More Lies and Deception – Police Chief Kim Raney and Al Crancer, Jr.

Sometimes I just really get tired. Tired of fighting against all the bullshit and lies. Tired of the fact that for years, prohibitionists have come to the conclusion that they have no need to tell the truth at all. Tired of tracking down and reading through yet another “study” to find out that it’s a whole lot of crap wrapped up with a pretty ribbon, so that others can pretend to tell the truth as they peddle their lies to eagerly vapid reporters. Tired.

And yet… and yet.

The lies need to be exposed.

I found out about this Fox News interview video from a tweet from the folks at No on Proposition 19 who were quite excited about it. As soon as I saw the segment’s logo “Going to Pot,” I knew it would be a bad bit of business. But I wasn’t prepared for these two zombie flesh-eaters staring out at me from the video.

This was just after she said (with wide-eyed amazement):

Who would of thunk, that in 2010, we’d be actually having a debate, about legalizing… pot!… to make up and balance a budget?

And then she actually held that look for a couple of seconds.

My thought, however, was who’d have “thunk,” that in 2010, we’d still have idiots like this trying to keep us from legalizing something that should never have been criminalized?

And, not to get off on a rant here, but who are these morons? I guess there’s a reason I never watch television news channels and why in particular I use the parental control feature to lock FOX News (Oh, I’ll DVR Stossel or Napolitano if they’re talking about the drug war, and of course, anytime Balko is on…, but I would absolutely freak if I accidentally flipped through channels in the morning and landed on these two!)

I could understand (not like, but understand) such mindless zombies having an anchor job if they were, well, attractive, but these two are so ugly, their mommas would have to tie a pork chop around their neck to get the dog to play with them.

Anyway, police chief Raney (who’s not at all like those two) lays it on really thick. He’s not an idiot. Just a deceiver. Here’s what he has to say…

This is one of the most devastating initiatives ever to hit California […] It has no chance of taxing or regulating marijuana. […] the effect would be devastating. First of all, you have a work force, where now you have people bringing and smoking marijuana at the workplace…

Out-and-out lies and deception.

He complains twice about the notion that the state won’t get money from taxes because it’s designed to be taxed at the local level. He doesn’t explain why that’s bad, however. After all, his city could get tax revenue. But when you think about it, you realize that his drug war gravy train comes from the top (from the state and the feds). This initiative will force him to be responsible to and responsive to the local citizens in order to get funding. None of the Police Chiefs like that.

And then he drops his big bombshell…

There was just a study that was just completed earlier this month by a retired analyst from the National Traffic Safety Authority. He evaluated the five years previous to 2004 and the five years after, where medical marijuana was approved in the State of California. What they’ve discovered is that traffic fatalities where the driver tested positive for marijuana has increased 100%, and his estimate is that, should this measure pass, that number will increase another 300%.


I can already see where this is heading…. “driver tested positive for marijuana,” percentage increases, etc. This will be about cherry-picking minor shifts in data expressed in major percentages that will show no causality, but merely the presence of marijuana smoked at some previous time.

But now I’ve got to track down the jerk who put together the piece of crap that’s being used by the Police Chief to deceive the public. I did, and boy, does it smell.

The folks at the Hive had run into this a while ago. I either didn’t hear about it or didn’t notice at the time.

A recent study by Al Crancer Jr. a retired research analyst for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has found that that passage of the upcoming California initiative this November “TC2010” as it is commonly known might triple the amount of traffic deaths of marijuana related deaths on California highways. “No one is looking at the effect of the passage of this initiative on traffic deaths and injury,” said Al Crancer, Jr. “Everyone is focusing on the tax revenue benefit to the state of California”. […]

About Al Crancer Jr.
Crancer lives in Moraga, Californian today is the principal of Crancer and Associates, a statistical research group that conducts research and analyses in traffic safety. In addition, Mr. Crancer has published numerous research articles that appeared in such journals as Science, Journal of the American Medical Association, and the American Journal of Psychiatry.

Clearly a badly written press release, which helped prepare me for what to expect. Crancer and Associates appears not to even have a website and may only exist in Al Crancer’s mind. No reputable media picked up the “study” and it seemed destined to die until our intrepid Police Chief showed up.

