--------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Happy July 5th Date: 97-07-05 12:33:39 EDT From: Tomato JAM FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED JULY 3, 1997 THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz Most Americans should be ashamed to celebrate the Fourth What an inconvenient holiday the Fourth of July has become. Oh, so long as we stick to grilling hot dogs and hamburgs, hauling the kids to the lake or the mountains, and winding up the day watching the fireworks as the Boston Pops plays the 1812 -- written by a subject of the czar to celebrate the defeat of our vital ally the French -- we can usually manage to convince ourselves we still honor the same values that made July 4, 1776, a date which rings in history. Great Britain taxed the colonists at far lower rates than Americans tolerate today -- and never dreamed of granting government agents the power to search our private bank records to locate "unreported income." Nor did the king's ministers ever attempt to stack our juries by disqualifying any juror who refused to swear in advance to "leave your conscience outside and enforce the law as the judge explains it to you." The king's ministers insisted the colonists were represented by Members of Parliament who had never set foot on these shores. Today, of course, our interests are "represented" by one of two millionaire lawyers -- both members of the incumbent Republicrat Party -- among whom we were privileged to "choose" last election day, men who for the most part have lived in mansions and sent their kids to private schools in the wealthy suburbs of the imperial capital, for decades. Yet the colonists did rebel. It's hard to imagine, today, the faith and courage of a few hundred frozen musketmen, setting off across the darkened Delaware, gambling their lives and farms on the chance they could engage and defeat the greatest land army in the history of the known world, armed with only two palpable assets: one irreplaceable man to lead them, and some flimsy newspaper reprints of a parchment declaring: "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it. ..." Do we believe that, still? Recently, President Clinton's then-Drug Czar, Lee Brown, told me the role of government is to protect the people from dangers, such as drugs. I corrected him, saying, "No, the role of government is to protect our liberties." "We'll just have to disagree on that," the president's appointee said. The War for American Independence began over unregistered, untaxed guns, when British forces attempted to seize arsenals of rifles, powder and ball from the hands of ill-organized Patriot militias in Lexington and Concord. American civilians shot and killed scores of these government agents as they marched back to Boston. Are those Minutemen still our heroes? Or do we now consider them "dangerous terrorists" and "depraved government-haters"? In "The Federalist" No. 46, James Madison told us we need have no fear of any federal tyranny ever taking away our rights, arguing that under his proposed Constitution "the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," and predicting that any usurpation of powers not specifically delegated would lead to "plans of resistance" and "appeal to a trial of force." Another prominent federalist, Noah Webster, wrote in 1787: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States." Is this still true today? Or are those who arm themselves and make contingency "plans of resistance" against government usurpations instead branded "conspirators" and "terrorists," and ridiculously associated with Timothy McVeigh (who was kicked out of the only militia meeting he is ever known to have attended -- in Michigan -- and whose actions surely reflect more directly on the screening process of the outfit that gave him his training in munitions -- the United States Army.) In Phoenix last week, an air conditioner repairman and former Military Policeman named Chuck Knight was convicted by jurors -- some tearful -- who said they "had no choice" under the judge's instructions, on a single federal "conspiracy" count of associating with others who owned automatic rifles on which they had failed to pay a $200 "transfer tax" -- after a trial in which defense attorney Ivan Abrams says he was forbidden to bring up the Second Amendment as a defense. Were the Viper Militia readying "plans of resistance," as recommended by Mr. Madison? Would the Constitution ever have been ratified, had Mr. Madison and his fellow federalists warned the citizens that such non-violent preparations would get their weapons seized, and land them in jail for decades? Happy Fourth of July. Vin Suprynowicz is the assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Readers may contact him via e-mail at vin@lvrj.com. The web site for the Suprynowicz column is at http://www.nguworld.com/vindex/. *** Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com Voir Dire: A French term which means "jury stacking." --- --- timEd 1.10+ * Origin: LibertyBBS, Austin,Tx [512]462-1776 (1:382/804) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBD00000 Date: 07/08/97 From: DENNIS MUMMERT Time: 04:20pm \/To: ERNST BERG (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: New to the Echo. EB> I feel a federal rescheduling of Marijuana from Sch. 1 to sch 2 EB>will help more then all the winds or reason. A rescheduling from Schedule 1 to no schedule at all is actually indicated. --- Ezycom V1.10 * Origin: TechNet-1 Prime - An Engineering Syst (1:110/515) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00000 Date: 07/05/97 From: L P Time: 09:05am \/To: DENNIS MUMMERT (Read 0 times) Subj: Petitioning the government Dennis Mummert wrote in a message to L P: DM> My question concerned the efficacy AND the safety of emailing govt. DM> officials. The efficacy depends on how seriously a particular person takes email. Email is generally considered to be relatively informal. To me, it is as good as and much more convenient than dealing with snail mail. But, in the world of formality and "manners", I believe that hard copy is at the top of the list, with a letter enclosed in an envelope being the most "respectful" and respectable. So, if you want to be as sure as possible of being taken seriously, write a letter and send it by way of the post office, or better yet -- Fed Ex. On the other hand, if you know that the person in question *likes* email, send email. For me, I have sent email to the president, since the mail to him just gets tallied anyway, and I fax to my senators and representative since this is more convenient and cheaper than snail mail and seems to get as much attention as anything from them. But, if it ends up making the difference of your sending it by email or not sending it by snail mail because of the extra work -- send the email. Safety? Bests, L P --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00001 Date: 07/05/97 From: L P Time: 09:23am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: NORML News - July 3, 1997 A NON PROFIT LEGAL, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION The NORML 1001 CONNECTICUT AVENUE NW Foundation SUITE 1010 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 T 202-483-8751 ? F 202-483-0057 ? E-MAIL NORMLFNDTN@AOL.COM Internet http://www.norml.org . . . a weekly service for the media on news items related to marijuana prohibition. July 3, 1997 Oregon Legislature Ends 24 Years Of Marijuana Decriminalization July 3, 1997, Salem OR: Governor John Kitzhaber (D) signed legislation at the eleventh hour last night that recriminalizes the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana. A press statement released today from the governor admits that he signed the measure "with a good deal of reluctance." House Bill 3643 increases the penalty for possession of less than an ounce of marijuana from a non-criminal "violation" to a class C misdemeanor crime. Under the new law, individuals would be arrested and, if convicted, could face up to 30 days in jail, a $1,000 fine, and loss of their driving privileges for six months. Passage of the bill came despite a strong effort from NORML and other national and local drug-law reform organizations. NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup led a task-force opposing H.B. 3643 that conducted field polling and organized opposition in an attempt to convince the governor to veto the legislation. State reform groups, including Portland NORML, first attempted to stop the measure in the Legislature and subsequently conducted a telephone campaign to persuade Gov. Kitzhaber to kill the measure. Kitzhaber acknowledged many of NORML's concerns when expressing his reluctance to sign the new law. "The difficult question raised by this legislation ... is the delicate balance between the public safety of our society at large and the civil liberties of it's individual citizens," Kitzhaber explained in a released statement. "I am willing to give this legislation the benefit of the doubt, but I will direct the Criminal Justice Commission to closely monitor how it is being implemented and what effect it is having. ... If ... the measure proves to be ineffective -- or if it is used for such purposes as harassment rather than for legitimate law enforcement objectives -- then it should be repealed and we should return to current law." Kitzhaber further remarked that he felt most law enforcement agents would continue to treat marijuana possession cases as violations. In this respect, he said that "this measure has less to do with the possession of marijuana as it does with expanding the powers of search and seizure," a position which Kitzhaber favors. NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup strongly criticized the adoption of the new law. "This law will cost Oregonians millions in already scarce law enforcement resources that should be focused on violent crime, broadly expand the powers of law enforcement and reduce the privacy rights of citizens, and needlessly criminalize tens of thousands of otherwise law-abiding adult Oregonians who smoke marijuana. "Nearly one-third of Americans live in states which have now had a 15-20 year real-world experience with marijuana decriminalization, and the experience has been overwhelmingly favorable. Contrary to fears expressed by some, marijuana usage rates are virtually the same in states that have decriminalized in states where marijuana smokers are still arrested. Moreover, research fails to demonstrate any change in attitudes in marijuana use among young people in decriminalized states. Stroup added, "Otherwise law abiding citizens who smoke marijuana are not part of the crime problem and it is both fiscally wasteful and needlessly harmful to treat them as if they were." Oregon was the first state to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana in 1973. Presently, marijuana decriminalization laws remain in effect in California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Ohio. Individuals found possessing small amounts of marijuana in these states receive a traffic-like citation and must pay a small fine. For more information, please contact either R. Keith Stroup of NORML @ (202) 483-5500 or Terry Miller of Portland NORML @ (503) 777-9088. -END- MORE THAN 10 MILLION MARIJUANA ARRESTS SINCE 1965 . . . ANOTHER EVERY 54 SECONDS! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A NON PROFIT LEGAL, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION The NORML 1001 CONNECTICUT AVENUE NW Foundation SUITE 1010 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 T 202-483-8751 ? F 202-483-0057 ? E-MAIL NORMLFNDTN@AOL.COM Internet http://www.norml.org NEWS RELEASE ** NEWS RELEASE ** NEWS RELEASE ** NEWS RELEASE July 3, 1997 NORML Responds To Recent Marijuana And Brain Studies Rat Studies Must Not Overshadow Decades Of Epidemiological Human Research That Fails To Demonstrate That Marijuana Has The Kind Of Serious Dependence Liability Of Heroin, Alcohol, Or Tobacco July 3, 1997, Washington, D.C., 1997: Recent studies performed on rats lend little support to the notion that marijuana may act as a "gateway" to harder drugs in humans, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) announced today. Two independent studies reported in this month's edition of Science Magazine revealed that marijuana-like synthetic agents induced chemical changes in the brains of rats that are commonly associated with drugs of dependence. The first study, conducted by a team of researchers in Italy, demonstrated that THC -- one of the active ingredient in marijuana -- stimulated the release of a neurochemical called dopamine in the so-called "reward pathways" of the brain. The second study indicated that rats suffered effects of mild withdrawal from the chemical HU-210, a potent substance that mimics the effects of marijuana, when administered a blocking agent directly in the brain. Some scientists speculate that the findings from these two studies, when examined together, show that marijuana manipulates the brain's stress and reward systems the same way as more potent drugs. While NORML does not question the actual science of these latest studies, the organization sharply criticizes the "real-world application" of their findings. "Many substances have some dependence liability, including legal ones like chocolate, sugar, and caffeine, and illegal ones, such as cocaine and heroin," NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup explained. "The issue is not whether or not marijuana has any dependence liability, but its relative dependence liability compared to other drugs. This research further supports, rather than challenges, the assertion that marijuana does not have sufficient abuse potential for Schedule I status because it explains the neurological basis the mild withdrawal symptoms that occasionally occur and emphasizes the chronic levels of use necessary to induce them. --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00002 Date: 07/05/97 From: L P Time: 09:23am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: 2 NORML News - July 3, 1997 "Furthermore, these two studies must not overshadow the decades of epidemiological research that fails to demonstrate that marijuana has the kind of serious dependence liability of heroin, alcohol, or nicotine, or that it leads to the use of other drugs. Even if this rat research is replicated, it is a large leap to suggest that it proves that marijuana is either a drug of dependence or a "stepping-stone" to harder drugs, two assertions which have not been convincingly demonstrated either clinically or epidemiologically after decades of research. The limitations of these studies are suggested by the fact that it is possible to demonstrate the reinforcing properties of opiates and cocaine with rats by self-administration studies. Animals will not, under any circumstance, self-administer THC. "Lastly, NORML reaffirms that there are no conclusions drawn from these studies that in any way support the government's current policy of arresting and jailing otherwise law-abiding citizens who smoke marijuana. Marijuana has never demonstrated the criteria necessary to mandate its Schedule I prohibited status and that remains unchanged." -- END -- MORE THAN 10 MILLION MARIJUANA ARRESTS SINCE 1965 . . . ANOTHER EVERY 54 SECONDS! --- * Origin: 61 deg. 25' N / 149 deg. 40' W (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00003 Date: 07/06/97 From: L P Time: 10:24am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Addiction [1/3] >>> Part 1 of 3... From: http://www.pantless.com/~pdxnorml [The U.S. government's top addiction experts discuss the current scientific understanding of addiction and admit that marijuana is the least habit-forming drug. If only the government were so candid when the issue was marijuana! Note the chart where the federal government's top addiction expert, Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and Dr. Neal L. Benowitz of the University of California at San Francisco, rank six substances based on five criteria for addiction and find marijuana to be the least habit-forming. More myth-debunking - "According to large Government surveys of alcohol users, only about 15 percent are regular, dependent drinkers. Among cocaine users, about 8 percent become dependent. ... About 90 percent of smokers are persistent daily users." (Note that "users" means "current users." The numbers can differ considerably when the proportion of dependent users is compared to the number of those who have *ever* used particular substances.)] Is Nicotine Addictive? It Depends On Whose Criteria You Use