Of course, we all know, or should know, that this insanity over various drugs ["Zero judgment," Feb. 20] basically is rooted in the culture wars and ignorant intolerance of marijuana use by adults. Zero-tolerance policies require that you put your wisdom out on the doorstep and march in line with what drug warriors want for you to do. Every single drug-policy study ever done in a century, that is, 27 scholarly works, recommends decriminalization. Of course, we live in a culture in the United States that is rife with xenophobia, in fact our entire drug policy is rooted in racist drives from earlier in the past century. Until we come to grips and develop a proper drug policy rooted in science and pragmatism, we will continue to witness a witch hunt gone crazy where good kids are punished for possession of Tylenol. Matthew Hulett, Brick, N.J. [end]
Dear Editor, MP Randy White appears to be a tad confused about the history of the formation of the current marijuana decriminalization bill [White slams Liberal pot laws, Mar. 2, Langley Advance News]. It had already been revised and toughened twice before the current rejected proposals were made. It is based in the recommendations of the Senate and the Commons reports on marijuana policy, one of which recommended full legalization, and the other decriminalization. A bill intended to be more reasonable to Canadians who are caught in their youth consuming marijuana, a bill intended to relieve them of a life-long criminal record, it was never meant to be an amplification of Canada's emerging new Drug War. It has in part become that because of two rounds of incorporated compromises. [continues 177 words]
Your editorial is right on the mark. It is absurd to lump all drugs into one category. Will this apply to pharmaceutical drugs as well? What about antihistamines? Rep. Mark Gundrum, R-New Berlin, says, "These mind-altering drugs are so dangerous it is illegal to sell, distribute or even possess them." The most dangerous drug on our roads is alcohol, and it is legal to sell, distribute, and possess it, so his meaning is lost to me. My concern is that some poor lad who smokes a joint of marijuana on a Friday will have an accident the following Sunday and will be treated as harshly as if he drove under the influence of LSD. That is not justice. [continues 193 words]
Spare us this type of ranting, please (Oct. 26 guest column, "Rule of law lost in propaganda"). One of the defendants accused by Tom Coleman of drug dealing was in another state at the time he alleged he bought cocaine from her. Coleman engaged in theft and exploited his position as an officer in previous localities, and, as said by the ruling judge who tossed out these cases, has zero credibility. Saying that people who plead guilty obviously are guilty is quite pollyanna. In the name of our drug war/witch hunt, we have stacked the deck so heavily against defendants that defense lawyers will routinely advise their clients, even if innocent, to take a plea for a reduced charge vs. risking a multi-decade minimum mandatory sentence. [continues 84 words]
I AM GLAD Ed Rosenthal may get a new trial (Rosenthal case shakeup, April 1). He was railroaded in the first trial, the whole truth and nothing but the truth was not given to the jury, and justice was not served. Since all of the scholarly evidence in major drug policy works supports medical access to cannabis, it is absurd that this evidence be hidden because Congress, a group of lawyers for the most part, has its head in the sand and denies marijuana has medical utility. [continues 64 words]
Your paper recently printed, "Of course, the fact the grow operation was busted at all points to the success of the joint approach of local police forces in targeting street drugs." Oh, really? I suppose the cops are on the verge of getting this whole drug problem under control, eh? Please, spare me this spin-meister idiocy. The cops are lucky if they touch five per cent of the illicit-drug activity occurring. Hey, look at my country spending $100 billion per year at all levels of government targeting street drugs. We sure are experiencing success too, with a nice methamphetamine epidemic sweeping our nation. Dolts. [continues 125 words]
Regarding the recent drug bust at the former Molson plant: I suppose the cops are on the verge of getting this whole drug problem under control, eh? Please, spare me this spin-meister idiocy. The cops are lucky if they touch five per cent of the illicit drug activity occurring, and that has not changed in over a century. Hey, look at my country spending $100 billion dollars per year at all levels of government targeting street drugs. We sure are experiencing success too, with a nice methamphetamine epidemic sweeping our nation. [continues 103 words]
Dear Editor, There is absolutely no requirement in any of the international drug control treaties that personal possession of any drug be punished through criminal sanctions. The only requirement is that such possession be a violation of law. Decriminalisation equates to making possession a civil offence (punishable by fine only) versus a criminal offence (punishable by being jailed). If it were true that decriminalisation violated these treaties, then 12 states in the United States would already be in violation of these treaties for having already instituted decriminalisation of personal marijuana of possession. As would also be the nations of Italy, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Australia, Belgium, Germany, and Holland. [continues 66 words]
I understand that this vote will reinforce what already is the case, but it is clear that under Ravin, as restated this year, personal marijuana possession and cultivation is already legal in Alaska. That would be possession of four ounces and cultivation of up to 25 plants. I find it odd this was not mentioned in your article. I suspect it is because it is a reality many power brokers and gatekeepers find hard to accept. Some seem to think if you stick your head in the sand long enough, reality will just flitter away. [continues 128 words]
I think we have heard this tune from officials from the United States before. Have we not? And, does any Canadian truly believe our DEA has the power to trump our commercial interests, that we would damage our economy over a trickle of marijuana from Canada when we are being relatively flooded from Mexico, and from within our own borders, with ample supplies of marijuana? I quote the RCMP: "To put things in perspective, it is estimated that approximately three tons of Canadian marijuana are seized each year in the United States, while the exports from Mexico alone total thousands of tons annually. During the first half of 1999 alone, U.S. Customs intercepted 547 tons of marijuana being smuggled into the country from Mexico. The U.S. are basically their own main source of marijuana." [continues 103 words]