It took me a little while to track down the study, but I finally found a copy of it at CADFY (You can download it here).

The thirteen page “study” is full of irrelevant data included to make it look more impressive, and I did slog through the whole thing, but the relevant stuff was pretty limited.

So let’s see what Mr. Crancer has to say in the abstract…

California data on drivers involved in passenger vehicle fatal crashes using Marijuana were analyzed to determine the impact on traffic safety and to provide information on the possible impact of an initiative, the Tax and Regulate Cannabis Initiative or “TC2010” which is on the California ballot in November 2010 to reform and partially legalize Marijuana.

A total of 1240 persons were killed in the last five years in fatal motor vehicle crashes involving Marijuana. 230 were killed in 2008. Use has increase steadily in the last ten years and is now at 5.5% in fatal passenger vehicle crashes. The use in single vehicle fatal crashes where most drivers are tested shows an involvement rate of 8.3%. The largest increases occurred in the 5 years following the legalization of Medical Marijuana in January 2004.

“Involving Marijuana” = drivers tested positive for marijuana and may not have smoked pot for days or weeks.

For the five years following legalization there were 1240 fatalities in fatal crashes, compared to the 631 fatalities for the five years prior, for an increase of almost 100%.

Ah, that’s where Police Chief Kim Raney got the 100% figure. And it’s absolutely meaningless. Because it has absolutely nothing to do with any changes in numbers or rates of fatal crashes. It’s only about the percentage of people with marijuana in their system and nothing about impairment.

Let’s take a look at Crancy’s charts and assume they’re accurate. [Note, I have not independently verified these charts or the exact wording of the chart elements from the data at FARS – if someone else wants to, have at it, but as you’ll see shortly, it’s really unnecessary.]

OK, we see an increase in drivers tested positive for marijuana. But it doesn’t look all that menacing, and it’s not even close to the alcohol figures. Let’s look at the single driver crashes, which for some reason Crancy finds more compelling:

Nope. Not compelling. Yes, there’s been an increase in people with marijuana in their system since medical marijuana was legalized. Of course. That’s not a surprise at all.

  • Are you aware that there was a huge increase in the number of traffic fatalities where the driver tested positive for Viagra in the five years after 1998 compared to the previous five years? That’s because more people started using Viagra in 1998 when it was introduced.
  • Are you aware that there has been nearly a 20% increase per year over the past seven years in traffic fatalities where the driver previously had ingested organic foods? Maybe organic foods cause traffic fatalities! Or maybe there has been nearly a 20% increase in organic food consumption each year for the past seven years.

Both of those have as much data validity as Mr. Crancy’s absurd speculations.

Now, we can go to the same public government databases that Mr. Crancer used and take a look at all sorts of data. Let’s start with one he purposely ignored — the overall rate of traffic fatalities over that 10 year period in California.

The most useful base statistic is number of fatalities per million miles travelled, which, in California has been hovering a little over 1 per year. This is particularly useful because it means that the data isn’t skewed by population shifts or changes in driving from gas prices, etc.

Why, I wonder, did Al Crancy leave this critical piece of data out of his report?

Here’s what we discover in California:

  • From 1999-2003: 6.26 fatalities per million miles travelled
  • From 2004-2008: 6.12 fatalities per million miles travelled

That’s right. Since the legalization of medical marijuana in California, the rate of traffic fatalities has gone down.

What makes this particularly remarkable is that, while the number of people on the roads in California with marijuana in their system has increased, fatality rates have gone down.

Based on these figures, I predict a further reduction in fatality rates on the highways if Proposition 19 passes.

What makes this even more remarkable is if we take a look at Mr. Crancer’s tables again. Note how the percentage of drivers in fatal accidents with a BAC over .08 increased. We know that drunk drivers cause fatal accidents (something that has never been proved with stoned drivers). So, if drunk driving fatalities rates have likely increased, and yet overall driving fatality rates have decreased, that indicates that the increased presence of marijuana in the system of drivers has actually countered or made up for the increased drunkenness.

