HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bx461@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Leo J. Mauler)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: [anonymous] Drug Testing -- NEED REFERENCES!
Date: 3 Sep 1992 20:58:05 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


>In an effort to improve attendance, my boss just handed me a
>new directive he intends to implement WRT mandatory drug 
>testing, including measures requiring employees to pay the 
>expense of positive drug tests (both chemical and spectral 
>analysis) out of their own final paychecks.  
>
>I say drug testing as a means to improve attendance is 
>insanity, he doesn't see it that way.  He sees the threat of
>drug testing as his weapon of last resort, I see it as a 
>useless (and expensive) morale-killer, contrary to our goals.
 
Say you're a typical unskilled worker.  You probably have a 
high school education or less, so you are more or less 
dependent on TV and gossip for your news.  You will know a 
great deal about drug hysteria and will probably be affected 
by it.  You will also realize that even being suspected of 
being a drug user or dealer is grounds enough to warrant 
anything from verbal abuse to jail time.
 
Now you discover that your employer is implementing drug 
testing, and you know about the rumors that drug testing can 
give false positives.  Do you want to go to work and risk 
being called a drug user unfairly?  I think not!
 
If you believe that drug tests are accurate, all it takes is 
the first false positive in one of your coworkers, and 
attendance DROPS much like a brick off a ten-story building.
 
The reason drug testing is such a morale-breaker is that it is 
believed as gospel truth even though it fails half the time.  
People aren't going to want to work there if there's regular 
drug testing, because half the time they'll be an accused drug 
user, and most people don't want to put up with that kind of 
pressure.  Those who are drug users will quit right away, and 
you'll scare the rest away in a few weeks to months.  So if 
your intention is to give jobs to people and give them a 
chance to work, instituting drug testing is about the WORST 
thing you can do to accomplish this goal.
-- 
Never do this at home.  Look how easily it killed this sig.
/\  ___/\  ___/\  _____________________________________________
  \/     \/     \/  bx461@cleveland.freenet.edu (Leo J. Mauler)
DISCLAIMER: Everything I say is false, including this sentence.
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:15047 alt.folklore.urban:22112
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Cannibaderm, anyone?
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:17:43 GMT
Followup-To: alt.folklore.urban,alt.drugs
Organization: Western Washington University

phil@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Phil Gustafson) writes:

>(James Douglas Del-Vecchio) writes:
>>Or [marijuana] can be extracted with alcohol and imbibed.  No heating.

>To no good effect, though.  As Freewheeling Franklin sez, "Drinking beer and
>smoking dope at the same time is like pissing into the wind."


Two urban legends in one?
I don't know where you got your information, but it is not correct.

	1) Dope + alcohol will get the drinker/smoker more hammered 
than either one alone.

	2) THC can be extracted from uncooked marijuana using grain 
alcohol, which can be injested for full effect, as from mj cooked
into food.

Jim Del Vecchio
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: methamphetamine synthesis
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 19:23:05 GMT
Distribution: alt.drugs
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Keywords: methanphetamine speed
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 <jimbo.715627866@craft.camp.clarkson.edu> jimbo@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (James Peploski) writes:
>I am a chemistry faculty member who was presented with an interesting
>problem.  It seems that a local individual was arrested and charged
>with making methamphetamine. 
	I urge you to reconsider.  Do not cooperate with the WOD.
	It is not in your long term interests nor the long term
	interests of America.  The WOD is fast becoming an excuse 
	to destroy the constitution.  When you cooperate with
	the authorities on this you are contributing to the 
	destruction of our constitution.  Read this notesfile
	for a while.  Read about civil forfeiture and how it is
	used to do an end run around the constitution.  Read about
	Volusia county Florida.  Read about how totally innocent 
	peopl are robbed of their money by county sheriffs using the WOD 
	to mask racism.  Read about how race figures in so called
	"drug runner" profiles.  Read about how the WOD is being used
	to declare virtual free-fire zones in minority areas.
	(Read about Tyler Texas).  Read about how the WOD is being
	used to justify the construction of many more prison cells
	and "boot camps".  Don't wait until the American Gulag
	is complete before you do your part to prevent its
	birth.	Read about how irrational it is to deny AIDS patients the
	use of the only drug that helps the nausea (marijuana). 
	Read about how our government is manipulating people's 
	fear of drug crime to take away the freedoms that generations
	of Americans have died to protect.  

