SUGGESTION TO LEGALIZE POT LACKING IN COMMON SENSE

Editor:

RE: Senators' "legal dope."

I don't believe people in positions of power/respect should make ridiculous
announcements such as this. What message is being sent to our youth? It is
unlawful to buy tobacco under 18 years old but you may possess marijuana?

Let's not stop there. It is unlawful to buy lottery tickets or alcohol or
get a bank loan, but you can, under the proposal set forth by the Senate,
purchase and possess marijuana, at 16 years old. If a person is not mature
enough to make a decision on lottery tickets, why in all common sense would
they be mature enough to smoke dope.

The thought (or lack thereof) is suggested that it will save one billion to
1.5 billion dollars in policing costs. I don't understand the logic. I
believe the money "saved" will be a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the
soaring costs of health care and rehabilitation centres if such legislation
in approved.

It is a well-known fact that "soft drugs" are a starting point for hard
drugs. When a person has one ounce of liquor with dinner, they usually
suffer no effects and are in control of their faculties. When a person
smokes a joint, they are "stoned" and depending on the potency of the
marijuana, they can be totally without control of their faculties.

How are the police able to test for this impairment? Blood tests? Not
likely, this would be too intrusive. Will the police now have to buy new
devices to test for marijuana consumption? Another added cost. If not, why
would anyone drink and drive when they could smoke and drive without
consequences?

Marijuana alone is a strong mind-altering drug. The reported percentages of
THC has grown continuously over the years. The suggestion that legalizing
marijuana will diminish crime is badly flawed. Organized crime has rooted
too deep in the sale of distribution of marijuana.

Tougher penalties will save money in the long run as the deterrent turns
people away from drug use. The seizure and sale of proceeds of crime will
often offset the cost of policing as well as deter more people from
becoming involved in the drug trade.

If convicted persons lost significant amounts of their property and
freedom, they would find other ways to support themselves legally. They
would then be taxpayers and give back to society rather than be a drain on it.

DAN PATERSON

Claresholm RCMP

Claresholm