Hey, it makes as much (in fact a lot more) sense than the conclusions reached by Al Crancer, and is much more supported by the data.

But of course a hack like Al Crancer, Jr. can call himself an analyst, pretend that he’s part of an organization that does statistical research, throw together a bunch of data and completely distort its meaning, get another hack like Police Chief Kim Raney to take it to FOX News, and here we are again.

Yeah, it’s tiring.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to More Lies and Deception – Police Chief Kim Raney and Al Crancer, Jr.

  1. BruceM says:

    You can just see the stupidity and religious ferver exude from her face. No idea who this Faux News whore is, but I always say I can tell religious extremists from looking at their eyes, and she is one of them. And she’s a stupid one, at that. We shouldn’t let people go on live tv to do the news when they’re high on Jesus.

  2. Hope says:

    Sorry, Pete.

    It’s hard sometimes… but yes… you have to keep doing what you do as long as you have to. You do it so well.

    Thank you.

    On the other hand…

    That picture is poster material of some kind.

  3. Hope says:

    My gosh, Pete. Look at this post.

    You say you can hardly stand it anymore… then you clobber the living hell out of them!


  4. Mike says:
    For anyone that doesn’t know who that woman is,
    this should shed some light on it.
    Miss America?

  5. Richard Steeb says:

    So in effect as the detectable Cannabis use has “doubled”, the death rate has gone down 25%… Best argument for legalizing it I’ve heard yet! We need to quadruple Cannabis use!!

  6. Pete says:

    @Mike. Wow. I guess I knew that FOX news was largely theatre. I just didn’t realize how much of a public role these people are will willing to take day after day.

  7. Brian says:

    fixed that photo for you:

  8. drewbob says:

    day after day i am completely blown away with how well you manage to pick apart all the garbage that gets thrown out into the public and neatly recycle it into a major ass whooping for who ever decided to spit it out.

    Keep doing what you do Pete. You are a constant source of information for many reform activists.

  9. SpGNo says:

    two things popped into my head:

    1.) So if I don’t smoke pot, I might end up like those zombie people on Fox news? puff puff puff puff.

    2.) The looks on those people’s faces belong on the cover of Wilhelm Reich’s The Mass Psychology of Fascism. Seriously, the vacant expressions, the tense musculature, the armoring…these people have never had an orgasm they didn’t feel guilty about. Just look at them.

  10. Paul says:

    You can’t just expect these people to capitulate and start singing legalization hymns on Drug War Rant. They are going to aim for our weaker arguments, scare people about stoned drivers, talk up stoned kids, stoned parents, and stoned, well, just about everything.

    I think they believe the tax revenue argument to be weak, which is why they keep bringing it up. Personally, I always thought it was weak, too–the revenue will be nice, but it is hardly going to rescue California. So, I wouldn’t stress the revenue argument too much.

  11. kant says:

    Any one want to point out the fact that in California medical marijuana was approved of in 1996. In 2004 it was sb420 that went into effect which allowed for mmj dispensaries and set limits on the # of plants that can be grown to 6 (the limit was later struck down by the California supreme court).

    So this study only covers the change with the arrival of dispensaries. Not the approval of mmj.

  12. Sukoi says:

    @drewbob – Ditto!

  13. claygooding says:

    One thing about the lady at Fox,she is reputed to have a very high IQ AND SHE HIDES IT SO WELL.
    I have been know to throw the remote at the TV while watching Fox news,except for the ones Pete mentioned favorably.
    Ethan Nadelmann Debates Bill O’Reilly About Drug War
    As usual O’Rielly has made his mind up and any view but his own is considered foolish,based on myths and could be considered sacrilegious.

  14. claygooding says:

    As Nov 2nd gets closer there will be studies declaring that marijuana is the cause of everything from babies being born naked too being a weapon of mass destruction.
    Our government has spent over a trillion dollars and since the ONDCP does not know the meaning of harm reduction,they will just continue digging the hole they are in.
    When marijuana is finally legalized across America and the citizens look at the last 40 years through our eyes,what kind of trust in our government is that going to bring?
    What kind of message is that for the “children”?
    The drug warriors have used guns,military tactics,imprisonment,financial devastation,social propaganda and spent over a trillion dollars,while stoners have used the truth and their wits,and the stoners are winning.
    Latest Angus Reid Poll: 52% of America Want Marijuana Legalization

  15. Steve says:

    Hey Pete, guess what tops the list if you google “police chief kim raney”.