A drug abuse wheel of fortune? This has to be one of the more stupid ideas I have ever heard. It's right up there with the recent Drugs Maze built in another town. Will the Wheel tell the truth, that the vast majority of those who consume illicit drugs have no problems whatsoever? How about moderation and moderate drug use, as is the norm with over 99 per cent of most drug users? If I can have a modest martini or three, why not a joint occasionally? [continues 102 words]
One inescapable fact of Rush Limbaugh's situation that neither he nor Bill Bennett can deal with, is that jailing Rush in a cage with violent felons would have proven counterproductive. There is no place for the criminal law and subsequent sanctions in dealing with problematic drug use. These are human beings, not mules to be manipulated with sticks and carrots. The relapse rate for Rush's problems after treatment is above 80 percent, and Rush should be thankful he is receiving special treatment and compassion from drug warriors. The rest of us middle-class folk would go to jail. [continues 180 words]
Regarding "Rush Is Still Stone Wrong" [Currents, Nov. 23]: One inescapable fact of Rush Limbaugh's situation that neither he nor William Bennett can deal with is that jailing Limbaugh alongside violent felons would have proven counterproductive. There is no place for criminal law and subsequent sanctions in dealing with problematic drug use. These are human beings, not mules to be manipulated with sticks and carrots. The relapse rate for Limbaugh's problems after treatment is high. He should be thankful he has received special treatment and compassion from the drug warriors - the rest of us middle class folk would probably go to jail for the same offense. I keep wondering if he will stand up for what is right and proper: ending the Drug War with decriminalization. Matthew Hulett Brick, N.J. [end]
To the editor: I have a question for Dr. Paul Latimer. If it is true that cannabis use is a risk factor for developing schizophrenia, then why are schizophrenia rates per capita flat throughout the last century in Western nations as cannabis use came into the mainstream? Matthew Hulett Brick, NJ [end]
Susan Mansur Bahr writes to your paper, "... there is a huge difference between someone who uses drugs to ease physical pain and someone using cocaine or meth to get high." Really? In what sense? Both use the drugs compulsively. Both break the law. One relieves a physical pain; one relieves a psychological pain. Both get "high." So, what is the difference? Indeed, does she really trust a compulsive addict like Rush to tell her the truth when he has lied to and deceived even his wife for so long? Maybe, just maybe, he liked the "high," the way in which it altered his consciousness. That would appear to be the key difference for illogical fanatics. "Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish and wine unto those of heavy hearts. Let him drink and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more." (Prov. 31:6-7) Matthew Hulett [end]
Lighten up! ("Up in smoke" Jose Rodriguez, Oct. 10.) Comparing smoking a joint to having sexual relations is perverse. One act is intimate and personal, while another is no different than having a beer. I enjoyed Jean Chretien's joke immensely. It's time the public learns to laugh about this witch hunt for folks who use the safest recreational compound known to man. Jose Rodriguez, go have a martini if you please -- and calm down. Matthew Hulett (Rodriguez was laughing, too.) [end]
In your parenthetical remark to my letter, Not liberals in classic sense (Sept. 23), you stated, "We didn't know Jefferson grew weed." In actuality, Thomas Jefferson did grow cannabis. As did George Washington. They called it hemp, but all species of cannabis are members of the species cannabis sativa L. George Washington was also known to roll some hemp into his tobacco cigarettes. They both praised the hemp plant in some of their writings: "Make the most you can of the Indian Hemp seed and sow it everywhere." - --President George Washington, 1794 [continues 81 words]
RE "RAPE drugs criminal 'weapons': Alliance MP" (Sept. 24): It will be interesting to hear alcohol called a weapon. Alcohol is the No. 1 date rape drug. Are they going to address the licit drug implicated in more than 80% of rape cases that involve drug induced incapacitation? Or, is it only those "other" drugs that need to be called weapons, while alcohol is just dandy? I think drug warriors will engage in any level of irrational fear-mongering to try to ramp up their counterproductive drug war. For instance, if these new intoxicants are being used broadly in this fashion and it is such a problem, might we be given some documentation of the phenomena? [continues 79 words]
Re: "Police pursue today's high-yield pot" (Sept. 2). Thanks for the propaganda about potent pot. Now, let's examine the facts. No. 1, hash products that measure up to 50 per cent THC content have been available for centuries. No. 2, Starks measured Thai samples of marijuana in 1974 that came in at 17 per cent THC content. No. 3, samples that measure above 12 per cent THC content are relatively rare. Take the time to ask baby boomers about Thai stick, Panama Red, and Colombian Gold, and then come back to me and attempt to persuade me most of them were smoking hemp-like marijuana measuring 0.9 per cent THC content. [continues 95 words]
Re: The Dopes can't even grow weed (Sept. 22). Thomas Jefferson was a classical liberal. Liberal as defined in Webster's is an educated person. Whatever those folks at Health Canada may be, I think they are not liberals in the classic sense. I highly doubt most conservatives could grow medical marijuana and prepare it very well, either. How about you folks at The Winnipeg Sun? I would suggest, first and foremost, that you do not grind in lower leaves and stems from the plant to stabilize the product. Patients are perfectly capable of titrating their dose by taking one more or one less toke. Cloning a chosen plant with cuttings should stabilize the product well enough without adding in highly irritating components like stems, leaves and seeds. Matthew Hulett (We didn't know Jefferson grew weed.) [end]
