'EITHER THE POLICE BELIEVE THIS MISINFORMATION OR
THEY ARE DOING IT ON PURPOSE'

To the editor:

Re: Marijuana candidate puts high school in tough position, NDN Fri.
Nov.17/2000

I disagree.

After reading the entire article, I believe that it is the police that
has put the school and its' students in a tough position. I quote two
excerpts from the article to support this statement. Dan Loehndorf
plans to contradict the police information on marijuana which he hopes
will actually help students make proper choices. "Unfortunately the
police are sometimes misinformed about cannabis and other substances"
Loehndorf told the Daily News.

Then two paragraphs later, in the same article NCP Sgt. Jerry Meyers states:
"I tell them (the students) the truth." "The truth is that it's addictive,
it's not good for you, it's got 10 times the tar and nicotine that a
cigarette has, and from my experience it's a progressant (leads to other
drugs). For a young mind it's a dangerous drug. Note: there is no
discernable nicotine in marijuana.

This misinformation boldly stated in the newspaper reminded me of NCP
Sgt. Dan Maluta's pronouncement in the NDN Friday Mar. 5, 1999: "What
health practitioner would prescribe marijuana which has some 4,000
toxins and other substances to try and cure or help someone, is beyond
me."

Sgt. Dan was soundly rebuked by fellow police officer Gil Puder, an
Instructor, Criminal Justice Dept. Langara College and Instructor,
Justice Institute B.C. Police Academy, in the NDN Mar. 11, 1999 "One
copper to another on marijuana laws".

Either the police believe this misinformation or they are doing it on
purpose. In either case they should not be counseling students.
Perhaps drug education should be provided by health care professionals
or at the very least people who will tell the truth and know what they
are talking about. Aren't we past the "Reefer Madness" fiasco yet?

Name withheld by request, Nelson