    I appreciate what you do Pete.

  16. they have always only used parts of the data and blown them out of any realistic proportions as a means to frighten and brainwash people. that is why it is important to use all of the data — that’s where “the whole truth” can be found.

    pictures are the best way to utilize the data — especially when it is displayed in context. everyone inolved in drug law reform needs to understand that, and more importantly, to practice it.

  17. Maria says:

    Teeth gnashing ridiculousness is what those morning shows are made of. But they -know- their target audience. I can just hear my father quoting the police chief’s stats. And my mother going along with him because “the whole thing is just so complicated.”

    My favorite bit is the male anchors question at the start “But what if the police who have to protect that law think it’s a bad idea?” hah hah ahah … Well, at least he’s honest that he knows the job of the police is to protect the government and not to enforce laws or to serve and protect their fellow citizens.

    Also, I’m still not understanding the special mental gymnastics it takes to say that after prop 19 passes, hordes of stoned zombie workers are going to show up for their jobs … because so many fucking people show up to work drunk now? You know, some days … after watching the uhm, “news”, I do wonder why more of us don’t.

  18. Maria says:

    Perfectness embodied in jpg form.

  19. ezrydn says:

    The true stupidness hasn’t kicked in yet. This is just the initial knee-jerk reaction. It’ll get deeper and deeper before the vote and more and more assinine. However, now is when we need to begin the attack of “correctness in reporting” and hold their feet to the fires they’ve created.

    This is really nothing compared to what’s to come. They’ve got just over 90 days now to come up with some of the most preposterous and idiotic meanderings they can scrape together. We have to be ready to replace fiction with fact. Now, more than any before, is the time to start swamping LTEs.

    When I look at that pix above, it just shouts “Please, turn the headlights off!” I don’t want to know who the Ogre on the right is.

  20. allan420 says:

    well now… absurd expressions aside… remove the woman’s make-up, give her a class of wine and a cuppla puffs and put on some of that fiendish rock&roll and she may began to loosen up. The feller there… nothing will help him I suspect, altho’ I would encourage him to switch from tighty-whiteys to boxers.

    And ditto on the props Pete… dude, you are a wonderful asset with an obviously great heart. Makes me glad to know that teachers like you still exist (some of my college instructors were agents of transformation in my life).

    It was our gal Linda that posted that PR. The original was posted on some Australian PR site which Linda cited as her source. What we witness with the Canker driving “study” is how they create “news” from thin air. Pete’s conclusion is a broadside that should sink Canker’s sorely assembled pap.

  21. Just me. says:

    That a boy Pete. if you do this well TIRED , how well will you do energized ?

    Fox, cnn, they are all the same. I stopped watching this crap some time ago. These two… true sense of the word sheeple. They still live with a false sense of the world around them.Following blindly what they are told…never to truely see.

    Clay : A High I.Q. doesnt mean smart , can just mean trained. 😉

    Good job all.

  22. Ziggy says:

    Everyone hates a child abuser, if we make up some stats, or at least skew them significantly, we can make people who smoke pot look like child abusers and no one will vote for legal pot… That’s O’Riely… Look, if there is a dude that needs to light up, it might be him…

    Believe me, they were directed to have those scowls on their faces, to have a “serious” discussion about pot… notice no inneundos, no stoner jokes or persona’s discussed. The see the jokes as backfiring, and now it’s time to get “serious”.

    As for the police chief, he shouldn’t be allowed to talk as a public figure. He said the effects would be “devestating” without ever once saying “in my opinion”. And the millions of dollars that California stands to lose aren’t drug free workplace dollars, they’re marijuana eridication dollars, of which I’m sure he’s on the take.

  23. Fox Friends is a terrible show made up of people who collect fat paychecks for deliberately dumbing down the masses- something I noticed over a year ago when they ‘discussed’ coca.

