Where Legalization Has Flourished, Drug Use Has Increased
“Do as the Dutch Do” -- this phrase has become a clarion call for legalization advocates, who fondly imagine a day when the world, or at least the U.S., treats marijuana the way the Dutch do. Almost every drug legalization discussion leads both sides of the debate focusing on drug policy in the Netherlands. It is fascinating that this tiny country of 16 million people is so often referenced in comparison to countries (like the U.S. or U.K.) with much larger populations. The reason, of course, for this often-used comparison is due to the fact that the Netherlands is one of the only places in the world where you can buy marijuana legally.
In 1976, as the counter-culture swept through much of the western world proclaiming free love and drugs (and as drug use was reaching historic levels in the United States), the Dutch approved a formal policy to allow the possession and sale of up to about ninety marijuana cigarettes (thirty grams). The government allowed “coffee-shops” selling marijuana to appear around the country and approved in 1980 guidelines allowing more local control discretion of commercial marijuana practices. As the Dutch got used to the idea of legal marijuana, coffee-shops popped up in nicer parts of town and the number of them grew eleven-fold in eight years (nine in 1980 and 102 by 1988) (Jansen 1991). Currently, a lower-end estimate numbers coffee-shops at about 1,500.
But not everyone has been pleased with the proliferation of coffee-shops in the Netherlands. Pressures from residents to reduce the noise associated with marijuana-vendors and patrons, and international bodies (like the International Narcotics Control Board, an arm of the United Nations) calling for less drug tourism and drug trafficking led the country in 1996 to tighten their regulations. Now coffee-shops are licensed and it is only legal to possess fifteen joints (five grams) at one time.
MacCoun and Reuter, two advocates of softer marijuana policies, point out that between 1976 and 1984, marijuana use rates remained about the same for adults and youth. Thus the effect of legalization (or, “depenalization” as they put it) was minimal. From the mid-eighties to the mid-nineties, though, they observe that “surveys reveal that the lifetime prevalence of marijuana in Holland increased consistently and sharply.” They report 15 percent of 18-20 year olds used marijuana in their lifetime in 1984 turned into 44 percent by 1996 -- a 300 percent increase. Indeed, they also find cite past-month prevalence of 8.5 percent in 1984 to 18.5 percent in 1996. Why would marijuana use suddenly increase in the mid-1980s, after remaining relatively flat for nearly the first ten years of lenient marijuana laws? MacCoun and Reuter point to “commercialization” as the culprit. That is, they contend that during this period between 1984 and 1996, the greater glamorization and more visible promotion of marijuana lead to an increase in use. They claim that depenalization without commercialization does not increase use, as noted in steady use rates between 1976 and 1984 (MacCoun and Reuter 2001).
Their analysis is tightly reasoned and highly plausible – the glamorization of cocaine in early 20th century America probably led to a major increase in use during that time – but there could also be other possible reasons. Still largely unanswered is why the year 1984 is so special. What about that year made it such a tipping point for commercialization? Using MacCoun and Reuter’s own numbers that they cited from Jansen, the number of coffeeshops grew at a faster rate between 1980 and 1985 (9 to 71 -- an 8 fold increase) than between 1985 and 1988 (71 to 105) (MacCoun and Reuter 2001). Could the increase between 1984 and 1996 be more related to what I call “normalization,” that is the time where a drug is gradually accepted and brought into a culture to the point where it becomes an established, often times irreversible norm? Normalization by definition does not occur over night -- indeed when a policy as obvious to the public as marijuana legalization is implemented, it makes sense that prior anti-drug attitudes take time to soften – acceptance takes place gradually.
The approval of marijuana in the Netherlands seems to also have the effect of downplaying the known risks of the drug, resulting in the normalization of marijuana in that country. The former Dutch health minister, Dr. Ernest Bunning, is on record as saying: “The moment we say, ‘there are people who have problems with soft drugs,’ our critics will jump on us, so it makes it a little bit difficult for us to be objective on this matter.” Even Amsterdam’s Police Commissioner, Jelle Kuiper, notes: “As long as our political class tries to pretend that soft drugs do not create dependence, we are going to go on being confronted daily with problems that officially do not exist. We are aware of an enormous number of young people strongly dependent on soft drugs, with all the consequences it has” (Collins 1998).
Additionally, the normalization of marijuana seems to have an effect on the production of the drug. Jansen notes that the annual Nederweit (high potency Dutch-grown marijuana) crop is about 100 tons a year -- almost all grown illegally -- of which 65 tons is exported. The Dutch Ministry of Justice reports that the Nederweit industry employs a remarkable 20,000 people. And since sentences for even large scale marijuana distributors are very low (the maximum a marijuana smuggler can go to jail is four years; “two years-of which he would serve one-is more likely”) (Collins 1998).
The normalization of marijuana in Europe has officials increasingly worried. A European Union working group on drug policy issued a draft resolution in July of 2004 identifying marijuana as “European drug problem number one” and recommending that governments criminalize Internet sites that promote marijuana use or cultivation. Soon after Britain eased restrictions on marijuana use, drug problems increased, leading Prime Minister Gordon Brown to re-classify marijuana to a more serious status. If lenient policies lead to increases in use (as is the case with our legal drugs in the U.S.), what is the damage that can result in those increased use rates? The following two arguments explain how the scientific community has come to realize that today’s marijuana is not the harmless herb its advocates argue it is.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
If everything you say is true, why is Holland closing prisons citing a lack of crime ?
2nd, I'm 60 years old and have smoked pot every day since i was 23, and i am healthy with an IQ of 136.
