-------------------------------------------------------------------

No Snooping! Privacy Laws And Modern Technology Don't Mix (An Account
Of The Legal Case Originating In Florence, Oregon, Challenging The Use
Of Infra-Red Or Heat-Mapping Sensors To Invade People's Privacy
In Order To Detect Indoor Marijuana Cultivation - Britain's 'New Scientist'
Notes Modern Technology Is Making It Easy To Throw Privacy Laws
Into Disarray, Though It Misidentifies The Location
Of The San Francisco-Based US Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals)

Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 13:18:59 +0000
To: press@drugtext.nl, editor@mapinc.org
From: Peter Webster 
Subject: ART: New Scientist IR Snooping Case
Newshawk: Peter Webster
Source: New Scientist
Contact: letters@newscientist.com
Website: http://www.newscientist.com/
Pubdate: May 2, 1998
Author: Charles Seife

NO SNOOPING!

Privacy laws and modern technology don't mix

THE heat that American citizens generate in the privacy of their own homes
should remain a private matter, a court has ruled.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Portland, Oregon, last month
overturned a conviction for growing marijuana, ruling that the snooping
method used by police was an invasion of privacy. The case, which may go
all the way to the US Supreme Court, is the latest example of how modern
technology is throwing privacy laws into disarray.

When police in Oregon suspected that Danny Lee Kyllo was growing pot plants
in his home, they called in a high-tech snooper, the Agema Thermovision
210. This infrared camera can see through walls to detect warm objects,
including the lamps used to nurture marijuana plants. Officers saw high
levels of heat coming from Kyllo's home.

With that evidence, the police obtained a search warrant and found a
marijuana farm, weapons and drug paraphernalia. Kyllo faced a prison
sentence of more than five years. Now his case will have to be retried.

Several courts had previously ruled that infrared radiation is "waste
heat", and therefore fair game for the police to look at. "Anything you
throw away, cops can pick up and search without a warrant," notes David
Banisar, a lawyer with the Electronic Privacy Information Center in
Washington DC.

But the Ninth Circuit decided that infrared searches violated Kyllo's
"reasonable expectation" of privacy. John Henry Hingson, his lawyer, thinks
the ruling will threaten law enforcement agencies' plans to use other
high-tech snoopers, such as millimetre-wave imagers that can see objects
through walls. "This decision will be reviewed by the Department of Justice
very, very carefully," he says.

Prosecuting attorney Robert Thomson says that his team is talking to the
justice department about fighting on---to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

The arguments surrounding infrared and millimetre-wave cameras are the
latest wrinkles in an increasingly confused debate about technology and
privacy. It is illegal to eavesdrop on cellular phone conversations, but
until the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)
banned the practice, a 1991 Supreme Court ruling made it perfectly
acceptable to listen in to a conversation conducted on a cordless phone---
even though the only fundamental difference between the phones is the
frequency they transmit on. The issue gets more confusing by the day. As
New Scientist went to press, the US cellular phone industry was threatening
a lawsuit to clarify the CALEA, claiming that "the FBI is requesting
surveillance capabilities that go beyond the law".

Cassidy Sehgal, a lawyer in Washington DC with the American Civil
Liberties Union, notes that e-mail and digital telephony---voice messages
carried over the Internet---currently have little or no privacy protection.
"It's hotly debated right now," she says.

The way forward lies with clear laws on the degree of protection citizens
can expect from the prying eyes and ears of the whole range of snooping
technologies, argue civil libertarians. But these show no sign of being
passed.

Charles Seife, Washington DC

-------------------------------------------------------------------

California Reports Record Number Of Pot Prisoners In Spite Of Prop. 215
(News Release From California NORML Says New Figures
From The State Department Of Corrections Show The Number
Of Marijuana Felons In State Prisons As Of December 31, 1997,
Was Up More Than 10 Percent From The Previous Year)

From: "ralph sherrow" 
To: ralphkat@hotmail.com
Subject: Fwd: DPFCA: Cal MJ Prisoners Set New Record
Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 22:04:44 -0800
To: dpfca@drugsense.org, aro@drugsense.org, skubby@powernet.nt
From: canorml@igc.apc.org (Dale Gieringer)
Subject: DPFCA: Cal MJ Prisoners Set New Record
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org

Cal NORML Press Release May 2, 1998:

CALIFORNIA REPORTS RECORD NUMBER OF POT PRISONERS IN SPITE OF PROP. 215
OTHER DRUG PRISONERS ALSO AT RECORD LEVELS; NO APPARENT EFFECT ON
ILLEGAL DRUG USE

The number of marijuana prisoners in California has soared to
record levels since passage of Prop. 215, according to a newly released
report from the state Department of Corrections. The report, the first to
cover the post-215 period, shows that there were a record 1,905 marijuana
felons in state prison as of December 31, 1997, up over 10% from the
previous year.

"This conclusively refutes the ludicrous claims of Attorney General
Lungren's office that Prop. 215 has effectively legalized marijuana in
California," comments California NORML coordinator Dale Gieringer, "In
fact, medical marijuana users are a minor fraction of the user population,
and even many of them are being arrested by overzealous narcotics cops in
defiance of Prop. 215."

