HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tms@cs.umd.edu (Tom Swiss (not Swift, not Suiss, Swiss!))
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: "Reasonable Doubts" episode of 12/22/92
Date: 25 Dec 92 21:22:43 GMT
Organization: The Reality Liberation Front (pixels to the people!)

wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>
>Just wondering if anyone else caught the December 22nd episode of the
>tv series "Reasonable Doubts"... that the episode was made and aired
>carries some fascinating implications about the current state of the
>War On Drugs with regard to the mainstream American media.

     I only caught a few minutes of it, thanks for the summary. 

     A few weeks ago, they had an episode that delt with jury
nullification. The case in question was a woman who killed the man
convicted of murdering her daughter (son? husband? I forget) and
who was being released early. The public defender (I forget his name,
but he's the somewhat annoying guy with the southren accent) told
the jury that even if they find that what the defendent did was
illegal, no law requires them to find her guilty. He was cited for
contempt, but got his accquital.

===============================================================================
Tom Swiss/tms@cs.umd.edu  |  "Born to die"   |   Keep your laws off my brain!
     "What's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?" - Nick Lowe 
                     Keep your values off my family.
    "You all look like happy campers to me.  Happy campers you are, happy
     campers you have been, and, as far as I am concerned, happy campers you
     will always be."
                -- Vice President Dan Quayle, to the American Samoans,
                   whose capital Quayle pronounces "Pogo Pogo"
From: bagg@ellis.uchicago.edu (matthew john baggott)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: "U.S. Drug Laws Clash With Somali Tradition"
Date: 30 Dec 92 23:49:58 GMT
Reply-To: bagg@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <Fu4kwB1w165w@qed.cts.com> marsthom@qed.cts.com (Mark Thompson) writes:
>[Various items about the Qat leaf (aka "Khat") being illegal...]

>This is pretty strange, since you can buy the purified active alkaloid 
>that's present in Khat, Ephedrine, over the counter in most truck stops
>and gas station mini markets along the interstate highways in the 
>Southwestern US, as well as mail order ephedrine tablets through
>ads in nationally published magazines.

Actually, the main active component of khat is cathinone (S-alpha-
aminopropiophenone), which looks like amphetamine with a carbonyl
group replacing a methylene group on the side chain.  Khat also
contains cahine and norephedrine but these are less potent.  See,
for example, Geisshusler & Brenneisen's "The content of psychoactive
phenylpropyl- and phenylpentenyl- khatamines in Catha edulis
Forsk of different origin," _J. Ethnopharm. 1987, 19: 269-277.

>I've also heard that Khat leaves become inactive when dried. This was 
>mentioned in an article I read several years ago discussing the use of 
>Khat in Yemen - it was mentioned in passing that Khat had no value as
>an item of export because it had to be chewed fresh.

This is true.  It would also seem to be evidence against the idea
that ephedrine, a fairly stable molecule, is the active component in khat.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs,alt.individualism,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: bagg@ellis.uchicago.edu (matthew john baggott)
Subject: Re: "U.S. Drug Laws Clash With Somali Tradition"
Reply-To: bagg@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:09:11 GMT

In article <2B38FAD2.15463@ics.uci.edu> honig@ics.uci.edu (David A. Honig) writes:

>Get a clue.  We can do whatever the fuck we want.  We can kidnap foreigners
>in their own countries, even.  We can tell the UN what to do, but not
>vice-versa.

Well, the UN does condemn the US's actions on occasion, but somehow it
always seems to get buried in the back pages or goes unreported.  Funny
how that is.

>--
>David Honig
>
>"Q: What does a C programmer say to an Ada(tm) programmer?
> A: I'll have a burger and fries, no onions."