Every research paper I have obtained viewed, read and processed I have noticed that use among teens reduces when it is legal,
My personal experience as a youngster I loved illegal things, i actually QUIT drinking alcohol at age 21 because there was less risk and less pleasure for me involved. That being said I see myself as a responsible smoker, I limit myself and usually only use it as a sleep aid to help me go to sleep on time and wake up more refreshed.
Do not get me wrong, there are users that will abuse marijuana or any drug for that matter. Reports from Amsterdam, Portugal, and California (California is a bit of a different case) usually reflect less use than when it was illegal. For me to have to go through illegal dangerous channels to get medicine is ludacris in what we call a free nation. California is a different case because it is part of a country that legalized the use and cultivation of cannabis, hence people are heading to California for this purpose to better their lives and increase their comfort about the plant.
I can legally kill myself by driving with alcohol in my system, I can legally kill myself by smoking tobacco but i cannot legally attempt to kill myself by smoking or vaporizing or eating parts of the cannabis plant.
The dutch had to close 11 prisons recently because of the decrease of crime rate
The reason coffeeshops were cracked down on in the Netherlands was a right wing government . I know because for 13 years I lived there. I never heard a single word about complaining neighbors. Most coffeeshops have a very quiet atmosphere. The "crackdown" is over. Even the far right officals admit it's just putting weed prophet into the hands of organized crime . Like we do in America.
Holland enjoys FEWER hard drug users than neighboring countries because, dutch people do not have to go to a drug seller for weed. Weed is only a "gateway" drug when the seller also sells hard drugs . It's a complete waste of money to jail, pot smokers. It's completely ridiculous.
Even IF that were true, if people drink less alcohol that is a VERY GOOD thing!
I don't know why people keep saying how dangerous MJ is. If it is so dangerous, SHOW ME THE BODIES!
(Caps fopr emphasis not shouting)
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3383
Of course it increased what does that have to do with anything?
Or just make them up?
So let me ask you this doc, if what you're saying is true, then how is that the report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction: http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/attachements.cfm /att_93236_EN_EMCDDA_AR2009_EN.pdf
Says that the Netherlands (the home of dutch coffee houses) that have had laxed laws on "soft drugs " (like Cannabis) for the past few decades, are showing the LEAST amount of Cannabis use compared to the rest of Europe?
Just wondering have you looked at the California Statistics published by our good old Government? Useage esp. in teen populations has significantly dropped since inception of MM in 1996-2007...REGULATED LEGALIZATION DOES NOT EQUATE TO BROADER USEAGE...READ YOUR #'s
An interview with a dutch offical has shown that one the best things about the legilzation of marijuana in amsterdam is that because its legal more people stay away from hard drugs such as cocaine, herion, meth, etc. i sure that if the US legalizes than ,as rchot has said, the increase would mainly be in the number of people actually admitting to smoking marijuana, and im sure that if it was legal then people would be less inclined to trying hard drugs because they wouldnt be in contact with it. i mean if it was legal then people could get it from safe licensed shops and not have to come into contact with drug dealers who would probably try and pressure them into buying hard drugs.
The Good Dr. Kevin isn’t telling the whole truth. Or, put another way, Dr. Kevin is attempting to deceive us with disingenuous facts
I just checked the following website - European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction -
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/themes/drug-situation/cannabis
There is something really interesting in the statistics on Cannabis use in the Netherlands.
Based on Dr. Kevin’s assertions, I would expect the Netherlands to be ranked among the highest cannabis using countries in Europe. It isn’t.
The statistics below are taken from the website mentioned above. These statistics are from a page listing only the highest usage countries. The age group is 15 to 64 year olds. Stats are broken down by Lifetime use, Last Year and Last Month. Here are the stats for 2008:
Country Lifetime Last Year Last Month
Denmark 36.5%
France 30.6% 8.6% 4.8%
UK 30.1%
Italy 29.3% 11.2% 5.8%
Spain ?? 11.2% 8.7%
Czech Rep ?? 9.3% 4.8%
Cannabis is illegal in all the countries listed above.
Here are the lifetime usage statistics for 15 to 64 year olds in the Netherlands as reported on the website:
1997 - 1998 19.1%
2001 19.5%
2005 22.6%
Now, Compare these numbers with France, Italy and Spain:
1992 1999 2000 2005
France 11.3% 21.9% 22.5% 30.6%
2001 2003 2005
Italy 21.9% 22.4% 29.3%
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005-06
Spain 14.2% 21.7% 19.8% 24.5% 29% 28.6%
Shame on Dr. Kevin. He didn’t provide the whole picture. It is true that cannabis use has increased in the Netherlands - a whopping 3.5% since 1997. Compare that to;
a 7.4% increase for Italy
a 14.4% increase for Spain
a 8.7% increase for France (from 1999 to 2005)
Intellectual prostitution is alive and well. It means nothing to be educated if you lack the discipline to be honest.
In your first argument, you used the "current user" statistics to show that "not everyone is doing it," comparing it to higher rates of legal drugs like alcohol. In your second, you point to the "lifetime user" statistics to show that an increasing number of people have tried it at some point in their lives, in a nation where it is legal. Is it really surprising that where marijuana is legal, that more people have experimented with it - or that where it is illegal, more people use the legal drugs?
I would see a slight to medium increase in the use of marijuana if it were legalized. Most of the increase would be people officially admitting using drug. I believe the consequences of the drugs illegality would make a majority of the people who use it highly secretive about their use.
The truth is nobody really knows how many people are using marijuana. Recently there have been studies done where scientist would analyze sewage to try to estimate how many people were using certain types of drugs.
For the most part I feel there are few people who would like to use marijuana ,but just don't do so because of its illegality. For instance if crack cocaine were legalized I'd bet there wouldn't be an increase of its usage. People generally observe users of drugs before they partake in its use. In the case of marijuana users can easily observe that it is less damaging than alcohol.