The Department of Corrections report also shows that the total
number of all drug prisoners has reached an all-time high of 42,998 - a
record 28% of the state's prison population. Of these, 17,747 are being
held for simple possession - a startling 30% jump in just 18 months -
accounting for a record 11.4% of the total prison population. Much of the
rise is due to the state's Three Strikes law, which mandates long sentences
for non-violent drug felonies by offenders with violent priors.

The report does not count drug offenders in county jail or federal
prison.

While California now has five times as many drug prisoners as in
1986, this has had no evident effect on illegal drug use. According to the
California Student Substance Use Survey, student drug use declined in the
late 1980's, but has since rebounded to its previous levels, mounting
steadily since 1990-1, when Attorney General Lungren and Governor Wilson
took office.

"The lock-em-up drug policy of the past decade has completely
failed," argues Gieringer, "California now has 20 times as many marijuana
prisoners as in 1980, yet despite this, the popularity of marijuana is
increasing. How many more Americans do our drug warriors propose to lock
up at taxpayers' expense in this war with no light at the end of the
tunnel? Californians would be better off to legalize marijuana and tax it
than continue to pay the burden of an ineffectual prohibitionist policy."

This year marks the 85th anniversary of California's first law
prohibiting cannabis. Since then usage has climbed from near-zero to
several millions, and there have been over one million arrests.
California NORML estimates the economic loss to the state from the laws
against marijuana at over $100 billion.

For the Department of Corrections report, "Characteristics of
Population in California State Prisons by Institution," contact the Data
Analysis Unit in Sacramento: (916) 323-8428; cdcdau@adminsvcs.corr.ca.gov.

***

Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // canorml@igc.apc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rappers Arrested For Investigation Of Pot Possession (Cable News Network
Notes Bust Of Snoop Doggy Dogg And Delmar Arnaud
At The Universal Amphitheatre Northeast Of Los Angeles
Just After They Performed On The 'I Got The Hook Up' Comedy Show -
CNN Notes Former Cocaine Convict Snoop Doggy Dogg Was Sentenced
To Three Years' Probation And Ordered To Make Anti-Violence Advertisements
In 1993 After Being Found Guilty Of Being An Ex-Felon In Possession
Of A Firearm After A Handgun Was Found In His Car During A Traffic Stop)

Date: Fri, 08 May 1998 11:39:07 -0700
To: pdxnorml@pdxnorml.org
From: TerraCore Communications (webmaster@terracore.com)
Subject: hello phil

The following article is from
http://cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/9805/02/snoop.doggy.dog.ap/index.html

Rappers arrested for investigation of pot possession

May 2, 1998
Web posted at: 11:51 a.m. EDT (1551 GMT)

UNIVERSAL CITY, California (AP) -- Snoop Doggy Dogg and another rapper were
arrested for investigation of marijuana possession at a comedy show, and a
crowd of about 60 fans rushed backstage to get a closer look.

Calvin Broadus, 26, who goes by the stage name Snoop Doggy Dogg, and fellow
rapper Delmar Arnaud were arrested Friday and booked on one count each of
misdemeanor marijuana possession, said sheriff's Lt. Brad Welker.

They were released after receiving a citation to appear in court.

Each was found with a baggy containing less than one ounce of the drug,
Welker said.

Deputies got a call about a disturbance Friday night at the Universal
Amphitheatre about four miles northeast of Los Angeles. More than 20 police
officers and 50 security guards responded and restored order within 15 minutes.

"There were no injuries and no fights," Welker said. "Everything happened
backstage. No one at the front of the stage knew what was going on."

Broadus was not scheduled to be in the "I Got the Hook Up" comedy show but
gave an impromptu performance with Arnaud.

After he was finished, Broadus walked backstage, where he was slapped in the
face by an unidentified male, Welker said. Broadus alerted a sheriff's
deputy at the scene, who smelled marijuana and searched him.

Broadus was convicted in 1990 of cocaine possession.

He also was charged with being an ex-felon in possession of a gun after a
handgun was found in his car during a 1993 traffic stop in Long Beach. He
was sentenced to three years' probation and ordered to make anti-violence ads.

Copyright 1998 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may
not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

(c) 1998 Cable News Network, Inc.

A Time Warner Company All Rights Reserved.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg Cited For Having Pot ('Reuters' Version)

Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 18:22:43 -0300
From: Keith Alan (keith.alan@pei.sympatico.ca)
To: "mattalk@islandnet.com" (mattalk@islandnet.com)
Subject: Snoop Doggy Dog: pot possession.

Rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg cited for having pot

Sat, 2 May 1998 10:30:40 PDT
Copyright 1998 by Reuters (via ClariNet)

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Rapper Snoop Doggy Dogg and his
companion were cited for misdemeanor marijuana possession after an
altercation backstage at a comedy show, a sheriff's spokesman said
Saturday.

The 34-year-old rapper -- whose real name is Calvin Broadus -- and
Delmar Arnaud, 26, were each found with less an ounce of the drug and
were not taken into custody, said Deputy Jim Hellmold.

Both men were ordered to appear in Beverly Hills Municipal Court July 1.

Hellmold said Broadus approached sheriff's deputies backstage at the
Universal Ampitheatre to report an altercation with a group of four to six
men after his performance at the ''Def Comedy Jam.''

