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

Law Threatens Right To Pain Relief, Groups Say ('Reuters' Says Doctors,
Nurses And People Suffering From Chronic Pain Testified Thursday
Against Bills Before Congress To Nullify Oregon's Unique Assisted Suicide
Law)

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 22:50:38 EDT
Errors-To: jnr@insightweb.com
Reply-To: friends@freecannabis.org
Originator: friends@freecannabis.org
Sender: friends@freecannabis.org
From: RandallBart (Barticus@att.net)
To: Multiple recipients of list (friends@freecannabis.org)
Subject: Law threatens right to pain relief, groups say (Reuters)

From http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2555648899-b82

03:34 PM ET 08/20/98

Law threatens right to pain relief, groups say

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Proposed legislation aimed at
stopping doctors from helping people kill themselves may also
stop them from giving adequate pain relief to patients, several
groups said Thursday.

Doctors, nurses and people suffering from chronic pain all
spoke out against the proposed measure, virtually identical
versions of which are making their way through House and Senate
committees.

``Pain is severely undertreated. The proposed legislation
serves to compound this problem by creating an environment in
which health care professionals are reluctant to prescribe
adequate treatments, fearing scrutinization and misunderstood
intent,'' Pamela Bennett, president of the American Society of
Pain Management Nurses, told a news conference.

Bennett described the case of a 15-year-old cancer patient
who needed 46 times the normal dose of a painkiller, Fentanyl,
just to control her pain. ``She was awake, alert, talking to her
parents and joking with her nurses,'' Bennett said.

``This dosage was needed to control her pain at this point
in her disease process.''

The girl eventually died, not from the enormous doses of
medication but from her cancer, Bennett said.

She said she feared the bill -- which is aimed mostly
against Oregon's assisted suicide law -- would scare doctors,
insurance companies and managed care companies from allowing
such high doses of painkillers to be given.

The bill does distinguish between giving a drug to control
pain, even though it might hasten death, and giving a drug
specifically to cause a death.

But the House and Senate committees have heard fears that
the distinction has not been drawn clearly enough, and that
doctors might shy away from prescribing strong painkillers to
dying patients for fear that they would be investigated by the
Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

Under the bill the DEA would be authorized to revoke the
license of any doctor who intentionally prescribes drugs to help
suicide.

Skip Baker, president of the American Society for Action on
Pain, said even without the law, doctors get hassled about
prescribing pain medicine.

Baker suffers from ankylosing spondylitis, an inflammatory
disease that affects joints between the vertebrae of the spine
and joints between the spine and pelvis, and says he needs
constant doses of narcotics to control pain that makes him feel
like his spine is in a steel vice.

``It took me 13 years of battle to have my medication
approved at 500 mg per day,'' he said. ``My own doctor spent
$40,000 defending himself before the Virginia medical board.''

The groups, which include the American College of
Physicians, the American Medical Association and the American
Geriatrics Society, are petitioning senators and representatives
about the bill.

Oregon's law, the first to legalize physician-assisted
suicide, went into effect last year.

A similar proposed law goes to voters in November in
Michigan, where retired pathologist Dr. Jack Kevorkian says he
has helped 100 people end their lives. He has been acquitted
three times of charges stemming from patients' deaths.

Oregon health officials said Wednesday that only 10
terminally ill patients have requested and received lethal drug
doses since the law there took effect.

REUTERS

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

Peter McWilliams Is Out On $250,000 Bail (The Federal Medical Marijuana
Defendant Posts A Brief Message From Los Angeles)

Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 22:23:38 -0700
From: "Peter McWilliams" (peter@mcwilliams.com)
To: "Peter McWilliams" (peter@mcwilliams.com)
Subject: DPFCA: Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 22:21:48 +0100
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/

Hello.

I am out,

I am home.

I am okay.

I am going to bed.

