EDITOR SHOULD TAKE HARDER LOOK AT POT

Fort Saskatchewan Record -- So, Mr. Thomson, you want to throw cold water
on MP Ken Epp's warnings about legalizing possession of small amounts of
marijuana.

You write in your commentary entitled 'MP ill informed on marijuana', "I
doubt too many gangsters were celebrating the repeal of prohibition in the
1930's".

To clarify the apples-oranges comparison that you make: the lifting of the
prohibition on liquor meant that alcohol was once again available legally
AND could be bought that way, rather than sought out in 'speak-easies' and
through 'bootleggers'.

On the other hand, the proposed marijuana legislation, as I understand it,
will NOT LEGALIZE marijuana, but, will allow possession of small amounts
for personal use. The sale of it will still be ILLEGAL.

So who do you think will be 'pushing it' -- a local marijuana outlet (the
equivalent of a liquor store) or some criminal?

Furthermore, if it's okay to have a bit, more young people who are
currently reluctant to give themselves a criminal record may choose to 'try
it on for size'.

Perhaps these are the considerations that prompted the Ken Epp quote that
you mention.

"This legislation is great news for organized crime. Demand will almost
certainly increase.".

Unlike you, I do question whether the legality, as it stands, of at least
tobacco, is appropriate. Alcohol is most often blamed for fatal accidents,
horrendous family and social problems and fatal lung diseases. However, no
one has advocated that we force tobacco manufacturers to stop injecting
profitable poisons into their products. Yet, bandwagons are quick to be
jumped on at the mention of marijuana.Why the difference ?

You counter Epp's claim that there is no research on the effects of
long-term marijuana use with your own unsubstantiated claim that the
substance has been studied for "at least the last thirty years". Yeah, well
- -- six of one, half a dozen of another.

Finally, it is amazing how Holland is always used as an example of
progressiveness when certain social issues arise be they legalizing
prostitution, marijuana, euthanasia, or legitimizing same-sex unions.
Perhaps that says more about Dutch society than it does about what and how
Canadian values and laws need manipulating?

And as the proverb goes, 'physician, heal thyself'. I would suggest that,
if you take journalism as seriously as I hope you do, that you 'take a
harder look at this issue' yourself and come up with a better analyzed
critique.

Jayne Buryn

Fort Saskatchewan

Editors note: if it's marijuana studies you want type the word marijuana
into any search engine. For both sides of the story visit the US Drug
Enforcement Agency's website, and NORML (National Organization for the
Reform of Marijuana Laws) Both list a dozens of studies as sources.
Obviously neither of these websites are objective but surprisingly what
they say about pot isn't radically different. NORML doesn't claim pot is
harmless and while some of the DEA's claims are debatable every one of them
also apply to alcohol and or cigarettes.