   --M@
From: bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Bill's Billy, Roger (was Re: Some anonymous posts)
Date: 31 Dec 92 23:13:17 GMT
Organization: Ohio University School of Art. Athens

In article <1992Dec31.162617.6213@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:

>	Or back on welfare, sucking from the GNP.  On Discovery or 
>something I recently watched a show on the doleing out of smack 
>methadone and coke to junkies in England, and I believe it had some
>of the same footage as the 60 min show.  What 60 min lacked however,

The British policy of giving drugs to junkies is 'presented' as a way
of helping drug users. I don't think helping the junkies has anything to
do with it. It's a way of isolating and containing them. They are written
off and disposed of in the cheapest way (legally) possible. The benefit
to society is that the addiction is contained. Since they get the drugs
legally there is no market for illegal drugs and supposedly the supply
dries up, making this (theoretically at least) the last 'generation'
of these addicts. Not a bad idea really, but I hate the altruistic 
bullshit that they try to cloak it in.


(all IMO of course)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: "U.S. Drug Laws Clash With Somali Tradition"
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:16:21 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <Fu4kwB1w165w@qed.cts.com> marsthom@qed.cts.com (Mark Thompson) writes:
>If Khat is illegal in the US, it's a stupidly xenophobic policy: 
>criminalizing Khat while allowing 75mg tablets of purified ephedrine to 
>be sold over the counter with no age limit doesn't make much sense.
>It would be like making coffee beans illegal while No-Doz was still
>promoted on national television.
	Welcome to AmeriKa and its War on Some Drugs, Rip.  Whew, glad
	you woke up when you did.  Twenty years of snoring is hard to take. ;-)
	I don't mean to be rude but you mean it just dawned on you that
	the WOSD is a cultural war?  Didn't the fact that a relatively
	mild and non-toxic drug like Marijuana is illegal and alcohol
	with its well known toxicity is legal tell you anything before
	khat came along?
	


						;-)

						smg


Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca (Bill Garland)
Subject: Give me steak or give me death!
Followup-To: alt.drugs
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:37:15 GMT

In article <62937@mimsy.umd.edu>, tms@cs.umd.edu Tom not Swift writes:
> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>>Who said anything about paying them? No, I wouldn't starve them. However,
>>a very bland vegetarian diet would probably do wonders at gaining their
>>cooperation.
> 
>      AHEM!
> 
>      Something wrong with a vegetarian diet? B->

Yes. There is just not enough meat in it. 8^)  ho ho ho
-- 
|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| If we had an index file, we could   | In fact, except for protecting |
| look it up in the index file under  | individual rights, no valid    |
| "Index File".                       | reason for government exists." |
|           -- Tegan in "Castrovalva" |      ... Dr. Frank Wallace     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Bill Garland = bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca |Commercial : Send me your money.|
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.activism,alt.restaurants,rec.food.restaurants
From: mjsst@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (mark.j.schiff)
Subject: NJ Diners - Anti tobacco
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 17:17:06 GMT
Followup-To: floyd!mjs


Subject: Eating out LAWs - Anti tobacco
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.activism,alt.restaurants,rec.food.restaurants
Path: cbnewsj!att-out!cbnewsh!ekb
	From: ekb@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (eric.kenneth.bustad)
	Newsgroups: misc.wanted,alt.activism,alt.activism.d,nj.wanted,alt.restaurants,rec.food.restaurants
	Subject: Re: New Jersey restaurants laws need changing - Anti-tobacco
	Date: 10 Dec 92 03:18:29 GMT
	Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ, USA
	
	Mark,
	
	If you are really so offended by second-hand smoke in NJ diners, I suggest
	that you complain to the manager and then walk out.  If enough people do
	that then some diners will go smoke-free, or at least install some effective
	ventilation equipment.

	I oppose any law requiring this.  There are too many laws telling people
	how to run their lives in this over-regulated state as it is.

	= Eric Bustad, Norwegian bachelor programmer (a non-smoker)

********************************************************************************

 Yes, I agree with the "too many laws" part, we only need one law reguarding
 smoking:

 No smoking in public or private where secondary smoke in any amount
 can be inhaled by humans or animals (with the exception of certain
 insects, since nicotine is an insecticide).