Take good care,

Enjoy,

Peter McWilliams

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

Marijuana Initiatives Bloom Around West (A 'Seattle Times' Roundup
On Medical Marijuana Ballot Measures Facing Voters In Washington State,
Oregon, Alaska, Nevada And, Potentially, Colorado, All Sponsored By Americans
For Medical Rights)

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 17:22:31 GMT
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
From: Dave Fratello (amr@lainet.com)
Subject: WA: Seattle Times on medmj inits
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org

Seattle Times
Thursday, August 20,1998

MARIJUANA INITIATIVES BLOOM AROUND WEST

by David Schaefer
Seattle Times staff reporter

When Washington voters decide in November whether to legalize the use of
marijuana for relief of cancer and other debilitating illnesses, they won't
be alone.

Voters in Oregon, Alaska, Nevada and, potentially, Colorado will cast
ballots on nearly identical measures.

That's no accident: Nearly all the money and much of the political
horsepower behind Initiative 692 and similar proposals elsewhere is being
provided by the California-based Americans for Medical Rights.

That group is principally supported by three wealthy businessmen:
billionaire global financier George Soros; John Sperling, founder of the
for-profit University of Phoenix; and Peter Lewis, chief executive officer
of Ohio-based Progressive Insurance.

They have donated nearly all of the $300,000 raised so far by the
Initiative 692 campaign.

They were also the financial backers for last year's unsuccessful
medical-marijuana initiative campaign, which lost handily despite spending
$1.5 million.

But Initiative 692 isn't a rerun of last year's measure, which would have
legalized an array of drugs and potentially reduced the jail sentence of
convicted drug users.

The current version is focused much more narrowly on marijuana use. It
would allow people with certain diseases to grow and use marijuana with a
doctor's recommendation. The measure would cover those suffering from
certain AIDS symptoms, nausea caused by chemotherapy, muscle spasms caused
by multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, glaucoma or other illnesses causing
"intractable" pain.

"We are not trying to legalize drugs," said Initiative 692 organizer Rob
Killian. "It is just (about) marijuana and just for sick people."

Killian, a Seattle-area doctor, also was the leader of last year's
campaign. He said he has seen the benefits of marijuana on his own terminal
patients and AIDS sufferers.

The most prominent opponents are King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng and Lt.
Gov. Brad Owen, who both worked against last year's measure.

Maleng said relieving the suffering of seriously ill patients should be
addressed through the stringent clinical tests required by the federal
government, not by an "end run" around the drug laws.

Owen said he is concerned that medical marijuana is a stalking-horse for
decriminalization of other drugs. He said the agenda of the three main
donors goes far beyond prescribing marijuana for cancer patients.

"The first step to legalizing drugs is to accept medical marijuana," Owen
argues. "Soros has spoken out for changing national drug policy. That is
the real purpose."

Soros has criticized the severity of U.S. drug-use laws, donating millions
to study and promote reforms.

But Americans for Medical Rights is solely interested in the issue of
legalizing marijuana for medical use, said spokesman Dave Fratello.

The group is focused on the West because 20 of the 24 states that allow
voters to write laws by initiative are west of the Mississippi.

Americans for Medical Rights conducted polls in 10 states, concentrating
its political efforts this year on those that looked the most promising.
They also are relatively small states, where it is less expensive to
conduct a campaign.

The group, which passed the California initiative in 1996, provides
financial, technical and legal assistance to the local campaigns. Should
this year's initiatives prove successful, the group likely will sponsor
ballot measures in Ohio, Illinois and Florida in the next two years,
Fratello said.

There are minor differences among the current crop of proposals.

For example, Washington's initiative calls for medical patients to be
allowed to keep a 60-day supply of marijuana. Colorado would allow patients
to possess 2 ounces of harvested marijuana and six total plants, of which
three are flowering. Oregon would allow seven plants, including three that
were flowering.

The Alaska, Oregon and Colorado initiatives would create a permit system,
which would provide identification cards for patients eligible to use
marijuana. Washington calls only for documentation from a doctor, similar
to a prescription.

Initiative 692 would allow a caregiver to have access to marijuana or help
the patient with its cultivation. No caregiver could help more than one
patient or legally use the drug themselves.

None of the proposals would allow the controversial "buying clubs," where
the sick can buy marijuana, established in California.