Broadus told the deputies that one of the men had slapped him, then fled,
Hellmold said.

It was while taking the report, Hellmold said, that the deputies smelled
marijuana on Broadus and Arnaud.

``The deputies came in contact with him (Broadus) and smelled
marijuana,'' Hellmold said. ``They searched him, found that he had less
than an ounce, and cited and released him.''

The incident was not Broadus' first brush with the law.

Broadus and his bodyguard, McKinley Lee, were tried and acquitted of
murder for the August, 1993 drive-by shooting of a 20-year-old gang
member named Philip Woldermarian.

And he was placed on three years probation in March 1997 for illegal
possession of a weapon.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Girl Punished For Going To Aid Of Fellow Asthma Sufferer ('Associated Press'
Notes Zero Tolerance Drug Policy In Mount Airy, Maryland,
Punishes 12-Year-Old For Saving Her Classmate's Life)

Date: Sun, 3 May 1998 01:07:38 EDT
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: ltneidow@voyager.net (Lee T. Neidow)
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: "Educators" Go Berserk

As an example of how much government efforts have accomplished in
truthfully educating the public about drugs, here is a story that
illustrates that even the supposedly best educated people in society -
those responsible for teaching children - don't have a clue:

5/2/98 -- 1:48 PM

Girl punished for going to aid of fellow asthma sufferer

MOUNT AIRY, Md. (AP) - When 12-year-old Christine Rhodes saw a
classmate having a severe asthma attack, she shared her prescription
inhaler, making her a hero to the other girl's mother.

But according to officials of Mount Airy Middle School, where Christine
is a sixth-grader, that makes her a drug trafficker.

And that gets entered in her records for three years.

``She went from feeling like she was on top of the world to feeling like she
had done something terribly wrong,'' said her mother, Laura Rhodes.

The incident happened on April 22, when 13-year-old Brandy Dyer
suffered an asthma attack on the bus on the way home from school. While
the bus driver called for help, Christine found her inhaler and shared it
with Brandy.

``I think she's a heroine,'' said Brandy's mother, Donna Cianci. ``Brandy
is fine, thanks to Christine.''

Ms. Cianci is outraged about Christine's treatment.

``This is what makes people not want to help other people,'' she said.

Mount Airy Principal Virginia Ashmore said she could not comment on
the case.

Ms. Rhodes said Ashmore did exercise leniency by not suspending her
daughter from school and was as fair as she could be under school rules.

``I'm not sure what the answer is,'' Ms. Rhodes said. ``I wish there was a
Good Samaritan clause in the school regulations for this situation.''

***

I would submit that what's needed is *not* a "Good Samaritan clause",
but a requirement that educators demonstrate common sense.

Lee

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Give Them Their Pills, The Fuddled Masses - America's Addiction
Is Not Just To Illegal Drugs (Britain's 'Economist' Covers US Drug Czar
Barry McCaffrey's Speech Last Week To The American Bar Association,
And, Noting That Sales Of Over-The-Counter Drugs Have Increased In The US
From $2.7 Billion In 1970 To $16.6 Billion Last Year, Suggests That Drugs
Meet An American Need For A Quick Fix For Any Problem, However Complex)

Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 18:23:40 EDT
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Gerald Sutliff 
To: Multiple recipients of list 
Subject: ART: "Give them their pills, the fuddled masses"
Subject: "Give them their pills, the fuddled masses"
Source: The Economist, May 2nd, 1998, United States section, Page 23-24
Contact: letters@economist.com
Website: 
Source: Jerry Sutliff

America's addiction is not just to illegal drugs

A GOOD general avoids wars he cannot win, which is doubtless one reason why
General Barry McCaffrey has never followed political fashion by declaring
"a war on drugs". Instead, President Clinton's drugs czar (more properly
the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy) argues that
'cancer is a more appropriate metaphor" - a long-term problem needing a
variety of treatments to check its spread and improve its prognosis.

Skirmishes, however, are a different matter, especially for a man who was
the American army's most decorated combat officer. Last week he was
denounced by black members of Congress; indeed, he was allegedly called "a
skunk" by Eleanor Holmes Norton, the delegate to Congress from Washington,
DC. His offence was to convince Mr Clinton not to allocate federal money to
needle-exchange programmes, despite the recommendations of Donna Shalala,
the health and human services secretary, and David Satcher, the new
surgeon-general, and despite academically respectable studies showing that
the provision of free, and so clean, syringes to drug addicts saves some 30
people a day from contracting HIV. General McCaffrey's argument, made all
the more persuasive by the approach of this year's congressional
elections, was that aiding the programmes would send "the wrong message"
about the administration's drugs policy.

So what is the right message? This week the general defended himself with
an address to the American Bar Association. The outcome of the
needle-exchange quarrel is "a democratic solution of tremendous cunning"
(others would call a solution that encourages such programmes but refuses
to finance them a fudge). A judicial system that holds 1.7m Americans in
prison at any one time, half of them for drug-related offences, does indeed
(said the general) bear disproportionately on blacks. It would certainly be
better to make greater use of supervised drug-treatment programmes rather
than long prison stretches. And it is wrong that a trafficker of just five
grams of crack cocaine (usually caricatured as a black street hustler)
should face a mandatory minimum prison sentence of five years while
the threshold quantity of powder cocaine (the form preferred by rich
whites) for such a sentence is 500 grams. As to the medical use of
marijuana, "Come on!" is the general's first reaction, but he is prepared
to change his mind if the drug that Mr. Clinton failed to inhale in his
student days can eventually "pass medical and scientific scrutiny".

