Judge Finds Medical Marijuana Patient Guilty in Pot-Growing Case

Robert Dalton (in the foreground) listens last week to testimony from the doctor that recommended medical marijuana to him as his attorney, Jeanette Dalton, and Kitsap County Deputy Prosecutor Coreen Schnepf look on. A judge on Friday ruled that Dalton was not qualified to have medical marijuana because legal opiates could have stemmed his pain. (JOSH FARLEY | KITSAP SUN FILE PHOTO)



A Kitsap County Superior Court judge Friday found a card-carrying medical marijuana patient guilty of growing pot, saying that under the law, the Bremerton man was "not a qualifying patient."

Judge Anna M. Laurie ruled that Robert Dalton's use of marijuana for chronic lower back pain didn't meet the conditions of the citizen's initiative passed by voters in 1998, or any subsequent amendment to it by the Legislature.

His lawyers, Jeanette Dalton and Douglas Hiatt, had "failed to sustain his burden" on the point that his pain couldn't be "unrelieved by standard medical treatments and medications," such as opiate-based painkillers, she said, adding that marijuana for medicinal purposes should be a "drug of last resort."

West Sound Narcotics Enforcement Team detectives served a search warrant on Dalton's property in August 2007. In court documents, they said they found 88 plants, which they said was well beyond the 60-day supply law for medical marijuana patients.

But Laurie's decision didn't even consider arguments over the currently contested definition of what a 60-day supply is. She called the issue "a moot point," in the case.

The Department of Health has been tasked by the Legislature with defining a "60-day" supply. The current recommendation for card-carrying patients is up to 24 ounces, with up to six mature plants and 18 immature plants.

Hiatt was "very disappointed" with Laurie's verdict, reiterating what he'd argued in court: that Laurie was "second guessing" physician Thomas Orvald, who recommended Robert Dalton use marijuana.

"If Judge Laurie wants to be a doctor, she should go to medical school," Hiatt said. "No patient in this state is safe if she's right."

However, Kitsap County Deputy Prosecutor Cami Lewis called the decision "the correct result." During closing arguments, deputy prosecutor Coreen Schnepf had argued that opiate medications were relieving his pain, and that he needed to have incurable pain by other medicines to use cannabis.

Hiatt had argued that those opiates made Dalton sick and weren't effective at quelling his pain.

Dalton faces zero to six months in jail for the felony conviction. His lawyers will ask the judge at an Oct. 17 hearing to suspend any sentence pending their appeal.

Jeanette Dalton, who is running for Kitsap County Superior Court in November, said that while she respected Laurie's decision, but feared the precedent it would set.

"If other judges apply this strictly constrained of definition, it will adversely affect patients across this state," she said.

With the conviction, Robert Dalton's medical marijuana card is nullified, he said following the verdict. He said he's not happy with the idea of going to opiates for pain control because of their addictive properties.

"I don't want to be a drug addict," he said. "That's why I chose medical marijuana."

© 2008 Kitsap Sun. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 103

Snowdog writes:

"unrelieved by standard medical treatments and medications,"

What does unrelieved mean and did this judge really use that made up word?


I think before going to medical school she might need to go back to grade school.

yeomalt writes:

Besides tradition- why is marijuana not just as legal as a glass of wine?


We are working hard to spread freedom across the globe - maybe we should take some of the filters off of freedom here at home. Those filters weren’t put in place by terrorists or foreign governments.

Maybe we should stop the crap about "freedom" if we don't really mean it.

Welcome Home Troops.


Port Hadlock

BigT writes:

"Besides tradition- why is marijuana not just as legal as a glass of wine?"

Because if people can grow their own intoxicant at home for free, they aren't going give big money to the alcohol companies. This makes the alcohol companies sad. To avoid being sad, they pay lots of monies to lobbyists to keep mary-jane illegal.

Foxyfox82#318464 writes:

What I find horrible about this case, is that this guy is now going to be punished for growing marijuana, when he thought that he was legal because he did have a perscription. He was not aware that he was breaking any laws at the time. I don't think it's the right of the judges to second-guess the doctors, and if the doctor was wrong to perscribe the marijuana, then the judge should go after the doctor and not the poor man who thought he was in the clear. Pain control is a difficult thing to gauge unless YOU are the one feeling the pain. And I don't blame him for not wanting the opiate-based pain-killer. Not only are they more addictive than marijuana, they are worse for you, and they have said affects, such as nausea. I really hope this guy takes this to a higher court. I will also certainly be remembering this when I go to vote for the County Judges.

checknbalance writes:

Unbelievable. Can we start a "Let's remove Anna Laurie from Office" campaign? Why is Jeanette Dalton involved in this? And her defense of the SK pedophile teacher case. That sounded like a real side show. They had the victim in there crying about how much she loved her abuser.

