'EITHER THE POLICE BELIEVE THIS MISINFORMATION OR THEY ARE DOING IT ON
PURPOSE'

To the editor:

Re: Marijuana candidate puts high school in tough position, NDN Fri.
Nov.17/2000

I disagree.

After reading the entire article, I believe that it is the police that has
put the school and its' students in a tough position. I quote two excerpts
from the article to support this statement. Dan Loehndorf plans to
contradict the police information on marijuana which he hopes will actually
help students make proper choices. "Unfortunately the police are sometimes
misinformed about cannabis and other substances" Loehndorf told the Daily
News.

Then two paragraphs later, in the same article NCP Sgt. Jerry Meyers states:
"I tell them (the students) the truth." "The truth is that it's addictive,
it's not good for you, it's got 10 times the tar and nicotine that a
cigarette has, and from my experience it's a progressant (leads to other
drugs). For a young mind it's a dangerous drug. Note: there is no
discernable nicotine in marijuana.

This misinformation boldly stated in the newspaper reminded me of NCP Sgt.
Dan Maluta's pronouncement in the NDN Friday Mar. 5, 1999: "What health
practitioner would prescribe marijuana which has some 4,000 toxins and other
substances to try and cure or help someone, is beyond me."

Sgt. Dan was soundly rebuked by fellow police officer Gil Puder, an
Instructor, Criminal Justice Dept. Langara College and Instructor, Justice
Institute B.C. Police Academy, in the NDN Mar. 11, 1999 "One copper to
another on marijuana laws".

Either the police believe this misinformation or they are doing it on
purpose. In either case they should not be counseling students. Perhaps
drug education should be provided by health care professionals or at the
very least people who will tell the truth and know what they are talking
about. Aren't we past the "Reefer Madness" fiasco yet?

Name withheld by request, Nelson