The question is whether any message, right or wrong, is being heard. The
general's goal, to be pursued with better education and better high-tech
surveillance of America's borders, is to halve the use and availability of
narcotics in America by 2007. If he succeeds, illegal drugs will still be a
problem for around 6.5m Americans - but that will be the fewest since
records began. The peak was 25m, in 1979.

Too good to be true? General McCaffrey, declaring himself "reasonably
optimistic", points out that the use of illegal drugs has fallen by half
over the past decade and that, for the first time in six years, the use by
young people has stopped growing. Moreover, as the baby-boomers at last
mature, there are some 61m Americans who have stopped using illegal drugs.
But that still leaves about 3.6m with a cocaine habit and 810,000 chronic
users of heroin. In addition, despite the "Just Say No" slogan that has
been common currency since the late Reagan administration, a tenth of all
Americans aged 12 and over now smoke marijuana or hashish (marijuana use by
high-school students doubled between 1992 and 1995). Meanwhile, among
America's 14-year-olds, some 10% use marijuana and some 4% methamphetamines
and other stimulants.

Whether these figures are encouraging or not is a matter of debate: is the
glass half-full or half-empty? What punning pessimists will argue is that
drugs meet an American need for a quick fix for any problem, however complex
or deep-rooted. Their proof is not just the continuing, albeit
"stabilising", demand for narcotics but the burgeoning sales of
prescription and over-the-counter drugs for pretty well every ailment, from
headaches to baldness.

If it twinges, dose it

The most recent example is viagra, a pill released a month ago to combat
male impo- tence. With American men apparently afflicted by the millions,
doctors are doling out viagra at the rate of more than 113,000
prescriptions a week-not quite on a par with the more than 436,000 dished
out for the feel-good drug Prozac, but impressive nonetheless-and the
share-price of Pfizer, viagra's manufacturer, is soaring. It will rise
still higher if the doctors and chemists decide that viagra has a similar
use for women (who are apparently as sexually dysfunctional as men).

If Viagra and Prozac are extreme cases of pill-lervour, there are plenty of
others that are impressive. Sales of anti-ulcerants such as Prilosec and
Zantac rose by 9% last year, to $6.2 billion; and sales of anti-psychotics
such as Zyprexa rose by 6i% to $1.6 billion. Turn to the morning newspaper
or the television evening news and advertisement after advertisement
recommends doctor-prescribed remedies for high cholesterol or high
blood-pressure. Last year the sales of a single antihistamine, Claritin,
rose by 40% to over $900m.

Arguably, such sales reflect the general financial excess of the American
health-care system: the United States spends more per head of population on
pharmaceutical products than any western country apart from France; its
spending on outpatient prescriptions has risen more than ten-fold since
1970; and its spending on health as a percentage of gross domestic product
has doubled in less than 30 years.

But that explanation is only part of the story. The truth is that demand
for non-prescription drugs has grown every bit as fast. In 1970 the
American market for drugs that could be bought over the counter was worth
$2.7 billion; last year, it was worth $16.6 billion. The sales of one
headache remedy, Tylenol, reached $664m; those of another, Advil, $302m;
those of a third, Excedrin, $125m. Add in the various over-the-counter
remedies for flatulence, con-stipation, diarrhoea, hayfever and the common
cold, and the average American might seem to be a pill-popping hypochondriac.

The industry denies this. It explains that many over-the-counter drugs were
once available only on prescription, and that to buy them without a
prescription saves around $20 billion in direct and indirect health-care
costs. "Far from a 'pill-popping' culture", maintains the Nonprescription
Drug Manufacturers Association, "Americans turn to over-the counter
medicines only 38% of the time they experience a self-treatable condition."

Maybe so, although "only" is an elastic word. The industry's surveys also
show that Americans are likely to take a non-prescription pill for 75% of
the headaches they get, and 73% of their bouts of indigestion. Moreover,
mix the wrong legal drugs, or take the wrong dosage, and the result can be
disastrous. Some surveys estimate that 140,000 people a year die from the
side effects of prescribed drugs. That compares with some 14,000 who die
each year from illegal drugs such as heroin-which at least, to quote
General McCaffrey, offer "intense pleasure at the subrational level".