You can take Anna Laurie and Jeanette Dalton and kick them to the curb. Anyone that defends child abusers and persecutes pot smokers should be chopping wood in the Ozarks.

Have fun, ladies, you had the chance to do the right thing, and you passed.

Cean writes:

One of Dalton's defense lawyers was Jeanette Dalton, contrary to remarks by James Olsen and "checknbalance."

NoSpin writes:

It's extremely disappointing to know that the West Sound Narcotics Enforcement Team is wasting time busting people for medical marijuana.

Don't they have any higher priorities? Meth, for example?

This is exactly why people lose faith in their government - over-zealost drug enforcement officers busting people for medical marijuana, prosecutors going forward with a case against someone who isn't doing anyone any harm, and a judge more interested in practicing medicine instead of law.

checknbalance writes:

Wow. I looked back in the archives and the Kitsap Sun didn't identify the judge who gave Ryan Springer her walking papers. So, a woman in a position of power sexually assaulting a female minor in her care is OK in this community, but a patient with a marijuana prescription is found guilty? Dude, you don't have to go to the Ozarks. You're already there.

checknbalance writes:

Cean: Contrary to what? I just brought up the fact that Jeanette Dalton won the case regarding the child loving SK teacher and lost the medical marijuana case. Sounds like a bad lawyer. Or a union lawyer.

dogbark1955#222919 writes:

One giant step backwards for Kitsap County.

jway writes:

The law should be obeyed. But the law should also be changed.

Arresting illegal producers and sellers of marijuana is as essential to the safety of our society as arresting illegal producers and sellers of alcohol. It is something that should never cease.

However, permanently banning the personal use of marijuana by adults simply criminalizes a huge section of our population for doing nothing more than choosing a safer recreational drug than alcohol. And refusing to allow the legal production and sale of marijuana by licensed businesses only guarantees that our country's enormous demand for marijuana will be met through illegal means. The *only* way to rid ourselves of illegal suppliers is by eliminating the demand for illegal marijuana. And there are only two options available to achieve that: either eradicate all users of marijuana, or license reputable companies to legally produce and sell marijuana.

What sort of world do we want for our children? One where drug dealers sell pot in our schools and foreign drug cartels have established themselves in our communities? Or one where the dealers and cartels have been forced out of the market by lower-priced legal marijuana and the continued enforcement activity against illegal weed?

It's *our* choice.

checknbalance writes:

jway: the message I'm getting from the Kitsap County Court is that we want our children to respond sexually to adult women and disregard doctor's orders. Go figure.

PhilSlaton writes:

Tokers can't get a break. Pass the Cheetos and Lil Debbies!

K_Johnson writes:

The BIG marijuana scare. This goes back to the 1930s with the government-made "Reefer Madness" movies. Yes, he had more than the 60 day supply, it seems.

Who cares? Paranoia.

checknbalance writes:

You gotta love those child abusers. Throw the potheads in jail, slap them with a felony label, but do everything you can to protect the woman on child sex. Sweet.

dgb#218515 writes:

Well now we got that bad assed drug user off the streets I sure feel much safer. KC courts why dont you try to put away real crooks for a change..... just a thought.

checknbalance writes:

Is Ryan Springer a registered sex offender?

checknbalance writes:

Judge Anna Laurie: I'm just amazed. You have teachers having babies with babysitters and teachers having sex with minors and teachers marrying students, but you find a person with medical problems guilty for growing pot. Apparently sex with anyone is not an issue for you, but herbal pain management is? Where did you grow up?

littleroundtop#212497 writes:

The Judge made the decision based on our laws .

legalizing pot or decriminalizing it is something our legislature can do . They make the laws.

rsvtuono writes:


Sure, get strung out on habitual, opiate based pain killers that do nothing but make drug companies prosper financially and the patient a junkie? It's the fuel that is making our country the laughing stock to the rest of the world, corporate greed! "drug of last resort" should read "drug of first resort"! What about the patients rights to make their own educated decisions with something that actually works without being a junkie?

