Search

Background: Many Americans rely on opioids at varying dosages to help ameliorate their suffering. However, empirical evidence is mounting that opioids are ineffective at controlling non-cancer related chronic pain, and many argue the strategies meant to relieve patient suffering are contributing to the growing opioid epidemic. Concurrently, several states now allow the use of medical cannabis to treat a variety of medical conditions, including chronic pain. Needing more exploration is the impact of cannabis laws on general opioid reliance and whether chronic pain sufferers are opting to use cannabis medicinally instead of opioids.Methods: This study investigates the effect of Medical Marijuana Laws (MML)s on opioid use and misuse controlling for a number of relevant factors using data from several years of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health and multivariate logistic regression and longitudinal analysis strategies.Results: Results provide evidence that MMLs may be effective at reducing opioid reliance as survey respondents living in states with medical cannabis legislation are much less apt to report using opioid analgesics than people living in states without such laws, net other factors. Results further indicate that the presence of medicinal cannabis legislation appears to have no influence over opioid misuse.Conclusion: MMLs may ultimately serve to attenuate the consequences of opioid overreliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A number of states in the United States legally allow the use of cannabis as a medical therapy to treat an illness or to alleviate symptoms. Concern persists as to whether these types of laws are increasing juvenile recreational cannabis use. It is also plausible that medical cannabis laws engender an escalation of illicit non-cannabis drug use among juveniles because cannabis is frequently considered to be a gateway drug.Methods: This study uses longitudinal data drawn from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health for the 50 U.S. states and a cross-sectional pooled-time series research design to investigate the effect of medical cannabis laws on juvenile cannabis use and on juvenile non-cannabis illicit drug use. Our study period encompasses five measurement periods calibrated in two-year intervals (2002-2003 to 2010-2011). This research design is advantageous in that it affords us the ability not only to assess the effect of the implementation of medical cannabis laws on juvenile drug use, but also to consider other state-specific factors that may explain variation in drug use that cannot be accounted for using a single time series.Results: Findings show that medical cannabis laws amplify recreational juvenile cannabis use. Other salient predictors of juvenile cannabis use at the state-level of analysis include perceived availability of cannabis, percent of juveniles skipping school, severity of perceived punishment for cannabis possession, alcohol consumption, percent of respondents with a father residing in household, and percent of families in the state receiving public assistance. There is little empirical evidence to support the view that medical cannabis laws affect juveniles' use of illicit non-cannabis drugs.Conclusion: Based on our findings, it seems reasonable to speculate that medical cannabis laws amplify juveniles' use of cannabis by allaying the social stigma associated with recreational cannabis use and by placating the fear that cannabis use could potentially result in a negative health outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study utilizes meta-analysis to synthesize estimates of the impact of public defenders and assigned counsel on the severity of imposed legal sanction at several decision points encountered by criminal defendants as they progress through the criminal justice system. While public defenders and assigned counsel have some notable effects on specific court outcomes such as pretrial detention and sentencing, the meta-analysis results show that they are just as successful overall as private attorneys in representing their clients' interests. The defendant's indigent status most likely explains why the clients of public defenders and assigned counsel may sometimes confront more severe sanctioning because the effects of pretrial confinement reverberate throughout the entire criminal justice system. The frequently observed deleterious consequences associated with pretrial confinement have engendered repeated calls to eliminate cash bail in determining pretrial release. • Indigent defense attorneys are just as successful overall as private attorneys in representing their clients. • Defendant's indigent status explains why they sometimes confront more severe sanctioning. • The deleterious consequences associated with pretrial confinement have engendered repeated calls to eliminate cash bail in determining pretrial release. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The nexus between urbanity and crime is interpreted as being congruent with either social breakdown or subculture theory. Each of these perspectives offers differing conceptualizations of the causal mechanisms responsible for this linkage, but adjudicating between them has proven exceedingly difficult because their respective predictions are similar. Each theory posits that an urban environment amplifies criminal activity. Using data derived from the FBI's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), this study contributes to the literature by investigating whether urbanization influences co-offending behavior. The determination of whether urbanity affects co-offending has theoretical relevance because social breakdown theory argues that urbanity produces interpersonal estrangement that impedes the development of friendship networks needed to facilitate group-based criminal offending. Conversely, subculture theory postulates that an urban environment propagates deviant subcultures that act to engender group-based rather than individualist criminality. Multivariate regression results furnish evidence supporting social breakdown theory by demonstrating that urbanity decreases co-offending behavior. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Two divergent perspectives have been articulated in the literature regarding the effect that an unbalanced sex ratio is speculated to have on male-on-female intimate partner violence. Evolutionary psychology proffers that a high sex ratio (i.e., more men than women in the population) propagates competition among males for female mates. This competition for female mates is thought to engender sexual jealousy among men, which in turn results in male-on-female intimate partner violence. In contrast, the Guttentag and Secord thesis argues that a high sex ratio acts to attenuate rather than amplify male-on-female intimate partner violence because the relatively small number of women in the population makes them more highly valued and respected by men. Using data culled from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the Census, we investigate the relationship between the sex ratio and male-on-female intimate partner violence. We define male-on-female intimate partner violence as violence occurring within a marriage or boyfriend/girlfriend type relationship. Multivariate regression results furnish evidence supporting evolutionary psychology by demonstrating that a high sex ratio increases male-on-female intimate partner violence. Results also show that male-on-female intimate partner violence is higher in cities where more women work. Such a finding further buttresses the logic associated with evolutionary psychology because participation in the workforce is theorized to afford a woman a greater opportunity to meet and interact with men other than her husband or boyfriend. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The current study used data drawn from the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and the census to investigate the relationship between indicators of interracial and intraracial economic inequality and violent crime rates, including White-on-Black, White-on-White, Black-on-White, and Black-on-Black offenses. Multivariate regression results for ninety-one cities showed that while total inequality and intraracial inequality had no significant association with offending rates, interracial inequality was a strong predictor of the overall violent crime rate and the Black-on-Black crime rate. Overall, these results were interpreted as consistent with J.R. Blau and Blau''s (1982) relative deprivation thesis, with secondary support for P.M. Blau''s (1977) macrostructural theory of intergroup relations. The findings also helped to clarify the unresolved theoretical issue regarding which reference group was most important in triggering relative deprivation among Blacks. It appeared that prior studies were unable to find support for the relative deprivation thesis for Black crime rates because of data and methodological limitations. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Using data from the new National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), this study analyzed the impact of a criminal offender''s sex on the likelihood of arrest for 555,752 incidents of kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible fondling, robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and intimidation in nineteen states and the District of Columbia during 2000. The data used in this study advanced the literature by enabling the authors to determine the likelihood of arrest for males and females based on sex-specific offending as reported by crime victims. Controlling for offense seriousness and a variety of other factors, logistic regression results showed that the probability of arrest for females was 28 percent lower for kidnapping, 48 percent lower for forcible fondling, 9 percent lower for simple assault, and 27 percent lower for intimidation than for males. A supplemental analysis also revealed that Black females had a higher probability of arrest than did White females for aggravated and simple assault. No discernable impact of an offender''s sex on the prospect of arrest was noted for the crimes of forcible rape and robbery. Overall, these findings suggest that the lower arrest rate for females is partly the result of leniency shown women by law enforcement personnel. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Using data drawn from the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program, from the Drug Enforcement Administration''s System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence, and from the 1990 Census, this study examined whether an arrestee''s probability of testing positive for cocaine use varied across aggregate levels of cocaine price. Results from a Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling analysis revealed that in cities where the price of cocaine was relatively high, arrestees had a lower probability of testing positive for cocaine use. Specifically, a 10 percent increase in the price of cocaine was associated with a 3 percent decrease in the odds that an arrestee would test positive for cocaine use. Findings also showed that individuals arrested for income-generating crimes did not have a higher probability of testing positive for cocaine when the price of cocaine was relatively high. Thus, it appeared that higher cocaine prices were not inducing users to amplify their criminal activity in order to finance a more costly drug addiction. Finally, results failed to furnish support for the hypothesis that individuals substituted opiates or marijuana when cocaine became more expensive. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Presents information on a study conducted on whether there is an increase in the jail capacity in Orange County, Florida. Background information on this study; How is this study carried out; Results of the study.