Graphic (bar chart)

Pharmaceutical spending per person

France - $300
U.S. - 290
Italy - 262
Britain - 160

-------------------------------------------------------------------

House Republicans Vow To Make US Drug-Free ('Reuters'
Notes House Republicans On Thursday Unveiled A Package Of Bills
To Escalate The War On Some Drug Users And Vowed To Make America
Virtually Drug-Free By 2002)

Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 23:25:06 -0500
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: trikydik@inil.com (trikydik)
Subject: MN: US: WIRE: House Republicans Vow To Make U.S. Drug-Free
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family 
Source: Reuters
Website: http://www.reuters.com/
Pubdate: Sat, 2 May 1998
Author: Joanne Kenen, Reuters

HOUSE REPUBLICANS VOW TO MAKE U.S. DRUG-FREE

WASHINGTON - House Republicans Thursday unveiled a package of bills to
combat drug abuse and vowed to make America virtually drug-free by 2002.
At a packed rally in one of the most ornate Congressional hearing rooms,
House Speaker Newt Gingrich and other top Republicans unveiled several drug
bills, some focusing on community-based drug programs, others seeking to
stamp out drug production overseas and a third series aiming to hold
anti-drug agency officials more accountable.

Citing 14,000 deaths a year directly related to drugs and another 6,000
indirect deaths, Gingrich said if that level of casualties was happening in
Bosnia, Iraq or Korea ``we would be up in arms.Instead, he said,
``people shrug their shoulders.''

Gingrich said drug use went down during the ``Just Say No'' years under
Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush, and has risen under President
Clinton. He called for an intense, four-year drive to lower drug use and
said he had told House appropriators to make it their top priority.

Before the Republican event, House Democrats said drug policy had
traditionally been bipartisan and urged Gingrich to keep it that way.

The Republican rally was not a bipartisan event, but was not a hard-edged
partisan attack on Democrats either. ``I liked the tone,'' White House
anti-drug chief Barry McCaffrey said in a telephone interview.

``We want to build bipartisan support for this effort,'' he said, adding he
would examine the bills ``very carefully.''

Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, who chaired the House Republican task
force on drugs, said the country had ``veered off course'' in the 1990s and
had to send out a clear message that ``we have zero tolerance for illegal
drugs.'Drugs are not an American value,'' he said.

House Republicans have said they want to twin anti-drug and anti-teen
smoking efforts, but most of the speakers at the rally did not mention
tobacco and Gingrich mentioned it only briefly.

House leaders say they still plan on incorporating an anti-smoking
initiative into the drug bills, although the proposals unveiled Thursday
did not deal with smoking.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Funding Futility (Letter To Editor Of 'Chicago Tribune' Observes
That When The Clinton Administration And Congress Demanded Scientific
Evidence That Needle Exchange Programs Reduce HIV Transmissions
Without Increasing Drug Use, They Got What They Asked For,
But It Wasn't Good Enough Because The Drug War Is Based On Mindless
Blind Faith, Not Rationality - And Imagines A Ban On Federal Funding
For Drug Prohibition Until Drug Warriors Can Prove Scientifically
That Their Policies Decrease Drug Abuse Without Increasing Other Types
Of Harm To Society)

Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 01:03:18 -0500
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: trikydik@inil.com (trikydik)
Subject: MN: US IL: PUB LTE: Funding Futility
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Steve Young
Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)
Contact: tribletter@aol.com
Website: http://www.chicago.tribune.com/
Pubdate: Sat, 2 May 1998
Section: sec. 1, page 22
Subject: US IL: PUB LTE: Funding Futility

FUNDING FUTILITY

ROSELLE - The cartoon illustrating the Clinton administration's
spinelessness on the issue of needle exchanges (Editorial Page, April
24) was excellent.

Drug prohibitionists who demanded scientific evidence that the
programs reduce HIV transmissions without increasing drug use got what
they asked for, but it wasn't good enough. That's because the drug war
is based on mindless blind faith, not rationality.

It makes perfect sense to fund the needle exchanges from an economic,
scientific and humanitarian perspective. From those same perspectives,
it would make a lot more sense if there were to be a ban on federal
funding for drug prohibition enforcement until drug warriors can prove
scientifically that these policies decrease drug abuse without
increasing other types of harm to society.

Based on current information, prohibitionists would be scrounging up
their own funding until they finally realized the futility and
devastation of their crusade.

Stephen Young

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Politics Of Needles In Washington (Syndicated Columnist Molly Ivins
In The Fort Worth, Texas, 'Star-Telegram,' Says The Actions
Of President Clinton And Republicans In Congress
Regarding Needle Exchange Programs Sends The Message
To American Children That The People Who Run This Country Are Idiots)

Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 05:28:34 -0700
Reply-To: Art Smart 
Sender: Drug Policy Forum of Texas 
From: Art Smart 
Subject: Ivins Op-Ed: The politics of needles in Washington
Comments: To: MAP News Editor 

Source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Pub Date: 5/2/98

The politics of needles in Washington

Molly Ivins

AUSTIN -- I love politics, but some weeks I can see why so many
people would rather do something else -- like get a root canal.
This past week we had the edifying sight of members of the
Congress of the United States following the president in
resolutely refusing to recognize fact, logic, the public health,
medicine and science in order to make cheap political points --
and then trashing the president for not having done so as
resolutely as they did.

At issue are the facts concerning needle exchange programs for
drug users. If you give addicts clean needles, it dramatically
slows the spread of AIDS and does not increase drug use.

Since you're not in politics, you may think this is good news.
Less AIDS, a better shot at getting addicts into drug treatment
programs, and it saves a big bundle of money -- what's not to
like? Bring down the duck, Groucho -- these folks don't know
their demagoguery.

