I'd like to defend Ms. Jasorka's assertion that marijuana needs to be decriminalized.

Ms. Pomerantz, in her letter ("Marijuana higher risk drug than some people believe," April 11), stated the numerous health risks of marijuana.

I don't want to dwell on the validity of that remark, but suffice it to say that THC does not cause physical dependency. The flip-side to that is that gambling won't cause physical dependency either, but a lack of personal responsibility is hardly the fault of a plant.

Health risks are personal risks -- why should the public be involved? Some say that marijuana, the "gateway drug," cultivates an "addictive personality" due to its addictive nature.

Clearly this drug is a scourge upon our nation -- won't somebody please think of the children? I choose to disagree with the idea of a gateway drug. Americans ingest another, far more addictive chemical on a daily basis: caffeine.

Yes, the average citizen of this great land drinks 216 liters of carbonated beverages every year, and yet we've somehow managed to avoid becoming a nation of heroin addicts.

The bottom line here isn't whether or not marijuana is harmful.

It's more of a question of whether or not the public should be concerned with personal choices. Aren't all marijuana-induced costs to society the direct result of marijuana prohibition?

It's 2007. We, as a nation, should be bright enough (or is our president starting to rub off on us?) to realize that the greatest consequences of responsible marijuana use shouldn't be the ones we impose on ourselves.