    The blond is exceptionally disgraceful sell out to stupid and went to Stanford and Oxford, so she’s not stupid but rather devious.

  24. Al Crancer says:

    The article is quite a rant for someone who really didn’t understand the California statistics presented.

    The largest increases in marijuana occurred in the 5 years following the establishment of the Medical Marijuana Program in January 2004. For the five years following legalization there were 1240 fatalities in fatal crashes, compared to the 631 fatalities for the five years prior, for an increase of almost 100%. In 2008 there were 8 counties where more than 16% of the drivers in fatal crashes tested positive for Marijuana. Five of the 8 counties had rates over 20%. Presently the use level is at 5.5%.

    For those of you who really have an open mind you might want to look at the forest of facts and not let your view be obstructed by the marijuana trees.

    Al Crancer (Cranker is also O.K.!)

    • Pete says:

      How do you explain the fact that total rates of traffic fatalities went down? And how do you explain this extremely significant omission from your “report”?

      What you presented has absolutely no indication of causality between increased marijuana use and increased traffic fatalities and it is intellectually dishonest to imply that as you clearly do in your abstract and press release.

      Oh, and as has been pointed out here in comments, medical marijuana was legalized in California in 1996, not 2004. The 2004 law was an amendment setting state guidelines.

  25. Pingback: More Lies and Deception - Police Chief Kim Raney and Al Crancer, Jr. - Forums

  26. allan420 says:

    @ Al Canker… thanks for dropping by! However… what studies do you have that show driving under the influence of cannabis is dangerous? Every study of legitimacy undertaken to date has stated that cannabis use makes drivers more cautious… and caution behind the wheel is a good thing!

    And please respond to Pete’s reply. Here is a table showing Calif traffic fatalities by year from 1991 to 2008. I’m not a statistician but I do know how to work a graph and this graph (the page’s top one) clearly shows a steady downward trend in CA traffic deaths. So, if cannabis consumption increased and traffic fatalities decreased…

    • Pete says:

      Actually, Allan, you may be interested in knowing that Al Crancer, Jr. was, in fact, part of one of the numerous studies that show that marijuana makes users more cautious and results in no more errors than those who were sober.

      So what’s the deal, Al? Why the sudden desire to do a hatchet job on these statistics? Particularly when you know that they include positive tests on people who are not in any way impaired and, in fact, have not smoked pot in days or weeks?

  27. poster says:

    That cop is fighting hard for his job, isn’t he? Hahha. Hes a cop and not a politician for a reason. Shut the fuck up and go do your job.

  28. denmark says:

    Couldn’t live without you Pete and understand your frustrations as we all share them.

    The prohibitionists just need to give cannabis a try, for a month, or even a few weeks, then voice their honest opinion. We all know their opinions would be different as former Governor of New Mexico said, “it’s no big deal after I tried it.” It’s really as simple as that.

    And you’re right about the makeup allen420. She’s nothing without it and the designer clothes.

  29. claygooding says:

    “So what’s the deal, Al? Why the sudden desire to do a hatchet job on these statistics? Particularly when you know that they include positive tests on people who are not in any way impaired and, in fact, have not smoked pot in days or weeks?”

    Could it possibly be that he is doing the study for the ONDCP? They are buying and funding studies 24/7,and you know how bad Kerli wants those per se drugged driving laws on every states books.

  30. FiddleMan says:


    We are all very happy that you are on our side! You are wonderful at cutting through the bullshit! This can be very hard to do, as it requires so much time to investigate everything that a prohibitionist says to find out exactly how the information was derived, misused and the bullshit was created. It takes a lot of work to clean up behind liars!!!

    And, thank you for coming by, Al! But you’ll find a more intellectual audience here…
    Please respond to Pete’s reply…

  31. claygooding says:

    Pete,I went the link in your post and it said:

    The Web server you are attempting to reach has a list of IP addresses that are not allowed to access the Web site, and the IP address of your browsing computer is on this list.