If you are President Clinton and your secretary of health, your
surgeon general, the federal Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, and public health organizations all tell you that
clean-needle programs work, you override all of them and continue
to ban clean-needle programs because you don't want to give the
Republicans an issue. You continue the ban on federal spending
for clean-needle programs even though it makes no sense and means
another 12,045 AIDS cases every year.

Then, if you're a congressional Republican, you not only vote to
continue the federal ban -- you add to it a provision defunding
any public health program or organization that pays for a clean-
needle program through other means. Then you stand up and blame
the president for even having considered lifting the ban.

The rationale (?) for doing this that "we must not send a message
to American children that drug use is OK." Actually, the message
we're sending to American children is that the people who run
this country are idiots.

The CDC reports, as reported by Judy Mann in 'The Washington
Post,' that AIDS continues to spread through the population, with
women and minorities at increasing risk, along with young people
from 13 to 24. High rates of infection among intravenous drug
users continue. Between 1994 and 1997, 32 percent of the AIDS
cases diagnosed were caused by homosexual sex, with that rate
continuing to fall. Meanwhile, IV drug use and heterosexual sex
accounted for 18 percent each of the new cases, with those rates
continuing to rise. Most of the heterosexual transmissions
involved women having sex with infected male drug users.

According to the CDC studies, 33 people a day get AIDS from dirty
needles. Clean-needle programs not only help stop the epidemic
but also give drug counselors a chance to get addicts into
treatment programs. They do not -- repeat, not -- increase or
encourage drug use, if you believe the medical and scientific
literature on the subject. You can, of course, ignore it, which
is what Congress did, 287-140. I suppose we should be grateful
for the 140, who clearly thought they had been caught in a
chapter of 'Alice in Wonderland.'

Meanwhile, because some in the administration had been making
nice noises about needle programs, House Majority Whip Tom
"Mental Delay" DeLay said: "By embracing and condoning the
concept of giving free needles to drug addicts, President Clinton
has raised the white flag of surrender." This was well after
Clinton had decided to continue the ban.

Since Republicans are now interested in the excesses of law
enforcement -- as per their bizarrely skewed hearing last week on
the harassment of presumably innocent citizens by the Internal
Revenue Service -- perhaps they will now take a look at the
excesses of the War on Drugs.

According to Mann, when the "war" started in the "Just Say No"
Reagan era, it cost $1 billion a year. It now costs $16 billion a
year, cocaine and heroin are cheaper than ever before, and the
teen-age use of marijuana has doubled since 1990.

We now have 1.5 million people in prison; 60 percent of all
federal prisoners and 25 percent of state inmates are doing time
for drugs. We have almost no treatment programs for addicts in
prisons, which pretty much guarantees they will continue when
they get out. More than two-thirds of the War-on-Drugs money goes
to law enforcement, with a far smaller percentage going to
treatment programs.

Meanwhile, the narcs are increasingly out of control -- and I'm
not talking about the occasional tragedy in which they get the
wrong address, bust in and shoot some helpless granny. They
increasingly fund their own operations by seizing property
allegedly "involved" in the drug trade, no matter how
peripherally. They have seized property belonging to the aunts,
uncles, cousins and grannies of drug users.

The good news for the week is that the Old Newt is back. Just as
the media were dutifully reporting the New Newt Gingrich --
kinder, gentler and thinner, and the author of a new book about
how he learned to be a statesman -- back came Old Newt.

At least the House speaker didn't call the president a "scumbag";
that was left to Rep. Dan Burton, the impartial and Solomonic
fellow in charge of the House investigation of Clinton's '96
campaign finances. (The Senate investigation was so much fun, we
all felt there should be another one, didn't we?)

"There is no administration in American history with less moral
authority than the Clinton-Gore administration," proclaimed
Gingrich, who was fined $300,000 for lying to Congress. Welcome
back, O enlightened spiritual leader.

Molly Ivins is a columnist for the 'Star-Telegram.' You may write
to her at 1005 Congress Ave., Suite 920, Austin, TX 78701; call
her at (512) 476-8908; or email her at
mollyivins@star-telegram.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------

States Crack Down To Shield Fetuses From Drugs ('Los Angeles Times' Article
In Eugene, Oregon, 'Register-Guard' Notes Wisconsin And South Dakota
Passed Laws This Spring That Mandate Incarceration For Pregnant Women
Who Use Alcohol Or Illegal Drugs, Signaling That A Fetal-Protection Movement
That Largely Failed In The Courts Over The Last 15 Years
Might Find A More Receptive Audience In Statehouses)

Register-Guard
Eugene, Oregon
http://www.registerguard.com/
letters to editor:
http://www.registerguard.com/standingdocs/feedback.html

May 2, 1998

States crack down to shield fetuses from drugs

By JUDY PASTERNAK
Los Angeles Times

CHICAGO - Two Midwestern states have passed laws this spring that allow for
the civil detention of pregnant women who abuse drugs or alcohol, signaling
that a fetal-protection movement that largely failed in the courts over the
last 15 years might find a more receptive audience in statehouses.

On Friday, Wisconsin's Senate approved a measure that puts exposed fetuses
under the jurisdiction of juvenile courts and permits those courts to order
the expectant mother confined to a treatment program, a physician's office,
a hospital or a relative's home.