 Mark Schiff, American ASEE, BSEE and BMF (an X-smoker anti-smoker)
From: nick@gepard.msk.su (Ovcharenko Nickolay Yurievich)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: BEE VEDOM: Use in pharmacology? Information needed.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 15:36:25 +0200
Distribution: world
Organization: GEPARD, Ltd
Reply-To: nick@gepard.msk.su

Dear gentlemen!
Here in Russia we are going to produce bee vedom. Would you help us in finding
medical or pharmacological centers interested in long-time cooperation. If
scientists or other specialists will contact with us, it will be great.
     Sincerely  Nickolay Ovcharenko
     nick@gepard.msk.su
     fax (095)-135-70-30


Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Re: Drug Brain Mystery Unlocked
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 00:01:01 GMT

FLASH!!! The DEA has outlawed Amandanide. The FBI has declared that
anyone producing Amandanide anywhere in the world is subject to
kidnapping and return to the U.S. to stand trial for drug trafficking.
The CIA has suddenly set up a new chemical factory just outside of
Langley, VA. for an unspecified purpose. Stay Tuned for further
developments.
-- 
Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
 
                        Happy Holidays to ALL!!!
From: kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: USA Today blip (or this ain't Russia, is it?)
Date: 22 Dec 1992 18:51:08 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: questor.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec22.110624.2982@cnsvax.uwec.edu> pfotenjr@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>from USA Today, 22 Dec.,'92 (reprinted w/o permission):
>
>
>	"CRIME BARRICADE:  Residents of a crime-plagued section
>	 of Lawrence, Mass., were issued passes and required to
>	 travel through a police checkpoint to get home.  Police
>	 said the tactic will help stop drug dealing to buyers 
>	 from the suburbs.  License-plate numbers of cars entering 
>	 the area were recorded and letters to be sent to the
>	 owners."
>

I live in MA and heard the run down on this on the radio this
morning.  According to what the Lawrence police chief is saying, it's
not quite as bad as this USA Today 'print bite' makes it out to be.

Basically what the policy entails is as follows.  They are very
briefly stopping cars driving into a four or five block area of the
town.  They inform the drivers/passengers that they are entering a
high crime area.  They say that if the occupents of the vehicle are in
area for legitimate reasons, that police have been stationed in the
area to protect them.  They also warn the occupants of the vehicle
that should they be there for some illegal purpose, that the area is
closely observed by police so they have a good chance of getting
caught.  They are not arresting anyone or searching any cars going
into the area.  It seems to more of a make the police visible type of
operation, albiet an intrusive make the police visible operation.

The reaction to the policy is mixed.  Some like the policy because they
feel the are safer with the police there.  Others feel that the police
presence is too intrusive in normal activities.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Maybe he's just a little insane, like painters or composers."
							-Miracle on 34th Street
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: Re: Danger of cocaine questioned by WHO researcher
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:30:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.172231.1@csc.canterbury.ac.nz>, civl097@csc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:
>From the Christchurch "Press", 24 December 1992
>
>Cocaine is not as addictive or harmful as is widely believed according to a
>World Health Organisation (WHO) expert planning the first international study
>of the drug.
>Recent studies in Amsterdam and Toronto found only five to 10 percent of the 
>people who used cocaine more than once became regular users, Dr Andrew Ball
>said.
>Dr Ball, of the WHO's programme on substance abuse in Geneva, said these 
>findings contradicted the popular perception that people lost control when 
>using cocaine.
>"It really does question the myth around cocaine being a very addictive drug."
>he said.

From my own observation, a higher proportion of cocaine users "kick the
habit" than users of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana.  But what does this
mean?  Is it less addictive?  I doubt it.  

The main difference I can see is that cocaine is much more expensive.  With
alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana, $5 will buy you (at least) good evening's
supply.  $5 worth of cocaine is a small rock of crack, which will last you
fifteen minutes if you're lucky.

So the user has more incentive to not use cocaine.  I guess the artificial
price supports (WoD) have at least some effect.  On the other hand, demand
elasticity does say something about how addictive a drug is.  

>Little was known about the effects of cocaine globally as most information 
>came from the United States which had a different problem to most other 
>countries.

