Musings on marijuana

Re “Should we tax pot?” Opinion, Dec. 4

Patt Morrison tells us that a Rand Corp. researcher estimates that if pot were legal, 60% to 70% of the population would smoke it regularly, as its addictive potential has supposedly been underestimated.

Yet pot is legal or decriminalized in some countries -- the Netherlands, for example -- and rates of regular use in these countries are lower than in the U.S., where pot is illegal. Was Morrison high when she wrote this column?

Jonathan Taylor

La Habra

::

Morrison’s witty musings miss the key issue behind changing marijuana laws. It certainly would be splendid if a legal marijuana market helped California pay some bills. Nevertheless, the real reasons to repeal marijuana prohibition are moral, not financial.

In the United States, we take pride in our laws because they are just. Crimes that cause the most harm to others get the most severe punishments. Murder deserves a bigger penalty than double parking because it creates more harm. But what harm is caused by owning a plant?

How can we penalize someone for covering a seed with earth and watching it grow? We all want our children to grow up in a world in which the punishment fits the crime. Removing penalties for marijuana possession would bring us closer to this goal. If creating a taxed and regulated marijuana market raises some money, that’s icing on the cake.

Mitch Earleywine

Albany, N.Y.

::

Should we tax pot? An alternative approach would be to legalize the substance and not tax it.

We would save the money used to criminalize it but not incur the “cost of regulating and enforcing the legal market.” Ridding ourselves of the cost of pot-law enforcement is a good way to begin trimming the budget.

Ken Hart

Long Beach