Hopefully I will soon break my habit of using words with too many syllables, perhaps then my letters to the editor will be published more often, or with less editorial deletions...

If anyone would like to assist me in this endeavor, please feel free to read a couple of my letters as published, and offer suggestions and/or corrections, so that I might improve my writing style in a manner that is likely to reach a wider audience.

:)

LICIT DRUGS

Bernie Diaz, in his letter ["Drug Illogic," Letters, Feb.  13], mentions the "unfortunate circumstances surrounding Noelle Bush's arrest on a forged prescription." Bush is a perfect example of how laws against substance abuse don't really apply to those in the class making such arbitrary and capricious rules: The daughter of the Florida governor is being allowed to participate in mandatory drug treatment, despite her criminal record, which is long enough that she does not technically qualify for the program.  Also, Diaz neglected to mention that treatment programs such as the one offered to Bush are being cut across the board in Florida, in favor of much more expensive and less effective incarceration.

Xanax, the drug Bush was trying to obtain, is classified by the Drug Enforcement Agency as a schedule-four substance, listed as having only slight potential for abuse; marijuana is listed as schedule one, having high potential.  Nicotine and alcohol are exempt from drug scheduling, despite the fact that they take 500,000 American lives annually.  It is amazing that those who claim to be part of the "drug-free" movement turn a blind eye to the relative harm caused by legal drugs, which are advertised side by side with ads that disingenuously pretend illicit drugs are worse.

Jose Melendez,

DeLand, Fla. 

Here's my letter of the day:

Dear editors,

I am amazed by the stream of unquestioned contradictory information coming out about marijuana users in the news media.

On the one hand, the common stereotype, spread with glee by the press, is that pot makes people stupid and unsophisticated.

On the other hand, according to law enforcement officers in charge of busting the people who grow the stuff, marijuana grow ops show enormous technical complexity and sophistication.

So which is it? Sophisticated or unsophisticated?

Are potheads people who can't pour pee out of their own boots with the instructions on the bottom, or are they people smart enough be able grow marijuana in an old boot using a sophisticated hydroponic system?

Since society feels strongly enough about what pot does to the brain to put people in prison over it, I think we need to reconcile these two disparate pictures of the intelligence of people who regularly use marijuana.