TOKING UP

To the editor:

In response to Joyce Nalepka's Thursday letter "Ask them," I would
like to say that most of her words are a false analysis of the
marijuana initiative that will be on the ballot in November.

In the '60s, Timothy Leary was not advocating marijuana use, he was
advocating LSD, which is a totally different drug with far more severe
consequences. LSD causes proven long-term brain damage, while
marijuana has yet to be found to have any major long-lasting
psychological effects when its use is discontinued.

I went to high school in the late '40s and early '50s when people were
getting ridiculously long prison sentences for possession and kids
were using it then. In the '60s and '70s, its use was epidemic in most
of the nation and the overwhelming majority of users seem to have
survived quite well as they aged into the boomer generation.

I am not recommending that anyone start toking a joint every morning,
but we should base our discussions on facts and not unfounded
hysteria. Pot use is not a reason to be sent to prison unless a person
commits a crime while using it. It is not a gateway drug any more than
cigarettes and causes far less physical harm and death to the user.

As far as kids dropping out of school and turning to crime to support
a marijuana habit, that statement is laughable. A number of kids will
drop out of school anyway and most of them could support the use of
pot on their allowance.

While the nation is being inundated with commercials about anti-stress
prescription drugs that make billions of dollars for the drug
companies that few without insurance can afford, we have a natural
herb that is free if grown in your back yard. I tend to believe that
the major sponsors of the laws against the use of marijuana are the
large drug companies that make no profit from its use or sale. It's
all about money.

Frank Bartlett,

Boulder City