ELEMENTARY LOGIC

Re: the editorial "Tokin' justice," The Sunday Herald, Jan. 4.

You say, without offering a scintilla of explanation, "Elevating a
dope-possession conviction to the status of a human-rights violation is a
stretch - as the court said, there is no 'free-standing constitutional
right to smoke pot for recreational purposes.' "

If there is no "free-standing right" to sit on the back porch and puff away
at a joint without bothering another living soul, what rights do we really
have? If we don't have the freedom to indulge in activities that harm no
one else, we have no freedom at all. (I feel like I'm talking to a child
here, I must say.)

Presumably, the courts feel there is no "free-standing right" to pick one's
nose without being hustled off to jail.

Alan Randell, Victoria, B.C.