Posted February 26, 201411 yr 87 percent favorable. Eighty. Seven. Percent. And a majority favors a degree of legalization. Wow. Color me very surprised. Poll shows strong support for medical marijuana, growing support for same-sex marriage in Ohio By Jackie Borchardt, Northeast Ohio Media Group February 24, 2014 at 6:45 AM COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio voters overwhelmingly approve of medicinal marijuana and narrowly support same-sex marriage, according to a poll released Monday. A Quinnipiac University poll of Ohio voters found 87 percent support the use of medical marijuana while only 11 percent oppose. Ohio voters also narrowly approve of allowing adults to possess small amounts of the drug for personal use -- 51 percent in favor, 44 percent opposed. Two medical marijuana proposals are in the works, but it's unclear whether either will collect the more-than 385,000 signatures of valid Ohio voters required to put the issue before voters in November. http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/02/poll_shows_strong_support_for.html#comments#incart_most-comments
February 26, 201411 yr Does anybody know anything about surveys? What is an acceptable number of people polled for it to be respectable? This says 1,370 registered voters were surveyed. Is that enough people to draw conclusions, or is it low? Not that I don't believe it; i'm just curious.
February 26, 201411 yr From what I understand it is all about margin of error. The more responses you have, the smaller the margin of error, but the larger the number of responses, the slower the margin of error decreases. The margin of error is (basically) calculated as 1/sqrt(N) where N is the number of responses. So 1,370 responses should have a margin of error of about 2.7% assuming the survey was neutral. It does vary based on the size of the population you are sampling, but that is a bare bones approximation of the margin of error. If you increased the number of responses to 10,000 you would see a margin of error of 1.0%
February 26, 201411 yr You really need several polls to draw any reliable conclusions. True numbers are often outside the margins of error. And results from Quinnipiac, iirc, tend to lean a little left. That said, most polling methods are reliable enough to give you a good gauge on where the public is on any given issue or candidate, and 87% is a remarkable number for this poll. Remember how everyone (including certain unnamed members of this forum)said the polling from 2012 was wrong because everyone they knew who voted for a certain candidate in 2008 was not going to vote for him again and it was going to be "morning in America" again? (still makes me giggle because either those people are blatant liars or were blatantly lied to). Well... the guy whose method is to aggregate all the polls nearly nailed the election. Arithmetic!
February 26, 201411 yr Unless their methodology has a gaping hole, 87% by a single poll means there's huge support.
February 10, 201510 yr http://m.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/02/09/heres-where-greater-cincinnatis-marijuana-farms.html What's up with this? Why would it only be legal to grow in these places? Is this being spearheaded by people just looking to keep the profit to themselves?
February 10, 201510 yr ^^Yes. The only people who were willing to fund the campaign. Elections cost money. I hate it. This initiative goes down in flames. There is just too much to pick at.
February 10, 201510 yr Definitely voting no the way this is written. We're giving monopolies to folks to grow marijuana? I'll sit out this round, and hope someone comes with something better.
February 10, 201510 yr I can't believe how blatantly corrupt this proposal is. Luckily it has been getting a decent amount of bad press, hopefully they have trouble getting signatures. Something tells me there will be enough people that just want weed that they'll get enough, though. Even the name of the group is misleading - there's another amendment being prepped for 2016 by "Responsible Ohioans" that is simple and transparent: http://responsibleohioans.org/amendment/proposal/ Meanwhile "ResponsibleOhio" has a behemoth of an amendment that is beyond ridiculous in terms of micromanagement: http://responsibleohio.com/responsible-ohio-amendment-language/
February 10, 201510 yr Why must every state come up with their own system for everything? Nobody can just clone something successful can they? Every American thinks that they're Ben Franklin and that they have to invent something new.
February 10, 201510 yr If I'm going to have to get stuck behind stoned drivers more often the state should at least get more than the sales tax off of the stuff. I'd vote no on both.
February 10, 201510 yr I'm just as worried about people on prescription drugs (legally as prescribed by the doc) out there driving. I had a scary incident on Friday where Vicodin given to me for an infected root canal kicked into overdrive while I was on my way to work. I had to pull off into a Meijer and walk it off for an hour. It felt like my hands weren't connected to my brain.
February 10, 201510 yr I don't think Loretto was "worried" about drivers on pot....... just frustrated. It reminds me of some comment I hear about a year or two ago along the lines of..... "Who would be opposed to a law which causes teenage boys to drive slower?"
February 11, 201510 yr The funny driving posts reminded me of a recent study that's come to light. If there's still any question as to which is worse for society, marijuana or alcohol, these findings should weigh heavy on the discussion. Marijuana Doesn’t Make You More Likely To Crash Your Car BY CARIMAH TOWNES POSTED ON FEBRUARY 7, 2015 A study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concludes that driving after smoking marijuana does not make you more likely to get into a car crash — especially when compared to driving after alcohol consumption. Researchers studied 9,000 drivers over the past year to examine marijuana’s impact on driving. Although 25 percent of marijuana users were more likely to be involved in a car crash than people who did not use the drug, gender, age, and race/ethnicity of marijuana users were considered, demographic differences actually contributed substantially to crash risk. Younger drivers had a higher crash rate than older ones, and men crashed more than women. On the other hand, drivers who consumed alcohol were significantly more likely to crash. Those with a 0.08 percent breath alcohol level crashed four times more than sober drivers, and people with a 0.15 percent level were 12 times more likely to crash. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/02/07/3620555/marijuana-use-in-car-crashes/
February 11, 201510 yr The problem with marijuana and driving doesn't revolve around the loss of car control but rather with "zoning out". They had a beginner do autocross sober and stoned and he actually did slightly better stoned; most likely due to course familiarity in the later runs. But he was focused the entire time.
