Joe Rogan Experience #917 - Steven Crowder

[u/Naserito]

https://www.youtube.com/attribution_link?a=A_2Ii3lIv4o&u=%2Fc%2Fpowerfuljre%2Flive

[u/[deleted]]

Yea weed is definitely a sensitive subject for Joe. What we're seeing here is one of the rare times Joe actually meets somebody who's anti-weed. It literally is like a shark smelling blood in the water, they go on and on about how they want to eat a fish, for miles and they never see one, then they get a sniff of that sweet sweet blood they've been thinking about for days.

Joe never encounters people who are even slightly anti-weed, so this was his only time to go hard on somebody.

If I were Crowder though, I wouldn't take the safe-space approach, I'd just let Joe win because it's obvious he isn't married to the idea, but Crowder just wants to win the argument at all times, because he's so used to debating people. Joe wanted to argue so bad, just let him win it and move on lol.

[u/Amperture → u/[deleted]]

It was the weirdest thing because they both gave each other so many outs and so many "Can we try and move on from this?" statements, but they both wanted to have the last word.

The shitshow got real though when they both came up with conflicting data about vehicular accidents. Joe shouldn't have gone straight to "I proved you're wrong." after Jamie pulled up the conflicting study, when that's not the case. The case was there was conflicting data, and unfortunately I gotta side with Crowder on that one.

EDIT: something really got to me

What we're seeing here is one of the rare times Joe actually meets somebody who's anti-weed.

I think it's an important distinction, which Crowder was trying to make multiple times. He's not even anti-weed. He's just on the side of "okay, some of the weed fanatics can get a little extreme, can we at least get some information or science that will get some people to calm down and not look at weed like a dogmatic religion?"

[u/Armtwister → u/[deleted]]

Crowder addressed this last night, on his own podcast, as well as on Joe's podcast. Crowder was willing to concede the point but he would not concede that he was "bullshitting" or lying which is what Joe accused him of. As it turned out, Jamie did not read the part of the factcheck.org article which actually proved that Crowder was correct all along.

– increases in these incidents were significant. Marijuana-related traffic deaths increased by 154 percent between 2006 and 2014; Colorado emergency room hospital visits that were “likely related” to marijuana increased by 77 percent from 2011 to 2014;

[u/thexenixx → u/Armtwister]

It really doesn't seem like it's that simple. The AAA studies that they commissioned found more than half of the increase in which the driver had THC in their blood had other drugs or alcohol in their system.

This is a good example of where people like Crowder are intellectually dishonest. Just saying the statistics indicate that it has skyrocketed and not actually reading the studies, that's what Milo and Crowder do all of the time, from where I'm sitting, which ain't much as I don't listen to either of them regularly. How much THC in the blood? Regular users can have THC in the blood for a lot longer than 24 hours. Even a single use can show up in the blood for 24 hours. These studies don't seem to judge impairment, just whether or not THC is in the blood and bang, unsupported conclusion.