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

CAMP Report Attacks 215 (A Bulletin From California NORML Says A Draft Report
From The Office Of Attorney General Dan Lungren, 'Marijuana - California's
Growing Problem,' About California's Annual Campaign Against Marijuana
Planting, Provides Useful Insight Into Lungren's Strategy Of Attack
Against Proposition 215 - Its Major Finding Is That CAMP Saw A 40 Percent
Increase In The Number Of Marijuana Plants It Eradicated In 1997)

Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 16:33:21 -0700
To: aro@drugsense.org, dpfca@drugsense.org
From: canorml@igc.apc.org (Dale Gieringer)
Subject: DPFCA: CAMP Report Attacks 215
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/

Following are extracts from what is apparently a draft version of a report
on California's 1997 CAMP marijuana eradication campaign by Attorney
General Lungren, "Marijuana: California's Growing Problem."

Although it hasn't been released to the public as yet, it provides
useful insight into Lungren's strategy of attack against Prop. 215. Its
major finding is that CAMP saw a major increase in the number of marijuana
plants it eradicated in 1997, to 132,485. This is 40% higher than the
year before, and the highest level in 11 years. (The total number of
plants eradicated in California is claimed to have jumped even higher from
386,262 in 1996 to 686,026 - an all-time high) Authorities have been
blaming this on Prop. 215, saying that it gave a green light to growers to
cultivate as "caregivers." (Of course, most of these folks have been
arrested by now, so we might expect such a bubble to collapse this year).

At any rate, the report opens on a defensive tone, with a quotation
from Dan Lungren to the effect that none of the plants seized by CAMP were
for medicinal use, but were intended for sales on the street to all,
including kids. (Obviously, Lungren has forgotten about his strenuous
efforts to quash the medical market market, thereby ensuring that pot
would have no place to go but the street). It proceeds with a bitter
critique of Prop. 215, which pretty much speaks for itself ("Prop 215, for
the first time in California history, allowed voters to choose what kind of
medicine a doctor should use," We have elected to use a voter-based
law-making process (proposition) that cannot be corrected by the executive
or legislative branches," etc. - that is, the people reclaimed their right
to medicine from the politicians and bureaucrats).

The report mentions surveys of California student drug use, showing
that marijuana and other drug usage have increased in recent years. None
of this is to Lungren's advantage, since the increase begins with his own
term in office, and predates Prop. 215. A new California student survey
is due to be released by Lungren's office in the next month - expect it to
get major publicity if and only if it shows a significant increase in pot
use since 1996.

Finally, the report plays on anti-Mexican sentiment, claiming that
40% of the "primary cultivators" in California are Mexican nationals. This
dubious factoid appears to be based on a few very large Mexican operations
that were busted in Mendocino County. These arrests are not representative
of producers at large: the most overly ambitious cultivators are the most
likely to get arrested, and skew the statistics accordingly.

The CAMP Report also includes an operational overview of the Bureau
of Narcotics Enforcement's organization and programs (but not budget!).
Ask if you want a copy, it's too lenghty to include here.

MARIJUANA: CALIFORNIA'S GROWING PROBLEM
Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General

"...The plants seized during this operation [1997 CAMP Season] were never
intended to be used for medicinal purposes. Rather, they were to be sold
on the streets...these plants were part of a criminal enterprise - destined
for gang members and street dealerts to sell to anyone, including
children." - Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General

"This year (1997) 132,485 plants were seized, the most in the 1990's - a
40% increase in the number of plants seized when compared to 1996. That is
more than 120 million marijuana joints that will not be rolled, smoked, and
potentially offered to children." - Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General

California's Proposition 215 - Truth and Consequences

* What Proposition 215 really says (see enclosed Proposition
215 initiative)

* Ensures "seriously ill" Californians have the right to
obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where deemed appropriate and
"recommended" by a physician.

* Primarily for use in cases of cancer, anorexia, AIDS,
chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, "or any other
illness for which marijuana provides relief."

* Ensures that patients and their primary caregivers who
obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon recommendation of the
physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.

* Encourages federal and state governments (unspecified) to
implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of marijuana to
all patients in medical need of marijuana.

