When I write a letter to the editor, it is my fervent hope that someone will respond. I am pleased to see that R. Armstrong responded, if only briefly (“Legalization is not the answer,” Jan. 18) to the opinion I stated in my last letter. I am further pleased to see R. Armstrong use the word “confused” when referring to my letter.
I stated in my letter that I was confused about a previous letter writer’s train of thought. Had you read my letter comprehensively, you would have noticed that the confusion had cleared by the time I referred to the Liberals. But I appreciate the response, nonetheless.
In your response, however, you exhibit some of that confusion. After a justifiable opening comment re: sarcasm, you were all over the map with your logic. You deplore, in paragraph two, “attacking the intelligence of those who don’t agree with you,” but, by paragraph three, you are claiming to be able to offer your opinion, “about legalizing anything that is mind-altering for recreational use” because of your “experience in life” and because of your “belief system that has grown out of trials, searching and just plain living.” Do you then, just automatically discount everyone else’s opinion that you disagree with because they have no “experience in life,” no “belief system,” and have not tried, searched and lived life? If so, then what makes me want to listen to what you have to say?
The problem with many of the letters, not just on the issue of legalization, is they are written from a perspective of fear.
I suspect that you have never tried marijuana recreationally. By careful perusal of your oft-repeated cautions and condemnations, I surmise that you are a user of neither coffee or sugar, two naturally occurring substances that are most definitely mind-altering.
Now, I am most definitely not as pure as the driven snow, but I don’t use caffeine, try to avoid sugar and salt and don’t eat processed foods.
I also don’t use marijuana in the manner you seem to perceive it used. Just as it is possible to have a social drink with some friends, so it possible to have a social joint. Sure there are ingesters/imbibers of both substances that are prone to excesses, but to lump us all in one pot (pun intended) is disingenuous.
To further suggest that marijuana use is responsible for inner-city addicts and all of the children put into foster care is not only unfair, it is callous and cruel.
There is no doubt in my mind, nor, I suspect, in the mind of any educated and aware individual, that the issue of legalization is an extremely contentious one. It seems to me top be of scant use to cloud the issue with rambling, uninformed opinions.
There are plenty of published opinions, offered by respected, educated, open-minded, scientific individuals and organizations that are available for those interested enough to want to become better informed.
Incidentally, I am not a Liberal. I am also not an escapist from reality, a criminal, an addict or uneducated. I am a hard-working, contributing member of society, am involved in community work and yes, I smoke marijuana.
Mark Levey
Enderby