  32. claygooding says:

    Thanx Pete,got there on that one and posted it,don’t you love a good argument with a paid prohibitionist?
    The District of Corruption now has a m/m law,,,,,but it will be until next year b4 the new dispensaries can grow
    a crop. The patients in DC will have to buy the generic medical marijuana from “the guy in the park” until the dispensaries get up and running

  33. claygooding says:

    I meant “harvest. Someone is planting seeds or bringing in clones now,as we type.

  34. Pingback: Tweets that mention More Lies and Deception – Police Chief Kim Raney and Al Crancer, Jr. - Drug WarRant --

  35. Mike R says:

    Are the collectives towns and counties in CA no less a part of the state? Those people no less citizens? This cop cries for half the clip about loosing state budget money. “The State doesn’t get one penny from this…”. Really?

  36. claygooding says:

    “Are the collectives towns and counties in CA no less a part of the state? Those people no less citizens? This cop cries for half the clip about loosing state budget money. “The State doesn’t get one penny from this…”. Really?”

    What the sheriff loses is the ONDCP payouts for marijuana law enforcement.

  37. kaptinemo says:

    One thing to note: how the prohibs are now daring to show up in places like this.

    Times were that they were too arrogant to bother attempting to defend their drivel; why mix it up with the ‘wacky legalizers’ (a common DEAWatch epithet, but oddly they haven’t been using it all that much as 19 has gained steam; I wonder why?) when they can be safe and comfy in their ivory towers?

    But now that we’re gaining traction daily? Guess who’s showing up…

    Now they’re gingerly, oh-so-delicately stepping into the muddy trenches, and giving half-hearted attempts at parrying the efforts of people who were forced into those trenches by them. And those who’ve been forced to reside in the trenches are battle-scarred vets with cold, sharp eyes and are armed with equally cold, sharp facts…and have no compunctions against perforating prohib gasbags with said facts.

    What was it Gandhi said? “”First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” Somewhere along the way they must engage you. And when that happens, THEY LOSE.

  38. claygooding says:

    What was it Gandhi said? “”First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” Somewhere along the way they must engage you. And when that happens, THEY LOSE

    You don’t know how proud it made me feel when the website of the study in Pete’s link wouldn’t let me in. Then Pete said it could be a glitch and let the air outta my baloon.

  39. allan420 says:

    aye Kap’n… along those lines I was just thinking that anti-drugnuts like these two have become the iconic caricatures of the new face of the drug war. We have Gil “Droopy” Kerlikowske and now we have these two… who need a cartoon identity, I’ll think on it… but the point is that we have elevated and they have fallen. They are now the ones appearing re-dikilus.

    I still think that male anchor sat on a nut or something. Thanks to Brian (capital B Brian) for giving a caption to the image. I think there is a zinger of a caption out there somewhere.

  40. Voletear says:

    They need a “cartoon identity” indeed, Allan. Anyone out there doing Drug War cartoons and/or comix? It’s a deadly weapon.

  41. cabdriver says:

    LOL, I think I just found my new screen saver. That photo is a keeper.

  42. JetCityWoman says:

    Heck maybe prop 19 will pass overwhelmingly after all if that’s all they have. There is so much disinformation in that clip I wouldn’t know where to start.

    Dirty politics and childish disinformation schemes gets them nowhere. As usual they don’t give voters enough credit for be educated on the subject. This is exactly the type of politics which will be getting many incumbents thrown out by voters in November, regardless of party.

  43. Richie Rich says:

    Crancer is just another dishonest shill for the immoral Prohibitionists and the cop unions. He retires and now hopes to sell his allusions and nonsense to someone, and who better than cops and their ilk?

    Of course he will never tell the whole truth, as it would render his ‘ work ‘ meaningless, or rather the meaninglessness would become apparent.To admit that traffic deaths went down after loosening of pot laws would ruin the whole point: Demonize weed at all costs, no matter how risiculous it is, and try and hold on to the old right wing lies as long as possible.

    Manipulating statistics to imply things that cannot properly be deduced from truthful and real surveys is stcok in trade for the devious industry that takes raw data and then implies connections that are unproven…it staggers the sound mind to see how bold the liars are.

    Mr. Crancer: Answer this, if you can :

    Since there is NO evidence that marijuana metabolites in a persons system has any effect on driving, and since there is NO causal evdience that shows that marijuana use impacts death rates on the roads, of what value is your ‘ work’?

