Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Editors reserve the right to edit letters for spelling, grammar, punctuation, excessive length and unsuitable content.


Marijuana isn't harmless; do something constructive for your 'high'

To The Daily Sun,
Aren't New Hampshire's drug/addiction problems bad enough? How does decriminalizing small amounts of marijuana (MJ) reduce the number of addicts and associated costs? Decriminalization isn't the answer to reducing our addiction problem.
Lacking personal experience, I refer to President Obama's director of National Drug Control Policy's, Michael Botticelli, December 13, 2015 interview on 60 Minutes.
Botticelli, a recovering alcoholic, is "not a fan of legalization" of MJ. He says MJ is linked to lower academic performance and lower IQs, that it exacerbates mental health problems, and that one in nine MJ users become addicted to it.
Does New Hampshire want more mentally impaired citizens? New Hampshire's mental health system and rehab facilities are already inadequate. Law enforcement says most people in jail have addiction problems and addiction often leads to incarceration. Our Division of Children, Youth, and Services is already overwhelmed trying to find foster parents for children with addicted parents. Reports are that children as young as 12 year olds are abusing illegal substances. Decriminalizing MJ will likely exacerbate these problems.
I agree that people should be allowed to do anything they like that doesn't hurt someone else, meaning they alone are responsible for the consequences. But addicts typically hurt family, friends, employers, perhaps strangers, and taxpayers who pay for their care, for problems most addicts created for themselves.
After decades of propaganda MJ decriminalization is popular, but MJ isn't harmless. Unless users grow their own MJ, they don't know what's in it that may turn them into a monster like the one that drove his car into a crowd in Times Square killing and injuring people. Some users will have or cause accidents, others will become addicted.
Botticelli wants addicts to learn that there is hope, that there is a "huge, incredible life on the other side of addiction."
For a "high", people need to learn to do something constructive like helping someone, making a new friend, taking a walk, learning something, playing with your children or watching them perform, meditating/praying, or planning their future and working their plan.
There is hope and a huge, incredible life available to every American, but it can be delayed or destroyed by stupid mistakes like committing crimes, not getting an education or a skill and a good job, having children before marriage and having a good job, or taking drugs, alcohol, or MJ.
Botticelli's comment reveals the critical message missing from our family discussions, our schools, churches, media, and anti-drug and anti-addiction efforts. We take it for granted so we forget to point it out: Life is wonderful, you don't get a do-over, don't screw it up!

Don Ewing

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 312

Thirty-nine states already make it a crime to harm a pre-born baby

To The Daily Sun,

This is the 16th of my reports to the voters of Hill and Franklin on what is happening in Concord. I want to thank you for the numerous positive comments I received for my columns. This week we had a Criminal Law and Public Safety Executive Session that elicited a lot of heated interest from the opposition.

A few weeks ago Senate Bill 66 was sidelined (retained) when a few people abandoned the Republican platform. SB-66 simply states that if a woman is pregnant and an injury to her results in death of the baby that the perpetrator can be charged with a crime against the baby as well as the mother. SB-66 in no way infringes on a mother's right to an abortion. This is not an abortion bill. It is a bill that protects the pre-born baby the mother hopes will be a part of her family. A few years ago a woman lost her baby due the negligence of a another person but the judge said that until the law was changed, only the crime against the mother was chargeable. We heard in testimony that in another case, a woman as hit by a negligent driver and her child, due to be delivered in just a few days died. This mother could not even get a birth or death certificate for the child. The legislature has tried for several years to make it a crime to cause harm to the pre-born baby as well as to the mother. Thirty-nine states have this law and 29, including liberal states like Massachusetts, set conception as the point from which a legal charge can be established. SB-66 sets the viability of the pre-born baby at 20 weeks. Those in opposition to this common sense legislation are terrified to give the pre-born child in New Hampshire any status of personhood. Our committee couldn't let this stand. We brought SB-66 back to the committee and after a lot of whining on the part of Democrats, we passed the bill 12-8, including one Democrat vote. On June 1, SB-66 is scheduled for a vote by the full House.
Please contact me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 320-9524 with your comments or if you just want to talk.

Dave Testerman

N.H. State Representative
Franklin and Hill

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 507