MYTHS ABOUND IN QUESTION 9 DEBATE

Sift through the emotion and rhetoric of the Question 9 debate and one fact
emerges. Whether Nevada should legalize possession of marijuana is not a
battle being fought amongst Nevada citizens but by outside interests. For
that reason and a few others, Question 9 should be voted down.

Question 9 would legalize possession of up to three ounces (about 250
joints) of marijuana by people over the age of 21 and build a state system
to produce and distribute the drug. It would not make it legal to sell
marijuana to juveniles, smoke it in public or drive under the influence.
Nevada law already allows patients prescribed marijuana by a physician to
grow their own and use it at home. Possession of up to an ounce is now a
misdemeanor; first offenders face a fine, and if the judge sees fit, drug
treatment.

Question 9 would fix a fundamental flaw in current law, allowing the 200 or
so medicinal marijuana smokers approved by the state to get the drug
legally. Currently they must grow it, which is difficult, or buy it from
street dealers. It's shameful that people have to break the law to get
their hands on a drug they lawfully are allowed. Yet, Question 9 goes
beyond medicinal use. While many people recognize marijuana may not be the
most lethal of drugs, many of those same people would have a tough time
arguing that the state should grow and sell it.

Opponents make a less than compelling case against Question 9, which they
argue is a con on Nevadans who naively believe the measure is only about
medicinal use. This insultingly assumes voters can't see through the smoky
rhetoric, that they don't know that out-of-state interests are pushing it
or that it has broader implications than medicinal use. Opponents also
scare residents into thinking the feds would strip our state of all federal
aid should voters pass this initiative when federal officials admit they
don't know what the fallout would be for Nevada.

There is massive research to support either argument, and both sides have
been disingenuous in this debate. Proponents call themselves Nevadans for
Responsible Law Enforcement, indicating that police here have thrown
countless pot smokers into prison. Not true; most marijuana users are sent
to rehab with prison space reserved for drug traffickers and high-volume
dealers.

Opponents are equally guilty when they proclaim marijuana a gateway drug:
Many experts agree cigarettes and alcohol are just as much a gateway to
substance abuse. Critics say allowing adults to use marijuana will lead to
more broken families and abusive homes. By that logic, alcohol should be
made illegal. The truth is that on a given month in this country 55 million
people use cigarettes, 100 million use alcohol and 16 million use drugs (56
percent of which are marijuana-only users).

Whether you think marijuana is a dangerous drug or not, Question 9 is a
dangerous proposition. It would enshrine one drug -- and one drug only --
in the Nevada Constitution, where it would be difficult to remove later if
necessary. Amendments to the Nevada Constitution should reflect fundamental
truths for our government, not someone else's national agenda. Vote no on
Question 9.