February 11, 201510 yr Yeah..... you zone out all other distractions (phone, radio, etc) and pay attention to the road ;). To be clear, however, when you combine drinks and weed, it is very dangerous to drive.
May 10, 20169 yr So the Ohio House just passed HB 523 to legalize medical marijuana. Heading to the Ohio Senate now....
May 11, 20169 yr God, I hate these guys. "Employers could still maintain drug-free workplace policies, and patients fired for marijuana use would be ineligible for unemployment compensation." http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2016/05/medical_marijuana_bill_clears.html
May 11, 20169 yr I knew that would happen. We live in a state where Scotts can fire you for using tobacco.
May 11, 20169 yr With certain exceptions, I don't take issue with private employers being able to fire their employees for violating an employer policy, even if that policy regulates off-site activity. The Cleveland Clinic doesn't allow any of its employees to use tobacco. Of course, a reasonable justification for that is those employees are under the CCF health care plan and the use of tobacco drives up health care costs. If I started a business and wanted to employ only sober individuals, meaning no drug or alcohol consumption, I should be allowed to do that. So long as the employer policy does not violate public policy, it should be up to the employer.... and up to the employee whether he/she wants to work there and abide by the rules.
May 11, 20169 yr ^ And what if you have a doctor's prescription for cannabis, but your employer wants to fire you anyway?
May 11, 20169 yr ^Fair point. Duh.... I hadn't thought of that. Does the 'drug free workplace' exception apply to off-site use? I suppose any drug, medicinal or not, which 'impairs' you is fair game for employers to prohibit while you are on the clock. You don't want heavy machine operators smoking a joint.
May 28, 20169 yr Well that was easy. Kasich still has to sign off on it, but since he's a poll-watcher and 90% of Ohioans approve of medical MJ he's likely to do it.
June 2, 20169 yr Curious when it will be signed into law. He's been sitting on it for a week now. Also curious why the group working toward having a voter initiative on the ballot in the fall dropped their campaign before this is signed into law. He could easily veto and then they're up a creek. Doubt he will but just saying.
June 10, 20169 yr "Medical marijuana makes me sick" - P.J. O'Rourke. I've been waiting for an ADA based challenge to the "no hiring smokers" policies. If tobacco is addictive, that is....
June 10, 20169 yr Do you have context for that P.J. O'Rourke quote? I mean, he wrote a detailed article about the night he did Ecstasy back when it was still legal.
June 10, 20169 yr Do you have context for that P.J. O'Rourke quote? I mean, he wrote a detailed article about the night he did Ecstasy back when it was still legal. I think it was a one liner type of thing. P. J.'s always been pro-legalization.
June 14, 20169 yr ^Fair point. Duh.... I hadn't thought of that. Does the 'drug free workplace' exception apply to off-site use? I suppose any drug, medicinal or not, which 'impairs' you is fair game for employers to prohibit while you are on the clock. You don't want heavy machine operators smoking a joint. I could understand this if it was while on-site, but the way "drug-free workplace" is mandated is by testing (at places that have that sort of workplace), and even if it's been several days since you used MJ, you will test positive, and so they could fire you. I don't know how this will be addressed but I wonder if it's an "amount" or level type of thing that would indicate it's been a certain number of hours since you used it, and if you test below that level, you're fine. I mean, if you come into work super hungover and took a breathalyzer, you might blow something but under the legal limit, so I wonder if there will be a legal limit by which you aren't really under the "influence" anymore. I'm looking to states like CO where this has already been legal for a while to set the tone on this, but so far I haven't seen anything. I have one of the medical conditions this would be allowable under, so am following this closely.
June 14, 20169 yr A switch to another method other than peeing in a cup would provide that kind of leniency. It's hard to compete with the low cost of the pee test. A buddy of mine had to pee test his prospective assistants at a company he worked for and found one place that did it for only $17. This was 10 years ago though.
March 9, 20178 yr Ohio to allow more medical marijuana dispensaries, letting them stay open longer, under latest proposal Ohio medical marijuana regulators have loosened several proposed restrictions on dispensaries that will sell the drug to patients. The moves come after the Ohio Board of Pharmacy received public comments on its first draft of rules for dispensaries. More below: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2017/03/09/ohio-to-allow-more-medical-marijuana-dispensaries.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
June 1, 20187 yr If this is true I sure hope the state government gets slapped with lawsuits since the law mandates a September start date. They have had 2 yrs to figure this out and have been moving at a snails pace. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180528/ohio-in-danger-of-missing-sept-8-deadline-for-medical-marijuana%3Ftemplate%3Dampart&ved=0ahUKEwj3pr6NsbHbAhUqgK0KHcAJAxAQiJQBCCcwAA&usg=AOvVaw033DY9-n13pi5u-2hAtltb&cf=1