That bill, in response to a case in which a cocaine user was confined in
suburban Milwaukee in 1995, originally passed the state Assembly last
November. Sponsors say they expect Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson to sign
the bill into law within a few weeks.

Once signed, it would take effect immediately.

In March, South Dakota's Gov. William Janklow signed a pair of bills
legalizing the involuntarily commitment to a treatment facility for nearly
the entire nine-month gestational period of a pregnant abuser of alcohol or
nonprescribed drugs. The laws take effect July 1.

Similar bills have been introduced in a total of 12 states this year,
compared to seven - all of which failed - in 1997. Civil liberties groups
are voicing strong concerns.

``If two states pass this kind of legislation, others will feel really
emboldened,'' said Louise Melling, associate director of the American Civil
Liberties Union's Reproductive Rights Project. ``You do have to wonder how
people are thinking about women and what the government can demand that they
do.''

But politicians who say they are horrified by the effects of fetal-alcohol
syndrome and uterine drug exposure have little sympathy for such views.

``No woman has a right to do that to a child,'' said Republican Rep. Scott
Eccarius of South Dakota, who sponsored one of his state's bills.

It is not uncommon for women to engage in behavior that could hurt their
developing babies. A pediatrics journal estimated in 1992 that 11 percent of
fetuses across America are exposed to illegal drugs.

Efforts to prosecute as criminals women who endanger their fetuses have
brought mixed results in the past 15 years, with many cases dropped and most
lower-court convictions overturned on appeal.

In July of 1996, however, the South Carolina Supreme Court let stand the
manslaughter conviction of a woman who shot herself in the abdomen when she
was more than 20 weeks' pregnant, killing the fetus.

In Wisconsin, the corporation counsel for Waukesha County decided to try the
civil route when an obstetrician reported that his then-24-year-old patient
was using cocaine, drugging her developing baby. A juvenile court judge
ordered the county sheriff to take the fetus - and of course, the woman who
carried it - to the hospital.

The expectant mother, known in court records as Angela M.W., was not under
arrest, nor charged with any crime. But she was not free to leave treatment.

She stayed for three weeks until giving birth to her third child, a boy
christened in court files as Bobby L.W. Cocaine was present in the baby's
meconium - his first solid waste - but not in his bloodstream. His mother's
parental rights have been terminated.

Wisconsin's appeals court agreed with the lower court that the state's
interest in a fetal life outweighed the mother's right to freedom of
movement by the third trimester - rooting the argument in Roe vs. Wade, the
landmark abortion case that outlined a woman's choice to continue or
terminate a pregnancy.

The state Supreme Court, however, said last year that the matter was for
lawmakers to decide - a common response in fetal protection cases.

Kathleen Blatz, now chief justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, introduced
a measure in 1988, when she was a state senator, providing for involuntary
commitment of pregnant women abusing cocaine, heroin and other hard drugs -
not marijuana.

After hearing testimony about crack babies, she recalled, she thought: ``We
keep looking at how to help the child after it's born. What good does that
do anybody?''

Her bill passed quietly, she added, with the major opposition coming from
doctors who did not want to be forced to report their pregnant patients'
drug use to authorities.

Since then, Blatz said, ``more than a handful but probably fewer than 100''
women have been committed under the law, and some of them received stays
when they entered outpatient treatment programs instead.

Commitments to residential programs generally are not for more than 28 days,
she said.

This year, lawmakers defeated an attempt to add alcohol to Minnesota's list
of substances that can lead to commitment. The bill as passed requires the
medical community to educate patients about the damage that too much
drinking can cause a fetus.

In California, a bill that would have defined drug use in late pregnancy as
criminal child abuse failed in committee last month.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Atlantic Provinces Survey Teens On Drug Habits
(According To The Canadian Press, The Nova Scotia Health Department
Says Dalhousie University Is About To Follow Up On A Survey Two Years Ago
That Showed A Dramatic Rise In The Number Of Young People
Using Marijuana And Alcohol)

From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Subject: Atlantic provinces survey teens on drug habits
Date: Sat, 09 May 1998 08:45:21 -0700
Lines: 63

May 2, 1998

Atlantic provinces survey teens on drug habits

HALIFAX (CP)

Researchers are about to launch another study that
will show whether teenagers in the Atlantic provinces are continuing a
disturbing trend of increased drug and alcohol use.

Thousands of teens will be asked about 60 to 70 questions, said Bryan
Wilbur, of the Nova Scotia Health Department.

Wilbur said the new survey "will help track the problem to identify
if there has been any change, for better or worse."

The last study, conducted two years ago, showed a dramatic rise in
the number of young people using marijuana and alcohol.

Almost a third of students between Grades 7 and 12 admitted to
smoking pot more than once a month in Nova Scotia, said the study,
which was organized by Dalhousie University.

When compared to a similar survey in 1991, the use of marijuana had
tripled.

Alcohol abuse remained relatively stable when measured against
earlier numbers, but was still extremely high compared to other parts
of the country.

"The majority (54.2 per cent) of students in Grades 7, 9, 10 and 12
consume alcohol in the course of a year and 30.3 per cent more often
than once a month," the study reported.

Up to 4,000 students will take part in the study in Nova Scotia
during the first two weeks of May.