* Exempts physicians in California from punishment or the
denial of any right or privilege for having recommended marijuana to a
patient for medical purposes.

* Exempts "patients" and "primary caregivers utilizing
medical marijuana from the criminal punishments of possession or
cultivation of marijuana.

* Defines "primary caregiver" as an individual, curiously,
and not a health care corporation or hospital.

***

What Proposition 215 doesn't say

* Does not provide for low-end age limitations or parental
consent for use by minors

* Does not provide government oversight by the Food and Drug
Administration as is the case with all other prescription drugs, which
ensures quality control, dose regulation, medical protocol development,
scientific research, and patient trials.

* Does not provide medical oversight to determine appropriate
use, when, where, how much and for how long the drug should be used.

* Provides no regulatory oversight, as is required in other
schedule drugs in California, to keep statewide records on lie use rates
and appropriateness of use by control agencies to govern and regulate
medical care service levels.

* Does not provide commerce regulations that control the
types and nationality of companies interested in producing medically used
marijuana such as pharmaceutical firms and tobacco corporations.

* Does not provide clear definition of the term "doctor" or
"patient."

* Does not address the direct conflict in which Prop 215 puts
California law with federal law. Californians, for the first time in the
state's history, by the adoption of a state ballot proposition, would be
effectively removing a drug from Schedule I (the most dangerous illicit
drugs) to no schedule, creating medical treatment policy by vote rather
than by scientific research and removing all regulatory controls at the
state level meant to protect those under medical care.

* Post polling survey - What voters thought Prop 215 said

* Medical marijuana supported by Medical research.

* Medical use would decrease illicit marijuana sales
conducted by patients and caregivers.

* Quality control would be maintained on marijuana.

* Would only be given to persons seriously ill with cancer or
glaucoma.

* Had tacit government approval because Proposition 215 was
listed on a voter choice on a government-produced ballot.

* Would require a prescription by a doctor.

***

Where we get our information and how we give it back - a study in
inconsistency

* According to the Journal of the American Medical
Association, most Americans get their drug information from the news media
-- mainly television.

* Most persons state that drug abuse is a "national crisis"
but 81 percent of persons polled say not in their family.

* Only 15 percent of persons polled say the government is
making progress and worry that drugs have all effect on our national
character, our link to higher crime rates, and have harmful health
consequences.

* Most Americans surveyed do not support treatment as a drug
abuse reduction modality.

* 90 percent of people do worse at school work or at
athletics while using drugs.

* 63 percent of parents and 76 percent of teenagers say that
marijuana is less harmful than other drugs but lead to more serious drugs
of abuse.

* 68 percent of Californians support doctor-prescribed
medical marijuana

* 80 percent of people think the war on drugs has failed.

***

Where we are and where we're headed

* After several years of gradual decline in almost all drug
categories, beginning in 1991 a gradual increase in drug abuse was noted in
all categories. But the most alarming drug-use increase was in the area of
marijuana, and it occurred in 1995.

* In California the Campaign Against Marijuana Planting
(CAMP) in 1997 saw its highest year of plant seizures (132,000) in 11
years, a 40 percent increase over the prior year of 94,221 plants seized.
That's 120 million marijuana cigarettes (see CAMP report graphics). Net
value of this crop was $530 million.

* An influx of Mexican national drug-trafficking
organizations occurred in 1996 and 1997. Records indicate they were
responsible as the primary cultivators of 40 percent of California's 1997
production season marijuana gardens. A proliferation of assault weapons
and booby traps in marijuana- cultivation gardens.

* Marijuana drug seizures at the California/Mexico border
increased dramatically in number and size (see graphics). Seizures almost
doubled from 1995 to 1998.

* The Rodney Skager report of grades 7, 9 and 11 - California
Students Substance Abuse Survey for Marijuana Among Youth

* From 1985 to 1989, a steady decline of marijuana use in
7th, 9th and 11th graders.

* 1991 - beginnings of an increase: 56 to 70 percent of 7th,
9th and 11th graders admitted the regular use of marijuana.

