I was dismayed and a bit stunned when the New Hampshire House voted last week to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana. I was furthered disturbed to read an editorial in the Concord Monitor defending the vote and criticizing those who oppose decriminalizing this illegal drug.

The quarter ounce of marijuana the House refers to is in no way a "small amount." In fact, a quarter ounce of marijuana can equate to 14 joints - not the seven that has been reported. The Monitor cites a study done by a Harvard psychology professor in the 1970s. However the marijuana of today is not the marijuana of the 1970s. It is significantly stronger, with some reports estimating today's strength to be five times that of a comparable amount from that time period. We have seen some types of the drug with such a high potency that "just a couple of joints" can lead to serious impairment.

The law enforcement community in New Hampshire rightfully takes drug use very seriously. However, it is also made up of compassionate men and women who see firsthand the devastating effect drugs can have on our communities, not to mention their fellow citizens. Most members of law enforcement and the criminal justice system have families and, yes, children.

It is misleading to imply that in New Hampshire our citizens serve jail time for a first offense possession charge for a "small amount of marijuana." Most of the anecdotal cases cited involve a defendant who pleads down to a possession of marijuana to avoid a stiffer sentence for a more serious crime.

Supporters of the bill argue a young person charged with possession of marijuana could potentially lose federal financial aid. In truth, federal law suspends federal aid to a college student for a set period of time only if the drug conviction occurred while the student was in school and receiving aid. The same law also allows the affected student to resume eligibility before the end of the period of suspension if the student successfully completes a drug rehabilitation program.

To call our current drug possession law an obstacle between some teens and college is a false argument. The solution to the problem of a potential loss of financial aid is simple: Do not use marijuana. If young people interested in earning a college degree are so concerned about their financial aid, why would they risk it all by using marijuana?

We have a serious drug problem in this country due in part to the misinformation and "mixed signals" we send on the subject. Popular culture often promotes the subtle and not so subtle pro-drug message that marijuana is a "harmless drug," a "soft drug" or a "rite of passage." These myths do not address the fact that marijuana is a dangerous, addictive substance that can ruin lives and harm the quality of life in our communities. Passage of this bill will reinforce this dangerous message, conveying that a little bit of marijuana is no big deal.

This bill also creates significant conflict within our laws. The legislation does not change the law regarding sale or transport of the drug. Any person caught with a "small amount" could still face criminal penalties if they give it to a friend or if it is found in their car, while possessing the drug would simply equate to a traffic ticket.

The law enforcement community in New Hampshire countered all of these arguments to the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. The committee carefully weighed the testimony and thoughtfully voted 13-5 against passage of this bill. But the majority of the House disregarded the overwhelming majority of the committee charged with thoroughly examining this issue and passed it by a large margin. Thankfully, the Senate and Gov. John Lynch have already indicated that this bill will not become law.

Finally, the Monitor states, "if incidents increase as the result of the bill's passage, or if marijuana use by the young increases, the law can be repealed." What good can come from a social experiment that mixes drugs and children? They are our most valuable resource. We owe them better than this ill-conceived legislation.

(John J. Barthelmes is the state commissioner of safety.)