Similar samples will also be taken in New Brunswick, P.E.I. and
Newfoundland, where the problem of drug use among teens has shown
almost as dramatic an increase as Nova Scotia.

Wilbur said results probably won't be released until November.

Counsellors who deal with substance abuse say they're seeing more and
more teenagers, some as young as 13, entering rehabilitation
programs.

Despite that, many kids and some adults, especially those involved in
the drug legalization movement, argue smoking pot is not as harmful as
alcohol or other drugs available to teens.

But the marijuana on the street today "is maybe 20, 30, 40 times more
potent than it was back in the '70s," said Jeanette Tobin, of Nova
Scotia's Central Region Drug Dependency centre.

"The drug impacts on the body of a person who isn't fully grown yet,"
said Tobin. "The liver, which is the major organ for breaking down and
removing toxins from the body, is not fully developed.

"When they use a drug, teens are going to do more long-term damage to
their bodies than they realize."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Cannabis Day Rally July 1 And Hempstock July 1-3 In Sturgeon Falls, Ontario
(Tarzan's Hemp Company And The Organization Objective Tolerance 2000
Sponsor Two Events)

From: "michel ethier" (maryhuanamike@hotmail.com)
To: mattalk@islandnet.com, seedling@golden.net
Subject: Re: Senior Charged For Trafficing
Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 13:14:40 PDT

TARZAN'S HEMP COMPANY and the organization OBJECTIVE TOLERANCE 2000
invite you to join us for a Cannabis day rally. on July 1, 1998 in
Sturgeon Falls, Ontario. This is a day of education, awareness and
tolerance. Over the past few years, this event has been celebrated in
many cities and town across Canada. This year however, we are going to
do things a little different in Sturgeon Falls, Ontario. Join us for
HEMPSTOCK, 3 DAYS OF EDUCATION, AWARENESS AND TOLERANCE.
Come see what real people have to say about the merits of the Cannabis
plant.
For details EMAIL maryhuanamike@hotmail.com
Call Michel Ethier (705) 753-4756

Yours in hemp

Michel Ethier

***

From: "michel ethier" 
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com, chris.clay@hempnation.com
Cc: editor@mapinc.org
Subject: Re: Toker to appeal roach ruling
Date: Sat, 02 May 1998 13:24:23 PDT

TARZAN'S HEMP COMPANY and OBJECTIVE TOLERANCE 2000 invite you to
HEMPSTOCK, 3 days of education, awareness and tolerance, July 1 to 3,
1998 in Sturgeon Falls, Ontario. We are in need of a couple of public
speakers.

For more details, E MAIL maryhuanamike@hotmail.com
Call Michel Ethier (705) 753-4756

Yours in hemp

Michel Ethier

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Crime Figures Fall When Heroin Addicts Get Help (Britain's 'New Scientist'
Says Preliminary Results From Britain's National Treatment Outcome Research
Study, Released This Week, Suggest That Every £1 Spent On Treating
Heroin Addicts Brings A Return Of £3 In Reduced Crime)

Date: Wed, 06 May 1998 20:44:32 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: Melodi Cornett 
Subject: MN: UK: Crime Figures Fall When Heroin Addicts Get Help
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Peter Webster
Pubdate: Sat, 2 May 1998
Source: New Scientist (UK)
Contact: letters@newscientist.com
Website: http://www.newscientist.com/

Hard Facts

CRIME FIGURES FALL WHEN HEROIN ADDICTS GET HELP

Addiction therapy saves money. Preliminary results from Britain's National
Treatment Outcome Research Study, released this week, suggest that every £1
spent on treating heroin addicts brings a return of £3 in reduced levels of
crime.

Yet despite these results, the government's new White Paper on drugs policy
contains no firm pledge of fresh cash for treatment beyond promising that
the £5 million in assets seized each year from drug traffickers will be used
to tackle the drugs problem.

There are thought to be more than 100 000 "problem" drug users in Britain.
Each one spends around 200 per week on drugs, largely financed by petty
crime. A team at the Maudsley Hospital in south London, led by Michael
Gossop, identified 1075 such people.

Most were heroin addicts, although many also had problems with other drugs
and alcohol. Their treatment mainly involved substituting prescribed
methadone for illegal heroin, or residential programmes encouraging total
abstinence.

A year after the start of treatment, Gossop's team interviewed 769 of the
addicts. On average, their use of street heroin had plummeted. Nearly 70 per
cent of those on residential programmes had been taking the drug once a week
or more. After a year, this had dropped to 40 per cent. For those on
methadone programmes, the number using heroin weekly fell from almost 90 per
cent to less than 60 per cent.

The rate of burglaries and other thefts committed by the patients fell by
almost half. This is similar to results from US studies ("Methadone: crime
cure or therapy?", New Scientist, 1 October 1994, p 36). But it wasn't a
foregone conclusion, says Gossop: "There really are big differences between
the drug users and the treatment services."

The White Paper stresses the value of treatment. But groups working with
addicts say more money is needed. "The drugs strategy, while good in intent,
needs backing with a cast-iron guarantee that the extra resources will be
there," says Roger Howard, who heads the Standing Conference on Drug Abuse.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[End]