This is in response to David Klipec’s letter to the editor. I don’t think he’s done enough research on hemp to make the claim that hemp’s only “real” value is recreational. He says the use of synthetics outweighs hemp’s use. How many synthetics does it take to help save old growth forests? How can it be cheaper to manufacture synthetics when hemp can easily grow in any weather condition? If bugs are a problem for hemp crops, why don’t people who grow hemp have any problems with those bugs?

As far as hemp being a gateway drug to use of harder drugs, there is a big difference between industrial hemp and recreational hemp. Although this was explained in the column he was replying to, I will restate it. Industrial hemp has no recreational value. Therefore, legalization of industrial hemp wouldn’t provide that “gateway.”

Now, I am in favor of legalizing marijuana as a whole. Even my grandma, who is 86 years old, thinks marijuana should be legalized. She lived through prohibition and compares the exile of marijuana to that. If we keep marijuana illegal, it will be more sought after. Look at Amsterdam: marijuana is legal there and their drug related problems are minimal compared to ours.

For the casual recreational user of marijuana, there isn’t a whole lot more harm done to their bodies compared to drinking a 12-pack of beer. I’ll admit to using marijuana occasionally. It hasn’t made me try harder drugs. Marijuana doesn’t make you snort cocaine or shoot meth. It’s a matter of that person’s will power whether they use other drugs.

Alcohol, nicotine and caffeine are all addictive drugs, yet they are legal. There is no difference between those and marijuana. According to Klipec, the hemp issue should have died long ago. It’s a shame that he has such a narrow view. Maybe he should smoke a bowl — his mind might be enlightened.

Jay Fulton

Senior

Management information systems