"A different problem" -- hee-hee.  Religious zealots and paternalistic
liberals who feel it's their duty to control everybody.  Are there really
less of them in the rest of the world, or are they just less powerful?

>2. With views like this, I don't think Dr Ball will last long with the UN.

He definitely wouldn't get his study funded in the US.

Keith Lewis             klewis@mitre.org          "Mr. Cheap"
I don't dance to music; music dances to me.  Email me for my PGP key.
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
From: aankrom@nyx.cs.du.edu (Anthony Ankrom)
Subject: Re: Frying one's brain / DMT
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 03:15:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.185650.1256@burrhus.harvard.edu> glazier@isr.harvar
.edu (Andrew Baker Glazier) writes:
>Personally,  I'd never heard of DMT before reading about it here, but it
s
>getting to be really annoying. Every post on it contradicts the one befo
e
>it, especially on the issue of its legality. I would appreciate some
>attribution of sources for this info.
>
>I would also like to know (and again, don't bother posting if you can't
>attribute; there are too many ULs as is) whether it is true that lysergi

>drugs (ie manufactured LSD, shrooms, MG seeds) have a permanent (which i

>not to say negative) effect on brain activity, and whether the chemical
>remains in one's system or is eventually dispelled
>-- 
>"A horse! A horse! Somebody give me a horse, man, because|glazier@ 
>I come to bury this dirtball, not to praise him. Whaddya |harvard.isr.ed

>think I am? Whether it's nobler for the mind to make people suffer with 
ll
>these totally outrageous arrows arrows for a fortune, or what!" -- D.R.


 Appropriate attribution to any statements on this topic may be next to
impossible. Indeed there are myriad studies done on tryptamines. From what
I have read (> 100 articles) on the topic of tryptamines, no report has
mentioned any neurotoxic effects, but (please forgive lack of attribution)
I have read that 4,7- and 5,7- dihydroxy and dimethoxy tryptamine
analogues have some neurotoxicity. Just how this is manifested I am not
sure.

St. Anthony

--
          / N \   O                   Mi vsi smo krizhani,
         |   \ |  || Ph               chlani izbrani
         |   | |_O-C-C-OH             mesarskega ceha...
BZ        \ / /      Ph                            aankrom@nyx.cs.du.edu
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:8061 alt.drugs:20217
From: bwhite@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (William E. White )
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Frying one's brain / DMT
Date: 24 Dec 92 15:15:42 GMT
Organization: Ohio University, Computer Science Department

In article <1992Dec24.031547.2742@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> aankrom@nyx.cs.du.edu (Anthony Ankrom) writes:

> Appropriate attribution to any statements on this topic may be next to
>impossible. Indeed there are myriad studies done on tryptamines. From what
>I have read (> 100 articles) on the topic of tryptamines, no report has
>mentioned any neurotoxic effects, but (please forgive lack of attribution)
>I have read that 4,7- and 5,7- dihydroxy and dimethoxy tryptamine
>analogues have some neurotoxicity. Just how this is manifested I am not
>sure.

Well, for starters you might try _Serotonin Neurotoxins_, Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences volume 305.  In particular, there are several articles
on mechanisms of action of 5,6-dihydroxytryptamine and 5,7-dihydroxytryptamine
(never heard of 4,7-DHT).  5,7-DHT is more selective for central 5HT fibers
and has less cytotoxic side effects than 5,6-DHT.  MAO inhibitors prevent
damage from 5,7-DHT.
The article entitled "Mechanism of Action of Dihydroxytryptamines" (p 57),
goes into considerable detail as to why DHTs are neurotoxic.

