RAVIN DECISION DIDN'T LEGALIZE POT; IT OUTLAWED INVASION OF OUR HOMES

I do not use marijuana nor do I advocate its use. I do not want my children
to use it. And I do not see how it can do any good for anyone. But I must
object to the coverage that calls its use legal. That is not true. The Ravin
decision simply declared that the constitution of the state does not allow
an invasion of our homes based on the use of marijuana in quantities under 4
ounces. That decision has stood the test of time, lasting for 29 years so
far. And since it is a constitutional issue, no ballot measure or
legislation can change it.

It was called "decriminalization" at the time. Nobody ever declared it
legal. It is simply outside the scope of criminal law in those quantities.
The best way this state can deal with it is to either regulate it by
legalizing it or simply give up on making it a political issue.

This state has real problems to deal with. Taking on an unwinnable fight is
not the best use of our legislators' time. I would argue they should move on
to more important things so we don't have this kind of coverage declaring it
is legal to use. That is counterproductive in the extreme. All it can do is
encourage others to use it who might not otherwise.

Scott Dennis

Anchorage