I am writing to inform the public about HB 1623, the bill to reduce penalties for marijuana possession. As a taxpayer, I believe our limited law enforcement resources should be spent fighting serious crime.

This is not an effort to legalize marijuana, just to reduce penalties so the punishment comes closer to fitting the offense.

Twelve states have decriminalized marijuana since 1973, so it's not as if we'd be going first. (Oregon went first in 1973; Nevada was most recent in 2001.) The federal government has not interfered.

Does saddling a young (or older) person with a criminal record serve the interests of society? Will individuals be better off for having been arrested?

If harsh penalties are really a deterrent, why haven't states like Maine (where it's been a violation since 1976) experienced elevated rates of use? (They haven't.)

Society can discourage marijuana use without criminalizing responsible users. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition has a saying that applies strongly to this bill: "You can get over an addiction, but you can't get over a conviction."

It serves no benefit to society when individuals are strapped with criminal records for minor marijuana offenses, especially when students are denied financial aid for college.

Marijuana should be treated differently than "hard" drugs such as heroin; failure to do so undermines the credibility of drug education.

We should not make criminals out of people who merely enjoy unpopular vices in the privacy of their own homes.

JACK RICKER

Concord