Experts say the definition of addiction is evolving. By Philip J. Hilts Special to The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com _The New York Times_, August 2, 1994, p. C3. WASHINGTON, Aug. 1 - When heavily dependent users of cocaine are asked to compare the urge to smoke cigarettes, about 45 percent say the urge to smoke is as strong or stronger than that for cocaine. Among heroin addicts, about 38 percent rank the urge to smoke as equal to or stronger than the urge to take heroin. Among those addicted to alcohol, about 50 percent say the urge to smoke is at least as strong as the urge to drink. In April, seven chief executives of tobacco companies testified before a Congressional subcommittee that nicotine was not addictive. Experts in addiction, while disagreeing with that assessment, say that the definition of addiction is evolving, and that they can see how such a statement might be made. Hearings on Smoking This week, the Food and Drug Administration is holding hearings to consider whether cigarettes fit in the array of addictive drugs and whether the Government should regulate them. The standard definition of addiction comes from the American Psychiatric Association and the World Health Organization, which list nine criteria for determining addiction. The two groups, which prefer the term drug dependence, base their definition on research done since the 1960's, which has determined that multiple traits must be considered in determining whether a substance is addictive. Thus although cigarettes do not offer as intense an effect as drugs like heroin and cocaine, they rank higher in a number of other factors. They not only create dependence among users but also elicit a high degree of tolerance, the need for more and more of a drug to satisfy the craving. When all the factors are added up, the consensus view among scientists is that nicotine is strongly addictive. In smoking, it is not the nicotine or addiction that is most harmful, but other toxic chemicals produced by burning tobacco, which cause most of the 400,000 deaths each year that are attributed to smoking. Dr. Lynn T. Kozlowski, an addiction expert at Pennsylvania State University, said addiction could generally be defined as "the repeated use of a psychoactive drug which is difficult to stop." He added that there might be many explanations for why it was hard to stop, including withdrawal that was too disturbing, or a high that was too enticing. A diagnosis of mild dependence on a psychoactive drug is determined by meeting three of the nine criteria. Five items show moderate dependence and seven items indicate a strong dependence. (Not all nine items apply to each drug. For example, time and effort spent acquiring a drug are a significant feature of heroin addiction, but have no meaning in nicotine addiction.) 9 Addiction Criteria These are the criteria: * Taking the drug more often or in larger amounts than intended. * Unsuccessful attempts to quit; persistent desire, craving. * Excessive time spent in drug seeking. * Feeling intoxicated at inappropriate times, or feeling withdrawal symptoms from a drug at such times. * Giving up other things for it. * Continued use, despite knowledge of harm to oneself and others. * Marked tolerance in which the amount needed to satisfy increases at first before leveling off. * Characteristic withdrawal symptoms for particular drugs. * Taking the drug to relieve or avoid withdrawal. >>> Continued to next message... ___ X Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 X --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: Who's Askin'? (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00004 Date: 07/06/97 From: L P Time: 10:24am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Addiction [2/3] >>> Part 2 of 3... How Experts Rate Problem Substances Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Dr. Neal L. Benowitz of the University of California at San Francisco ranked six substances based on five problem areas. 1 = Most serious 6 = Least serious Henningfield Ratings Substance Withdrawal Reinforcement Tolerance Dependence Intoxication Nicotine 3 4 2 1 5 Heroin 2 2 1 2 2 Cocaine 4 1 4 3 3 Alcohol 1 3 3 4 1 Caffeine 5 6 5 5 6 Marijuana 6 5 6 6 4 Benowitz Ratings Substance Withdrawal Reinforcement Tolerance Dependence Intoxication Nicotine 3* 4 4 1 6 Heroin 2 2 2 2 2 Cocaine 3* 1 1 3 3 Alcohol 1 3 4 4 1 Caffeine 4 5 3 5 5 Marijuana 5 6 5 6 4 * Equal ratings Withdrawal - Presence and severity of characteristic withdrawal symptoms. Reinforcement - A measure of the substance's ability, in human and animal tests, to get users to take it again and again, and in preference to other substances. Tolerance - How much of the substance is needed to satisfy increasing cravings for it, and the level of stable need that is eventually reached. Dependence - How difficult it is for the user to quit, the relapse rate, the percentage of people who eventually become dependent, the rating users give their own need for the substance and the degree to which the substance will be used in the face of evidence that it causes harm. Intoxication - Though not usually counted as a measure of addiction in itself, the level of intoxication is associated with addiction and increases the personal and social damage a substance may do. Before applying a test of the nine criteria, the expert first determines if the symptoms have persisted for at least a month or have occurred repeatedly over a longer period of time. Asked about the tobacco executives' testimony on addiction, Dr. Kozlowski