Letter to the editor: Legal pot is a Pandora’s box | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Legal pot is a Pandora’s box

In January, Gov. Tom Wolf announced he was considering the legalization of marijuana and has sent Lt. Gov. John Fetterman on a listening tour to get input from state residents (“Fetterman’s marijuana tour stop in Greensburg draws large, divided crowd,”).

In a Jan. 24 press release stating his support of the listening tour, Auditor General Eugene DePasquale said Pennsylvania could generate $581 million annually by “regulating and taxing” marijuana. He said the funds could, among other purposes, be used to reduce opioid addiction. Great point! LOL.

DePasquale said 8.38 percent of the state’s adults (21 and older) use marijuana at least monthly. He said “the tide of public opinion has turned,” as recreational marijuana has been approved in 10 states and Washington, D.C., with “public support levels more than doubling in less than 20 years.”

Do you think his mind is made up? Is 8.38 percent a majority? I think not.

Do we really want to open another Pandora’s box by legalizing marijuana when we are still struggling with opioid and other forms of drug addiction?

Which vice will be legalized next to feed the state budget pig? Prostitution? Pornography? Your guess is as good as mine.

John A. Waite

South Greensburg

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.