* 1993 to 1996 - upswing in all drug categories, especially
marijuana abuse (highest in 10 years), while alcohol remained the same or
declined slightly from 1993+

* Poly drug use (use of multiple drugs) rose 50 percent
between 1991 and 1996.

* The two biggest contributing factors were ease of
acquisition and adult modeling behavior.

* NIDA (National Institute of Drug Abuse) reports for similar
time periods and age levels of youth indicate similar abuse increase
patterns (see NIDA report).

***

Trafficking trends - reports from the National Drug Intelligence
Center after the passage of Prop 215 in California

* To the north, Canada is poised to become a major supplier
from over 17000 indoor marijuana growing sites.

* To the south, crop yields in Mexico and Colombia are up and
growing due to decreased eradication efforts by their own governments.

* Mexican cartels have moved into California and controlled
40 percent of the major growing operations in 1997.

* To the east, Jamaican marijuana production is up, and
eradication efforts are down by home governments.

* Domestic cultivation is, in the United States, centered in
California, Kentucky, Florida, Tennessee, New York and Washington.

***

Medical emergencies

* Since 1990 emergency room episodes for marijuana, while
declining slightly in the preceding five years, rose 86 percent, from
15,700 to 29,200. Interestingly, half of those emergency room admissions
were in combination with other drugs or alcohol (see number of
marijuana/hashish-related episodes graph).

* According to the Drug Use Forecasting Study, marijuana drug
use by male arrestees in the United States tripled from 1991 to 1996.

* Drop-outs from high school use marijuana at one and a half
to two times higher rates than non drop-outs.

***

The corporate connection

* Cigarette firms in Great Britain have secretly discussed
lacing tobacco with marijuana to boost sales (Sacramento Bee article).

* Phillip Morris filled a trademark application in France
under the name Marley in honor of the late Jamaican singer Bill Marley.
Other requests for trademarks were Acalpulco Gold and Red Lib.

* Company documents of British American Tobacco suggest
"using almost subliminal amounts of marijuana with tobacco as one avenue of
exploitation.'?

***

Ending points

More far-reaching than any of the previously made points, however, is that
Proposition 215,. for the first time in California history:

* Allowed voters to choose what kind of medicine a doctor
should use to treat the symptoms of diseases and conditions rather than
scientific research, medical protocol, and standard government -
monitored tests.

* Californians legalized a drug for medical use with no
prescription requirement. The law only demands a recommendation by a
doctor; it also does not state in what form or to whom the recommendation
or records are kept thereof. Even the most simple antibiotic under most
state law requires a prescription from a doctor, not a recommendation. The
prescription then can be filed so appropriate records can be kept for
third party payers, pharmaceutical firms, doctors, health care maintenance
organizations, and governmental agencies regulating the distribution of
drugs that, by their chemical makeup, are dangerous for self-dosing and
have a high potential of abuse. The federal Food and Drug Administration is
completely bypassed.

* We have upset the very delicate balance between the doctor,
the pharmacist, and the patient because no prescription or recognized
production facility for the production of marijuana is required by the law.

* We exempted doctors and patients from all responsibility
including removing civil and criminal liability This has not been done with
any other prescription drug in the history of this state.

* We rewrote and despecified the definition of patient and
illness to the point where any ailment as self-described by a patient can
qualify under the law for the use of medical marijuana. This was borne out
during departmental investigations against various providers of marijuana
in the early days of Proposition 215.

* We have elected to use a voter-based law-making process
(proposition) that cannot be corrected by the executive or legislative
branches of the California government. Only the court can nullify the
proposition on a constitutional issue.

* We have placed ourselves in direct conflict with federal
law, which strictly forbids the use of marijuana as a medicine by any
person and schedules it, as in prior California law, in Schedule I of the
United States Code. Schedule I is reserved for those drugs in federal and
prior state law that have a high abuse potential and no legitimate medical
use.

***

Finally, the courts, both state and federals and what they
have said thus far about Proposition 215.

* 1st District Court of Appeals says cannabis "clubs" are
illegal in California and can't act as a "caregiver" under Prop 215.