said: "In a way, I can see how they could say that. It has to do with a mistaken image of what addiction is, and I have many well-educated, intelligent people say something like that to me. People often think of a person taking one injection of heroin and becoming hopelessly addicted for the rest of their lives. That is wrong." In addition, he said, when people tend to think of the high that heroin produces, one that is about as intense as cocaine and alcohol, they cannot believe cigarettes are in the same category. And they are not. Even though in large doses nicotine can cause a strong high and hallucinations, the doses used in cigarettes produce only a very mild high. But researchers now know, says Dr. Jack Henningfield, chief of clinical pharmacology at the Addiction Research Center of the Government's National Institute on Drug Abuse, that many qualities are related to a drug's addictiveness, and the level of intoxication it produces may be one of the least important. If one merely asks how much pleasure the drugs produce, as researchers used to do and tobacco companies still do, then heroin or cocaine and nicotine do not seem to be in the same category. Dr. Kozlowski said, "It's not that cigarettes are without pleasure, but the pleasure is not in the same ball park with heroin." But now, he said, there are more questions to ask. "If the question is, How hard is it to stop? then nicotine is a very impressive drug," he said. "Its urges are very similar to heroin." Among the properties of a psychoactive drug - how much craving it can cause, how severe is the withdrawal, how intense a high it brings - >>> Continued to next message... ___ X Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 X --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: Who's Askin'? (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBE00005 Date: 07/06/97 From: L P Time: 10:24am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Addiction [3/3] >>> Part 3 of 3... each addicting drug has its own profile. Heroin has a painful, powerful withdrawal, as does alcohol. But cocaine has little or no withdrawal. On the other hand, cocaine is more habit-forming in some respects. It is more reinforcing in the scientific terminology, meaning that animals and humans will seek to use it frequently in short periods of time, even over food and water. Drugs rank differently on the scale of how difficult they are to quit as well, with nicotine rated by most experts as the most difficult to quit. Moreover, it is not merely the drug that determines addiction, says Dr. John R. Hughes, an addiction expert at the University of Vermont. It is also the person, and the circumstances in the person's life. A user may be able to resist dependence at one time and not at another. A central property of addiction is the user's control over the substance. With all drugs, including heroin, many are occasional users. The addictive property of the substance can be measured by how many users maintain a casual habit and how many are persistent, regular users. According to large Government surveys of alcohol users, only about 15 percent are regular, dependent drinkers. Among cocaine users, about 8 percent become dependent. For cigarettes, the percentage is reversed. About 90 percent of smokers are persistent daily users, and 55 percent become dependent by official American Psychiatric Association criteria, according to a study by Dr. Naomi Breslau of the Henry Ford Health Sciences Center in Detroit. Only 10 percent are occasional users. Surveys also indicate that two-thirds to four-fifths of smokers want to quit but cannot, even after a number of attempts. Dr. John Robinson, a psychologist who works for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, contests the consensus view of nicotine as addictive. Using the current standard definition of addiction, he said at a recent meeting on nicotine addiction, he could not distinguish "crack smoking from coffee drinking, glue sniffing from jogging, heroin from carrots and cocaine from colas." It is not that Dr. Robinson and other scientists supported by tobacco companies disagree with the main points made by mainstream scientists, but that they define addiction differently. Dr. Robinson says intoxication that is psychologically debilitating is the major defining trait of an addicting substance. It is a feature that was part of standard definitions of the 1950's, and is still linked to popular ideas about addiction, but which experts now say is too simplistic and has been left behind as scientific evidence accumulates. ___ X Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 X --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: Who's Askin'? (1:17/75) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 173 NORML Ref: EBF00000 Date: 07/10/97 From: STEVE KEMP Time: 12:06am \/To: DENNIS MUMMERT (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: New to the Echo. DM>EB> I feel a federal rescheduling of Marijuana from Sch. 1 to DM>EB>sch 2 will help more then all the winds or reason. DM> A rescheduling from Schedule 1 to no schedule at all is DM>actually indicated. Exactly. If aspirin, which takes many lives per year, is over the counter...and alcohol, that takes thousands of lives every year is over the counter. I little smokeable herb that has lesser effects to life and limb should be given the same benefit. CMPQwk #1.42 UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY --- FreeMail 1.10 alpha-3 * Origin: Electric Eye-28.8 Sacramento,CA(916)441-5465 (1:203/65)