Right and left, right and wrong. What a joke. How about black and white, which when mixed becomes grey and that is what we are dealing with here, a grey area.
Joe McLaughlin’s use of Pat Robertson as a guide on legalizing marijuana must have been on the same stuff he is talking about and defending. In my opinion, Robertson isn’t too bright but happens to have contacts that will let him spew his junk. I could supply references to people with more knowledge than Robertson, with a totally different opinion.
My main issue of irritation with Joe’s column of March 20 is the remark about the people who support legalizing marijuana are the only people with sober thinking. In other words, the people who agree with Joe and Pat are sober thinkers. If you don’t agree with them, you’re not a sober thinker.
In my first letter, I mentioned that this was worth taking a look at, as there was some merit to the decriminalization of marijuana in small amounts. I also mentioned the use of legal marijuana for medicinal purposes. McLaughlin feels, from the drift of his letter, that those who disagree with his point of view are not sober thinkers and wrong.
I consider myself a sober thinker and using the word in a different context, I’m not a drunk and I don’t use the wacky tabakee. There is a huge grey area here as to what the best course of action that could be taken, like heavy fines that are progressive and a limit of what will be a recordable criminal offence. All offences to be recordable but only repetition and quantity would make it a criminal record.
Personally I’m not in favour in legalizing marijuana in any manner.
E.T. (Tom) Skoreyko