Foxyfox82#318464 writes:

But littleroundtop, the judge found the guy guilty of growing pot, which his percription for medical marijuana allowed him to do under the law. The issue started out as "how much is a 60 day supply" and whether or not this guy had exceeded it. I wouldn't have an issue with it if the judge has set a definition of "60 day supply" and found the guy guilty of having more than that. But they never got that far...


So the guy was legal. Or at least, thought he was, as would anyone if they had a perscription. The judge over-ruled the guy's own doctor to pronounce him guilty because of her opinion regarding his pain levels. I think that is wrong. If she thought the doc was giving out un-needed perscriptions then charge the doc and yank this guy's scrip.

emdog writes:

I would like to know how much this case cost the taxpayers of Kitsap County? I agree with NoSpin, Meth is a much larger problem than Pot. I can drive into almost any neiborhood and find the local meth operation. Why cant our local law enforcement do anything about it. I have been told they know about this house, and that house, yet these places continue to operate. The Meth addict will break into your house to steal anything they think they can sell. Your kids Toys, your used tires, an old 8 Track Player, etc... I know because I have been a victim of this. Whats the Pothead gonna do? Steal my Dorito's? Raid my fridge? I would just like to know that my tax dollars are being used wisely. I guess we can all sleep better knowing that our streets are alot safer now.......NOT! Pull your head out Anna!

10toes writes:

Having experienced Anna Laurie's incompetence as an attorney, this is really no surprise to me at all. Her "perpetuating" of the very slimly legal profession should make all of us take a close second look at what these people are up too. It's all about getting your money any way they can, it's not about right or wrong. Disgusting really.

Thinking back, didn't the country prosecuter (I spelled that wrong) forbid her from hearing his cases? That pretty much says it all. Anna Laurie is all about taking advantage of people in the name of the law. This is just another example. These are the same people that end up running our country.

KitsapPatriot writes:

Soon to be ex-judge Anna M. Laurie go find a new job, because I'm going to say it, you are an idiot. You now have just cost tax payers more money because this will be appealed and they have a pretty good case to appeal it.

Local_indie writes:

Med MJ as a last resort? Sure get 'em hooked on opiate-based pharmacuticals! Talk about activist judges..This one is now a DOCTOR too??

Snowdog writes:

It's a shame that people with the mentality of this judge are in positions of power.

cpcandbar writes:

I don't believe it. What a horrible judge. To assume that opiates are better and that marijuana should be a drug of "last resort". My husband has spina bifida - he could exist with the opiates, as a couch potato who collects disability, or social security or welfare. Our family certaintly would not be what it is. With medical marijuana he has a good paying job, we pay taxes our kids are healthy and happy. I have a perscription myself for mm for migraine headaches and for my back which I broke. Oh yeah, I also have a full time job, and pay my taxes. We own our own home and are responsible, reliable members of the community. So now I got to worry about losing everything I have worked my fingers to the bone for, because some judge made an asinine decision. We didn't get our stuff dealing drugs, we work - but that won't matter, if, god forbid ole Westnet comes around. Yet people who do serious, violent crimes get a slap on the wrist or nothing. What a crock

Clancy writes:

I'm curious if the Drug Enforcement Admin. will now sieze Mr. Daltons property for growing pot there.
In a previous article it was noted that WestNET has raided his property at least three times before, one of which had evidence issues.
Their persistence in targeting Mr. Dalton may be motivated by the easy siezure and sale of his property to fund their Drug War.

ss427 writes:

Hmmmm, let's see,,,,, Dalton=30,,,,Laurie=0.
Just like here famous K-9 ruling. What a lame human being.

ss427 writes:

oops, I meant 'her', not 'here'.
Where's my coffee????

SINC1 writes:

So is there a family connection between the pot-smoker and his defender who's running for a judge position in this fall's election?

rfd5b4#325105 writes:

Wow! Talk about up in smoke.
Some folks act like marijuana is a brand new product that just got invented, and has NEVER been safety tested.

dardena writes:

I believe this is another good example of why we need the Medical Marijuana law changed to force doctors to write real prescriptions, with the drugs dispensed at pharmacies vs. the current "just sign the paper" and buy some smoke on the street.

Having been to Green Cross many times, I have witnessed much abuse, such as the “enrollee” buying dope for friends, and “buddies” smoking along with their friends. The dope costs the same as off the street, it just provides a legal source for both patents and non-patents alike.

