COLUMN: TRUTHS ABOUT MARIJUANA ARE CLOUDED IN SMOKE

I find it ironic that such a highly touted, seemingly brilliant generation
is so apt to be blatantly brainwashed by highly false propaganda.

"The truth about legalizing marijuana should be weeded out," (CT, Jan. 15)
certainly contained a few commonly heard reasons for the illegality of
marijuana. In the column, the author contrasts marijuana and alcohol by
explaining that alcohol's potency is far less than that of marijuana (less
marijuana is needed to impair judgment).

As always, the problems of marijuana addiction and healthcare costs were
also presented. It is even mentioned that smoking marijuana most likely
leads to some forms of lung cancer similar to those caused by cigarettes.

"Ladies and gentlemen, these new marijuana strains are extremely potent and
highly dangerous! They are 30 times more powerful than strains from the
1960s! This isn't your grandfathers weed!" The previous is a commonly
stated phrase that has become one of the mottoes of the DEA.

They even go on to mention that most marijuana in the 1960s had 1 percent
THC content while today's has up to 30 percent THC. What they know and hope
you don't realize is that marijuana with 1 percent THC is made into rope
and not smoked.

While marijuana with very high potency does exist, the majority of
marijuana consumed is around 5 to 10 percent THC. Obviously, the government
is overstating increasing potency problems. Do people not realize a
regulated market could lead to potency laws?

Secondly, let me be straight to the point. It is harder for a high school
freshman to obtain alcohol than it is to get marijuana. This is because the
alcohol market is so highly regulated -- this regulation of alcohol assures
quality and uncontaminated products.

There is no regulation in the marijuana market of the United States. This
can lead to plants laced with foreign substances that may lead to actual
health problems. This isn't a totally uncommon practice as it can increase
profits.

Also, this lack of regulation causes the U.S. government to lose incredible
amounts of taxable money every year. As a response, it is often stated that
marijuana has the highest number of addiction and treatment cases in the
United States each year. Because of this, all taxed profits would be
negated by ridiculously high treatment costs incurred by addicts.

Please, don't be fooled. Nearly all alcoholics are in treatment as a result
of a conscious decision that they needed help. Conversely, nearly all
marijuana "addicts" are in treatment because they must answer the question:
Do I want to go to jail or be in a treatment program for a year?

Wow, hard question. What would you choose? This is where the government
gets its outlandish addiction percentiles and statistics.

The U.S. government also enjoys painting the picture that smoking marijuana
leads to judgment so impaired that death is seemingly unavoidable. In one
commercial, a female is raped in front of uncaring potheads who are too
blazed to realize what is happening.

Marijuana does not lead to one forgetting that a gun can indeed kill or
that rape is highly evil. If anyone actually believes those TV ads, please
explain why.

To put topping on the cake, drug commercials even state that marijuana
smokers support terrorism by funding these organizations through drug
money. Come on.

Most marijuana consumed in the United States comes from our own farms and
Canada. Harder drugs such as cocaine and heroin are the drugs of choice for
those who fund terrorists.

Again, I come back to the subject of regulation. If marijuana was
regulated, absolutely no money spent on it would go to terrorists. You can
even spend those tax profits on the terror war.

I found it pretty entertaining that the author believes one reason for
continued prohibition is that smoking marijuana most likely leads to lung
cancer. Most marijuana smokers are not utterly oblivious to lung damage
caused by their habit. They know the risks and they accept them just like
cigarette smokers do. Additionally, marijuana can be consumed through
vaporization, which ultimately removes all carcinogens and unsafe materials
from the vapor consumed.

But why am I mentioning this? Cigarettes are legal, so that argument for
prohibition is pretty irrelevant.

Most people do not know that the United States used to pay people to grow
hemp because it was such a resourceful plant. If hemp were legally
cultivated, it would slow the depletion of the ozone layer.

Forests would also be saved as hemp produces paper more efficiently than
trees. Hemp is also an excellent renewable energy source that helps balance
the earth's oxygen and carbon dioxide levels.

I would be highly surprised if this changed anyone's opinion on this topic,
but I just hope it makes you think twice before believing everything you
see on the commercials.