Let Hamm practice
This is regarding James Hamm and his request to practice law in this state ("Practicing law, as a murderer," Oct. 12). The only way to know for sure if Hamm has the ability to practice law is to let him. But if allowed to practice law, maybe there should be some rules applied just to Hamm. For example, he should not be allowed to be a public defender or a private defense attorney. Hamm should only be allowed to be a prosecutor so he can help put criminals away, not help get them off.
He has done time for his crime, and he has finished his parole. He appears to be a changed man, in the respect that he has not committed murder since released from prison. He has done more with his life after his release than the majority of people who get released from prison. Rehabilitation does not work in most cases, even though we want it to. However, in the case of Hamm, it appears to have worked, at least so far.
-- Terrence W. Schultz
ASU student
Attitude matters
Mr. Hanson sounds like a typical ASU "bandwagon" fan ("Athletics needs a different kind of Love," Oct. 13). OK, granted Dirk Koetter's team has experienced a couple major setbacks this year. But basically asking for his head on a platter at this juncture is indicative of the pervasive "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" attitude found in all professional sports and into the college-coaching ranks.
In the past 15 years, ASU has had some decent teams, one great team and several putrid teams, as well. I was at ASU during bad seasons, and for that wonderful Rose Bowl season in which poor officiating -- which benefited a decent Ohio State team -- cost ASU a national championship.
After all the hoopla surrounding Sam Keller's incredible start to his collegiate career, he and the rest of the team had a few bad breaks and only one truly bad game. And the fact that Hanson has the audacity to start the negative attitudes and the death knell for this coach's tenure is despicable.
-- Christopher Burmood
ASU alumnus
Banning marijuana doesn't control it
I agree with Laura Graham's thoughtful column "Smoking marijuana not worse than drinking" (Oct. 14).
This brings up the question: Should marijuana be legalized?
It seems to me that this is the wrong question. The question should be: Should marijuana remain completely unregulated, untaxed and controlled by criminals?
Because marijuana is now illegal, it is sold only by criminals -- criminals who often sell other, much more dangerous drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine. And they often offer free samples of the more dangerous drugs to their marijuana customers, thus (creating) the so-called "gateway effect."
In a regulated market, this would not happen.
Do the readers know of anyone who has been offered a free bottle of whiskey, rum or vodka when legally buying beer or wine?
I don't either.
If we regulate, control and tax the sale and production of marijuana, we close the gateway to hard drugs.
-- Kirk Muse
Mesa, AZ
If you have an opinion you'd like to make heard, mail a letter to the editor. Just type "Letters.Editor" in the subject line and send it to letters.editor@asu.edu.