It the law were changed to require the “medicine” be purchased at a pharmacy, Medical Marijuana would then likely be $4 per month, vs. the going rate of $200 to $300 per month at either Green Cross or “off the street.” It would also eliminate any question of use or abuse.

The downside, of course, is dopers would lose a good excuse to smoke if the doctors were held to a higher standard of diagnosis and prescription.


JSW1939 writes:

Wow, lots of heat here but not much light in this discussion. Dr.Thomas Orvald is not a local MD but a marijuana activist from Yakima. Apparently people come to him from all over the state and pay for an interview to get a prescription. There was an article in a recent New Yorker about similar practices in California. Apparently just about anybody can get a prescription from these MDs, who are connected to places that sell the product.

justintime writes:

Does the law in fact say that mj can only be used as a drug of last resort? If it does, and other meds worked or there were other meds or methods he didn't try, then Judge Laurie came to the right decision. I think that what we have to remember is that Judges have go by the law and not personal or popular feelings. These med marijuana laws are a complete mess for sure but it is the legislature that needs to fix it. Tell the legislature that we don't need another committee for another year or two, we need them to get busy and fix this mess now, one way or the other.

Bainbridge - I know that the courthouse was buzzing that media would be all over the place, not because of the case as much as because Jeanette Dalton will be there. Of course its publicitiy. She decided to pass some of her DUI defendents to other attorneys lately (ones she has represented on prior DUIs and a Veh. Hom case). I'm sure it wouldn't look good for the campaign to represent offenders with multiple priors who she got off before with reduced sentences. Maybe she felt sure to win this one. When it comes to judicial races I am looking for someone who will interpret the law to the letter of law and a person who believes that the constitution is the supreme law of the land. In otherwords I won't vote for a person who I fear will legislate from the bench or a person who has very liberal leanings. I won't be voting for Jeanette Dalton. Besides, her and her husband finance manager had me cornered one day in a courtroom while court was IN SESSION yakking away at me to get me to change my mind. It was embarrasing!! Professional people usually make an apointment don't they, or at least take it outside of the courthouse!! Anyway just the fact that it happened told me a lot.

RSO writes:

Judge Anna M. Laurie is not a doctor, how can she say what is better for a patient?


littleroundtop#212497 writes:

No Foxy you are wrong . No he had 88 plants , beyond the 60 day supply . The iniative or law may be flawed , but the Judge upheld the law .

Also using normal medical criteria , the doctor did not show is prescription to be what the Inniative as written provided for . Their were other procedures medical doctors take that have been proven the norm .

Complicated yes , you may disagree with thre law , that is where the legislature comes in . But the facts of the case are not yours . Or the way the Inniative was written is for you to decide legally on the case .

Laurie is a liberal foxy , knowiong her I would say most likely she would vote fr the legalizing or decriminializing of pot . As many conservatives would . But that does not change the law as it is now .
The facts and laws despite what some believe to be better laws, should not change to win a debate or change the meaning of a law.

vincent writes:

This is not the only case in which Judge Anna Laurie misinterpreted legislative law or was chummy with an attorney. My child was a victim of a second degree felony assault. When we went to the restitution hearing before Judge Anna Laurie the first thing out of her mouth was to address the defense attorney warmly, as if they were close friends. My jaw dropped to the floor. I was sitting there with my son, whose mouth had been permanently damaged, and here she is being chummy with the defense!

The lead Doctor submitted an itemized bill of $18,000.00 The bills up to that point already had added up to $9,000.00, and she determined that would be all the convicted felon would be obligated to pay! She looked over the fact that the deputy prosecutor had references from past cases where the criminal had to pay all medical bills including projected bills. To make matters worse after handing her ruling she belittled the prosecutor for citing cases that did not satisfy her… and then praised the convicted felon’s attorney!


Gorstman writes:

Opiates over marijuana? Oh great choice. I don't care if an MD tells me that or not. Common sense.\
Last resort? After every seriously addictive (Hence lucrative for the drug companies)commercial pain killers.

When are the people of this country going to stand up and vote this BS down the toilet?

When People?

Now this guy, who is already in (unrelievable) pain has to sit in a jail cell and sleep on a cot (real good for the back by the way)

Stupid stupid stupid.