    When some cop, who of course wants unlimited pot busts to prop up arrest stats and insure money for his pals, quotes your ‘ work’ it becomes to the average TV viewer a fact, as most people cannot research everything they hear to find out the truth. You owe it to the nation and honesty to add a caveat on your results: ” Warning: The material presented by Crancer in no way validates the mistaken assumption that marijuana use causes highways deaths to increase, and no causal relationship between driving after marijuana use and highway deaths has ever been proven”.

    That would be a start: Then take a look in the mirror and ask yourself if you really want to place your name on deceptions and lies…taking a blood sample after a wreck and finding metabolites in it does NOT in any way, shape or form prove intoxication or reduced ability to drive. That alone proves the stats useless and worse…deceptive.

  44. cabdriver says:

    On a more serious note: I predicted that the “driving while high on pot” hysteria would be the principal line of defense against the legalization movement several years ago.

    Frankly, I think it’s up for grabs. A legal crackdown on “driving while high”- particularly one relying on per se laws and “non-invasive” testing like skin or mouth swabs.

    As “soft totalitarianism”, it works like a charm…and they can use it for revenue enhancement- enough to at least pay for itself, and keep people employed. And this would be how they would manipulate the law as parasitism, and help “solve” unemployment problems.

    Note that the particularly punitive approach is actually more the realm of The State than of “the government.”

    Read this book: America’s Drug War Debacle.

    America’s drug war debacle
    Leif Roderick Rosenberger.
    Published 1996 by Avebury in Aldershot, Hants, England, Brookfield, Vt .
    Written in English.
    Table of Contents
    The drug threat
    Origins of U.S. strategy
    A militarized U.S. strategy
    Clinton’s strategy
    Beyond the Clinton strategy.

    The book was written in 1996, when Roesenberger was a professor at the US Army War College.

  45. Servetus says:

    Re Crancer: “In 2008 there were 8 counties where more than 16% of the drivers in fatal crashes tested positive for Marijuana. Five of the 8 counties had rates over 20%. Presently the use level is at 5.5%.

    The drug test is positive, if it works, for the inert 11-carboxy-THC metabolite, not active marijuana. No drugged influence can be presumed given the test data or Mr. Crancers’ conclusions, or veiled suggestions, drawn from it.

    Present cannabis use level is set at 5.5% because it’s an average throughout the state, assuming one can ever trust numbers estimating the popularity of a largely surreptitious activity.

    Mr. Crancer’s analysis appears to ignore the fact that marijuana use is both a cultural and political attribute, that California politics is in many ways like a mini-version of the rest of the country, with red and blue counties that are like anti-marijuana or pro-marijuana states respectively. The middle and northern coastal counties and the major urban areas are mostly blue, while the interior and rural areas are conservative red counties, such as prohibitionist-minded Kern County.

    By default, it’s likely that 5 of the 8 counties that had rates of 20% were blue counties, because that’s where the most cannabis is produced and consumed.

    Similar statistics might emerge if someone compared fatal crashes to pineapple growing and consumption in Hawaii.

  46. Drew says:

    I refer to these people as the False Prophets of Prohibition. They popped up before Alcohol Prohibition and told people of the glorious days that were ahead once the banned alcohol, jails and prisons would empty, they could be sold off or used to store grain. They spoke on and on about how productivity would increase.

    After watching the Jon Stewart clip about her, she’s definitely into theatrics, so maybe she’ll have a sense of humor with regard to the screen shot I fiddled around with. I based it, in part, on the scare tactic ad a few posts back, i.e. they’re smoking joints. They’re also in a panic over big box marijuana, as the ticker beneath them keeps us updated.

  47. Duncan says:

    That man in the picture looks like he needs to take a dump.

  48. Kozmo says:

    I read all the comments in this thread hoping to see another response from Mr. Crancer. Please join us in this discussion Mr. Crancer. We very much appreciate the opportunity to discuss prohibition with any and all.

  49. dmon says:

    That Fox News dunce always has a look of wide-eyed amazement on her face, however.

Comments are closed.