* U.S. District Courts order Cannabis Club closed and declare
illegal, and violations of federal drug laws upheld precedent of
federal over state drug laws. In Alameda County Superior Courts the
criminal case against Dennis Peron, et al., moves slowly forward.

***

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

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

Town Stamps Out Smoking Ban ('The Hartford Courant' Says A Ban
On Teenage Smoking In Seymour, Connecticut, That Divided Neighbors
And Pushed The Limits Of Local Anti-Tobacco Legislation In The State
Was Repealed 1,366-545 In A Referendum Wednesday)

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 15:13:59 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US CT: Town Stamps Out Smoking Ban
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: General Pulaski
Pubdate: Thu, 20 Aug 1998
Source: Hartford Courant (CT)
Contact: letters@courant.com
Author: JANICE D'ARCY

TOWN STAMPS OUT SMOKING BAN

SEYMOUR - A ban on teenage smoking that pushed the limits of local
anti-tobacco legislation in the state this year and divided neighbors in
the small New Haven County community was felled in a forced referendum
Wednesday.

Residents voted 1,366-545 to overturn the ban.

``We got our town back,'' said Mary Adamowski, in a voice strained by weeks
of protest against the ban.

For a month, a small group of protesters led by Adamowski collected
signatures, addressed officials at town meetings and knocked on doors in an
effort to overturn what they called ``an infringement on civil liberties.''

The Seymour smoking ban became an immediate focus of attention for local
legislators after it was passed in July. The town was the first in the
state to place an outright ban on smoking in public for anyone under 18.

The ordinance was modeled on a similar law in Alvin, Texas, a tiny town
whose municipal officials have publicized their success on the Internet.
Alvin officials estimate their law has reduced teen smoking by as much as
20 percent in three years.

The Alvin law, and other teenage smoking bans that have sprouted up in
small communities across the country, have been praised by anti-tobacco
crusaders. But soon after Seymour First Selectman John O'Toole celebrated
the passage of the town's ban, local critics began to emerge.

``I don't know where they came from,'' said O'Toole, the outspoken town
official credited with being the ban's most forceful sponsor. ``A fair
amount of them are the types who, when their kids get caught doing
something wrong, say `not my baby.' ''

But many of the parents who cast votes against the ban Wednesday said
O'Toole was as wrong as the ordinance.

``This is all about parental authority,'' said Barbara Zanowiak, a Seymour
mother of four - including two teenagers - who voted against the ordinance.
``As far as I know, my teenagers don't smoke, but I think it's my job to
worry about it. I know it's difficult to raise children, but the town and
the police shouldn't be doing it for me.''

The ordinance said children caught smoking in public would be issued a
warning and their parents would be notified. A second offense would carry a
$20 fine and require enrollment in smoking cessation classes. A third
offense would draw a $50 fine and more classes.

``It's lunacy,'' said Adamowski, who quit smoking 10 years ago after a
life-threatening bout with pneumonia. ``It was my personal choice.
Officials in Seymour don't know what personal choice means. The
Constitution doesn't mean two cents in this town.''

Yet health officials stand by their initial endorsements of the ordinance.
John Sponauer, director of the Valley Substance Abuse Action Council, said
he hopes Seymour's failed attempt doesn't discourage other towns from
addressing teen smoking.

``When it comes to smoking, there's this big loophole,'' Sponauer said.
``With alcohol, underage kids can't buy it, possess it or use it. Underage
kids can't buy cigarettes, why do we let them smoke?''

But some said the outcome of Wednesday's vote is of little relevance to the
teens who light up outside the fast-food joints and the town pool hall
every night.

``Whenever we see cops, we stamp the butts out,'' said Christa Lydem, 17.
``Just like some of my friends stamp them out when they see their parents.
We're not going to stop doing that. We're not going to stop smoking
either.''