Foxyfox82#318464 writes:

I'm sorry littleroundtop, I was only going by what was written here on this article. It is apparently misleading. Personally, I believe that the law should be changed to allow for a wider variety of ailments to be allowed medical marijuana. It is certainly better than opiates. But you are right, that's up to the legislature and the voters. From the comments on this article, there must be plenty of people willing to step up to the voting booth, or sign a petition.

ss427 writes:

Yeah, she's gotta go, but there are still nearly half of our community who like to puff out their chests and recite the anti-drug spiel about the low life "dopers". They ignore the facts. The facts are that every culture on earth has its recreational drug of choice. The facts are that all drugs used to be legal in this country. The facts are that we didn't have to lock our doors because of crime caused by drugs being illegal. The facts are that marijuana is the SAFEST drug of any kind on earth. There's never been an overdose. And the users are mellow, not violent. Drivers are slow and cautious, not reckless. I could go on for hours. The war on drugs is a total failure. Yep. Hours.

TomRosendale writes:

The state licenses Doctors and attorneys. I can see a judge ruling against an attorneys position as they both deal in the same subject matter: the law. If a judge finds a court appointed attorney incompetent, the people pay, not the attorney. In this case she is basically saying the doctor was incompetent, and the sick man pays. It is a bad ruling as it again makes someone else pay for what is deemed a mistake by a professional.

If she was going to rule on the correctness of the prescription, which she did, she should have excused herself as not being competent in that field of knowledge. She ruled on the appropriateness of the prescription, not on the abuse of the prescription.

It was a difficult case to be sure, but the judge and Dalton's attorneys failed the afflicted and left a bad omen for other sick people.

As someone has said, to rule the doctor was incompetent to give the prescription, she should be a doctor or allow the competent authorities to pursue castigating the doctor, not the patient.

snocosarah#221734 writes:

It was pointed out already (and I believe it important to point out again) that this is a problem with the law, not the judge. As Americans, we blame blame blame "the man," but us as citizens cannot pass a law and then not expect a judge to uphold it. This is a problem with the LAW.

It's also important to note that thousands of Americans every year go to their doctor and try to get prescription drugs to feed their addiction or habit. Although marijuana is not a habit-forming drug, the defendant purposefully sought out a doctor to sign a piece of paper so he could smoke marijuana and pretend that it was legal.

Vincent, I'm sorry for you and your family's troubles, and I am sorry you had to pay for the remainder of your son's medical bills. However, as you even stated yourself, Judge Laurie reprimanded the prosecutor for his/her lack of presenting the evidence in a sufficient way. Thus, maybe you should've chosen a better attorney to represent your case, as the one that ended up presenting it just wasn't good enough.

Judge Laurie deals with more scrutiny in one day than the rest of us put together in a month. To judge her over a decision that wasn't sufficiently represented in this article is preposterous. We voted her into office for a purpose.

justintime writes:

I must be missing something TomRosendale. I don't see that Judge Laurie ruled on wether the prescription was correct, but - His lawyers, Jeanette Dalton and Douglas Hiatt, had "failed to sustain his burden" on the point that his pain couldn't be "unrelieved by standard medical treatments and medications," such as opiate-based painkillers, she said, adding that marijuana for medicinal purposes should be a "drug of last resort."

Does anyone know if the law states that marijuana has to be a "drug of last resort."?

dennybop writes:

There's hypocrisy to assign to just about every entity involved in this case. Things have gotten out of hand when the law prefers opiates to marijuana, judges believe they are qualified to interpret medical conditions and people growing pot for personal relief are so highly controlled that they dare not let anyone else have a speck of their crop.
It's time to do away with Medical Marijuana laws. It's time to totally de-criminalize pot and destroy the illicit, violent trade that goes along with it. It's time to re-evaluate the approach we've taken to try preventing the use of narcotics and addictive drugs aside from the less harmful cannibis. And for god's sake don't be taken-in by the argument that pot could be taxed like tobacco or alcohol. Let's get the government out of the pot equation altogether and have them focus on the scourge of addiction.