Incidentally, since dimethyltryptamine is an intermediate in the synthesis
of melatonin, I doubt that DMT itself would be particularly neurotoxic.  Of
course, at the same time, there's probably enough DMT in your pineal gland
at night to get you put in the big house for illegal manufacture of a
hallucinogen. :-)


>St. Anthony


-- 
|  Bill White   +1-614-594-3434     | bwhite@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu             |
|  31 Curran Dr., Athens OH  45701  | bwhite@bigbird.cs.ohiou.edu (alternate) |
|  SCA: Erasmus Marwick, Dernehealde Pursuivant, Dernehealde, Middle Kingdom  |
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.drugs,alt.individualism,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: "U.S. Drug Laws Clash With Somali Tradition"
From: marsthom@qed.cts.com (Mark Thompson)
Date: 30 Dec 92 07:26:14 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.drugs
Organization: The QED BBS, Lakewood CA

[Various items about the Qat leaf (aka "Khat") being illegal...]
 
It's not clear to me from the available news quotes that the US
force in Somalia intends to confiscate Qat posessed by Somalis.

The phrase "Qat is contraband and will be confiscated" could indicate 
that Qat is only contraband when it's in the posession of US troops.

Otherwise the US would be claiming extraterritoriality, something that 
went out with British policy in China shortly after the Opium Wars,
and is considered to be a major violation of sovereignty and 
international law.

What may be going on is that the US military doesn't want soldiers 
returning to the US with a taste for Khat.

This is pretty strange, since you can buy the purified active alkaloid 
that's present in Khat, Ephedrine, over the counter in most truck stops
and gas station mini markets along the interstate highways in the 
Southwestern US, as well as mail order ephedrine tablets through
ads in nationally published magazines.

It's ostensibly marketed as a bronchodilator, but the packaging and 
tablet shape make it blatantly obvious that it's being marketed as
a stimulant: the tablets are look-alikes for the white-cross form of
Benzedrine or "whites" that were once popular with truck drivers.

I've also heard that Khat leaves become inactive when dried. This was 
mentioned in an article I read several years ago discussing the use of 
Khat in Yemen - it was mentioned in passing that Khat had no value as
an item of export because it had to be chewed fresh.

There's also another ephedrine-containing plant, Ma Huang or Ephedra
sinensis, that is active when dried. Ma Huang is offered for sale in 
health food stores and mini markets in California as an herbal pep 
tablet. "Mormon Tea" is another species of Ephedra that grows in the
United States and is also used as an herbal tea.


If Khat is illegal in the US, it's a stupidly xenophobic policy: 
criminalizing Khat while allowing 75mg tablets of purified ephedrine to 
be sold over the counter with no age limit doesn't make much sense.
It would be like making coffee beans illegal while No-Doz was still
promoted on national television.
From: machman@hardy.u.washington.edu (The Machman)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Bill's Billy, Roger (was Re: Some anonymous posts)
Date: 31 Dec 1992 19:13:47 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.u.washington.edu

n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:

>homer@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Homer Smith) writes:
>
>>     Given the drug for free, they again regained their self respect,
>>GOT BACK TO FUCKING WORK ADDING TO THE GNP RATHER THAN DETRACTING FROM
>>IT, were not tempted to over do the drug to distraction because
>>were not charging themselves up with a secret shameful life, and
>>they could talk openly with others like them about their problem.
>
>	Or back on welfare, sucking from the GNP.  On Discovery or 
>something I recently watched a show on the doleing out of smack 
>methadone and coke to junkies in England, and I believe it had some
>of the same footage as the 60 min show.  What 60 min lacked however,
>as it would have been found distasteful to their vewiers, I imagine,
>was an interview with a family on welfare and smack.  They picked up
>both their drugs and their money courtesy of the English taxpayer, and
>there was a short segment of them in their welfare complex with their
>children in the backround and gross looking ma and pa talking about how 
>they haven't worked in years.    Free rent, free money, free smack -why 
>should they?

So if the drugs weren't free or weren't legal, these people wouldn't
be on welfare?  Non sequitur.  Free drugs for maintaining habits means
that addicts' money gets spent presumably on legal goods, and doesn't 
go to the black market.  That's as good an idea as welfare reform is.

-- 
 /'''   The Machman     machman@milton.u.washington.edu    david c carroll
 c-OO                                                                      
    \                     "Big Science.  Hallelujah"
   -