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

Florida - Medical Marijuana ('The Tampa Tribune' Says The Drug Free America
Foundation, Opponents Of A Florida Initiative To Legalize Marijuana
For Medicinal Use, Proclaimed Victory Thursday Because Proponents Failed
To Collect The 435,000 Signatures Needed To Get On The November 3 Ballot,
But Toni Leeman, Chairwoman Of Floridans For Medical Rights,
Said The Fort Lauderdale-Based Group Is Aiming To Place The Measure
On The State Ballot In 2000, Not This Year)

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1998 17:56:30 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US FL: FL-Medical Marijuana
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Thu, 20 Aug 1998
Source: Tampa Bay Online (The Tampa Tribune)
Contact: tribletters@tampatrib.com
Address: P.O. Box 191, Tampa, FL 33601-4005.
Website: http://www.tboweb.com/
Author: Associated Press

FL-MEDICAL MARIJUANA

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) - Opponents of a statewide initiative to legalize
marijuana for medicinal use proclaimed victory Thursday, but supporters of
legal pot said their campaign is far from over.

The Drug Free America Foundation hailed failure of supporters to submit
petitions by a deadline earlier this month for getting proposed state
constitutional amendments on the Nov. 3 ballot.

``They were unable to muster any semblance of an organized campaign,'' said
Terry Hensley, the anti-drug use foundation's executive director, in a news
release. ``Our education efforts must be working.''

Such celebration was premature, though, countered Toni Leeman, chairwoman
of Floridans for Medical Rights. She said the Fort Lauderdale-based group
is aiming to place the marijuana legalizing measure on the state ballot in
2000, not this year.

``They cannot `defeat' an initiative that's not on the ballot, so this
`victory dance' is inane,'' Leeman said. ``When we gather the 435,000
signatures, then it will appear on the ballot, and they can do nothing
about that.''

Florida Department of Law Enforcement Commissioner Tim Moore disputed
Leeman's year 2000 scenario.

``That'd be my story, too, if I'd failed miserably,'' Moore said.

Copyright 1998 Associated Press.

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

State Declares War On Teen Drug Use ('The Courier Mail'
Says Somebody - It's Not Quite Clear Who - Announced Wednesday
That A Ministerial Think Tank Would Be Set Up To Fight An Alleged Increase
In Drug Use By Teenagers In Queensland, Australia)

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 07:33:26 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Australia: State Declares War On Teen Drug Use
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: kwr01@uow.edu.au (Ken Russell)
Source: Courier Mail (Australia)
Contact: cmleted@ozemail.com.au
Pubdate: Thursday, August 20, 1998
Author: Ali Lawlor

STATE DECLARES WAR ON TEEN DRUG USE

A STATE Government ministerial think-tank will be set up to fight
increasing drug use by teenagers in Queensland.

The announcement yesterday came as police, youth centres and schools in
Ipswich called on the State Government to develop an integrated
departmental approach to the drug problem in their area.

Superintendent of Ipswich police Alex Erwin said information on drug use
should be shared between departments such as Health, Police and Families,
Youth and Community Care.

A report by Goodna police inspector Grant Pitman found the inability of
departments to release information about the extent of the drug problem in
Ipswich was inhibiting community drug education and rehabilitation programmes.

A spokeswoman for Premier Peter Beattie said "anything that helps to break
the curse of drugs among young Queenslanders should be implemented".

"The Premier will be discussing with ministers at the earliest possible
opportunity."

Ipswich police revealed last week that "starter packs" of amphetamines or
heroin mixed with honey were being handed out to children as young as nine
by dealers in the Ipswich area. Officers confirmed hundreds of children at
a high school in the area were using drugs ranging from marijuana to heroin.

Teenagers said a known dealer visited a local shopping plaza before and
after school to provide drugs to students.

Police Minister Tom Barton said there was a need for "a formal in-depth
discussion with relevant ministers and also a formal submission from the
people concerned to flush out their ideas". Families, Youth and Community
Care Minister Anna Bligh said she was looking forward to discussing an
integrated approach because it was "the only way to provide effective
services for these young people".

Supt Erwin said a coordinated approach would make a big difference to drug
problems in any community.

"You have to be careful with privy information but you can make a big
difference," he said.

"For example, if a nurse is talking to a child at school about their drug
problem, then it's a matter of confidence."