Beachgal writes:

Part of the legislature's intent regarding the Washington State Medical Use of Marijuana Use Act is as follows: "Qualifying patients with terminal or debilitating illnesses who, in the judgment of their physicians, may benefit from the medical use of marijuana, shall not be found guilty of a crime under state law for their possession and limited use of marijuana." RCW 69.51A.005. A qualifying patient under the Act is defined as: a patient of a physician licensed under chapter 18.71 or 18.57 RCW, has been diagnosed by that physician as having a terminal or debilitating medical condition, is a resident of the state of Washington at the time of such diagnosis, has been advised by that physician about the risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana, and has been advised by that physician that they may benefit from the medical use of marijuana. RCW 69.51A.010(3). The Act provides that the PHYSICIAN (not the court) diagnoses the patient with a qualifying condition for use of marijuana. To read the entire Act, go to http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.as...

pantagruel writes:

This war on pot has gone on far too long! My wife has been getting much needed help from using med-pot to get her through chemo. How would charging us with a crime help anyone? Legalize it! Tax it! Get over it!

SharonOHara writes:

Be kind here. Not that it matters but I don't have personal experience except though other people in a younger generation. Somehow illegal drugs missed my generation as a kid - it wasn't available around here, the subject never came up and I've never had it - nor any illegal drugs.
Drinking a bottle of beer -was the 'giddy' thing and height of teen-age rebellion.

That said...I voted to make marijuana legal for medical purpose for two reasons....

1) Over thirty-five years ago a family friend in last stage of cancer told me her doctor suggested she try it. She thought it helped, guilty though she felt about taking the illegal substance.

2) I didn't realize the law was against federal law.

I wouldn't vote for it today. I will not vote for any law that, if passed, is against federal law. Change laws at the federal level, not have any state go in direct opposition to a federal law...in my opinion.

So, my questions:
"...a safer recreational drug than alcohol. ..."
What is safer about marijuana than alcohol?

I agree with Judge Laurie... she did her job well.
The defense apparently didn't make their case.

One person I know does really stupid things after drinking alcohol but I'm told marijuana doesn't affect him the same way.
Why is that?
Sharon O'Hara

cpcandbar writes:

Measure 692 (Washington Medical marijuana law) states "It removes state-level criminal penalties on the use, possesion and cultivation of marijuana by patients who possess "valid documentation" from their physycian affirming that he or she suffers from a debilitating condition and that the "potential benefits fo the medical use of marijuana would likely outweigh the health risks." Patients diagnosed with the following illnesses are afforded legal protection under this act: cachexia, cancer, HIV or Aids, epilepsy, glaucoma, intractable pain (defined as pain unrelieved by standard treatment or medications) and multiple sclerosis. Other conditions are subject to approval by the Washington State Board of Health. Patients and their primary caregives may legally possess or cultivate no more than a 60 day supply of marijuana. The law does not establish a state-run patient registery.
Ammendents: in 2002 Wash. Medical Quality Assurance Commission approved Crhohn's Disease, Hepatitus C and "any disease, including anorexa, which results in nausea, vomiting, wasting, appetite loss, cramping, seizures, muscle spasms, and/or spasticity, when these symptoms are unrelieved by standard treatments." No where is using medical marijuana as a "last resort" mentioned in the law.

Foxyfox82#318464 writes:

There is no lethal dose of Marijuana as there is Alcohol, and no significant changes to brain structure. However, alcohol can severely damage brain function. Many Universities across the country including both Colorado State Universities and Appalachian State University have brought arguments before their schools in an attempt to equalize penalties for alcohol and marijuana consumption.

Marijuana is much safer than alcohol in terms of temporary impairment. While alcohol causes sever motor skill deficiency rendering one unable to drive or perform other coordinated tasks, marijuana does little other than slow these processes down.

Alcohol withdrawal is widely known as one of the biggest reasons it is hard to stop drinking. Marijuana however, has no physical withdrawals (other than the psychological withdrawal of not being high).

Alcohol tolerance increases substantially with abuse. While marijuana tolerance will increase with use, there is a much smaller difference between a pothead and first time smoker’s needs than there is an alcoholic and a first time drinker.

It is very difficult for Alcoholics to put the bottle down for good. Marijuana has been smoked by nearly 50% of all Americans, and only 1% of that number smoke regularly. Take the total number of citizens in the United States and figure how many people have tried alcohol, and how many are alcoholics, and you’ll be left with a figure 10 times that of marijuana.

Reinforcement is one of those qualities that it is hard to measure by taking a substance, but what it really means is potential for addiction. Marijuana has almost no potential for physical addiction (as stated in withdrawals) but can be psychologically addicting. Many marijuana users get used to the lifestyle and quitting the substance isn’t the problem, it’s the social life they have developed around it.

Full Article
