I read your report regarding the use of cannabis by third level students
(October 14) with interest.

With such a large proportion of our educated youth using this drug for
recreational purposes, one is left wondering why it is still illegal
especially when one takes into account that the two legal drugs, alcohol
and nicotine, are far more harmful than this innocuous herb.

Towards the end of the article Professor Brendan Walsh, of the UCD
Economics department suggests that there is no need to legalise cannabis -
"as the law (is) not presently being enforced."
Would that this were the case!

On the same page as your UCD article was a short report concerning a
35-year-old Dun Laoighaire man who had appeared in court on charges of
unlawful possession of cannabis. Only two pages further on we find another
report of a man found guilty in court of possession of cannabis having been
fined £200 and his property confiscated.

If Professor Walsh is so sure that the law regarding possession of cannabis
is no longer being enforced, I wonder if he would like to tell us what
action the UCD authorities would take if one of their students were found
to be in possession of this drug?

I was also slightly surprised to read that 41% of the students surveyed
were found to believe that the use of cannabis can lead on to the use of
other, harder drugs.

All the serious international evidence refutes this "stepping-stone" theory.
Even the 1995 guidebook 'Marijuana Facts for Teens', published by the US
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), states unequivocally: "Most
marijuana users do not go on to use other drugs."

The biggest danger with cannabis lies in the very fact that it is illegal,
and therefore is often only available from unscrupulous dealers who may
have other, more dangerous substances for sale as well.

I applaud Biochemistry lecturer, Dr Geraldine Butler for having the courage
to say that the recreational use of this drug should be legalised. As for
her comment that it should definitely be made available for medical use, I
consider it to have been a criminal act that this useful drug was
classified as a Schedule 1 controlled drug (which means that doctors are
unable to even prescribe it) under the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977. It can be
used for many purposes.

Martin Cooke
Drumkeerin, Co. Leitrim