"But look at the big picture. If the nurse is dealing with 20 to 30 people
in the school she could then say in general terms, 'We have a problem at
this school and these are the drugs we're dealing with'. That doesn't
affect confidentlality and this is how we see the information being
delivered, maybe even in report form."

Supt Erwin said government agencies could outline patterns of behaviour in
particular areas by using anecdotal information.

Acting principal of Ipawich State High School John Allison said "hard data"
from the Government was needed for preventative drug programmes to be
society you're obviously going to have a drug problem at school - school is
a reflection of society." Mr Allison said.

"Once we get that information you can at least say, 'If this problem exists
we can start to have a hard look at it'."

Co-ordinator of the Queensland Intravenous AIDS Association Alex Wightman
warned the exchange of information could stop young people from seeking
help for drug problems at an early stage.

"There's always a need for a better inter-government approach to the drug
problem but I'd hate to see health service agencies and welfare agencies
becoming intelligence gatherers for police operations," he said.

"It will just drive the problem underground."

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

Huge Police Drugs Raid Took Months Of Planning ('The Age'
Says More Than 200 Police In Victoria, Australia, Took Action Early Yesterday
Against A Sophisticated Amphetamine Manufacturing Ring With 20 Arrests
And Raids In Three States, Including 32 Houses And One Business In Victoria)

Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 08:14:13 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Australia: Huge Police Drugs Raid Took Months Of Planning
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Ken Russell
Source: Age, The (Australia)
Contact: letters@theage.fairfax.com.au
Website: http://www.theage.com.au/
Pubdate: Thu, 20 Aug 1998
Author: Brett Foley

HUGE POLICE DRUGS RAID TOOK MONTHS OF PLANNING

A massive police operation early yesterday against a sophisticated
amphetamine manufacturing ring was one of the largest police efforts in
years and the culmination of months of investigation.

More than 200 Victoria Police were involved in the operation, in which
officers raided properties in three states. In Victoria, 32 houses and one
business were raided as part of Operation Orbost, resulting in the seizure
of large amounts of drugs, cash, firearms and stolen property.

The head of the drug squad, Inspector John McKoy, said the raids by his
squad and the special operations group were the result of months of
investigation into amphetamines dealing in Victoria, New South Wales and
Queensland.

Properties at Nerang in Queensland and near Wagga in New South Wales were
also raided as part of the operation on Tuesday night and yesterday morning.

Inspector McKoy said the seizure of several handguns in the raid was
disturbing in the wake of the shootings of two police in Moorabbin on
Sunday morning.

``Handguns are only made for one purpose and that is killing. Fortunately
in operations like this the drug squad has the luxury of knowing who we are
dealing with and whether they are armed.

``Therefore we can plan these operations meticulously and enjoy the
protection of the special operations group.

``Unfortunately our members patrolling the streets do not have those
luxuries. They are particularly at risk, as we have seen in recent
events,'' he said.

Inspector McKoy said the raids across 19 Melbourne suburbs found several
handguns, several hundred thousand dollars in cash and other stolen
property. Large amounts of amphetamines and chemicals were seized from a
property in Mt Evelyn.

Police also raided a computer business in Plenty Road, Reservoir, where
police arrested five men from Melbourne, two from NSW, one from Queensland
and seized drugs and cash.

``Some of the people involved in this group are large-scale organisers in
the amphetamine trade and through their arrest we have put a dent into
organised crime in this state,'' Inspector McKoy said.

In all, more than 20 people were arrested and 17 appeared in the Melbourne
Magistrates Court yesterday. All were charged with drug trafficking and
firearms offences and all but one were remanded to reappear in the
Magistrates Court at a later date.

The police chief commissioner, Mr Neil Comrie, praised members of the
operation for their work, despite the tragic events of the weekend.

``The professionalism and dedication of police working on this complex and
potentially dangerous operation shines through and demonstrates that,
despite the grief, we have kept working,'' he said.

Inspector McKoy said all officers involved in the operation were
``heartbroken'' but carried out their duties in a professional manner.

``We are dictated to by the criminals we deal with and we have to seize
opportunities as they arise; last night was the opportune time to end this
operation.''