	Read about it and think about it and then just say no.
	Don't let yourself be sucked into the maelstrom of the
	WOD because it is an "interesting problem".  Producing a
	nuclear weapon would be an interesting problem.  Would you
	do it for Muammar Ghaddafi?  If good people don't say no
	then evil will flourish and we will all suffer.  Think
	carefully about how cooperating with the authorities in
	Germany during the 30's may have seemed the right thing to
	do.  Think about how cooperating with the WOD today may
	have similarly bad repercussions.  Think about it please.
	For America's sake.  And when you have thought it out
	and done your homework tell them you won't help them and then 
	tell them why.  And then tell your neighbors and friends.


>I recall that some publications such as The Anarchists Cookbook may in 
>fact contain fairly detailed  procedures for such for the synthesis of 
>illegal substances.  
	Oops. You said the magic words.  "Pure Horse. Flame him Danno." ;-)
	Seriously, the Anarchist's Cookbook has been thoroughly 
	debunked in this forum.  I wouldn't use that as a reference if
	I were you.


						smg


Newsgroups: alt.drugs,soc.culture.usa,talk.politics.drugs
From: chem91@Rosie.UH.EDU ("Bill Harrison (713)-743-2789")
Subject: Re: Satanic Crime units?? Re: WoD: Frontline Report
Reply-To: chem91@Rosie.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:42:06 GMT

[...]
>>maybe people are sensing a loss of support for the WoD and
>>looking for different work. similar to how mj replaced alcohol
>>as the demon target. so the final target of demonization in amerika
>>may be The Demon Himself. that could be interesting.
>>the main political issue of 2000: "are you pro or anti Satan?"
>
>	I'm pro-God, and I don't think you should be allowed to discuss
>the merits or even the alternative of satan-loving on a network that is
>partially government-funded.
>
>-Peter
>
>pfcouvar@amhux1.amherst.edu


I thought that religion and government were constitutionally *separate*??
After the fascist, oops family values convention you do wonder, though.

Bill (not a satanist or a theist)


+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\               /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
| Bill Harrison,            \             /       "Be as radical as... |
| University of Houston, TX  >-----------<         reality itself"     |
| CHEM91@JETSON.BITNET      /             \                V. I. Lenin |
+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/               \~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~+
From: u8951608@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: News item/LSD dosing
Date: 28 Aug 92 10:24:18 GMT
Organization: University of New South Wales

In article <2A9BCB51.11616@ics.uci.edu>, honig@aster.ics.uci.edu (David A. Honig) writes:
> 
>  tvh@sandman.EBay.Sun.COM writes:
>>
>>Really, stupid! In the next six month many emergency
>>situations could arise where you will be required to be your best.
>>If per chance you get dosed just before hand ...
>>
>>Things go best with a little planning!
>>
>>Trust me on this.
>>
> 
> On the other hand, I'd really like to have a pipefull of DMT in a glass case on
> my wall for the Big One (that's a seismic disturbance to all you inlanders...)
> 
> dh

What a senseless waste! How would you tell the effects of the earthquake
from the effects of the DMT?

Jeremy
jeremy@rsc3.anu.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.politics.marrou,talk.politics.drugs
From: bowman@reed.edu (Eric Bowman (bobo))
Subject: Re: Crime and drug legalization
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:54:09 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.231126.27117@adobe.com> mmwang@adobe.com (Michael Wang) writes:
>In article <1992Sep1.043801.19904@access.digex.com> backpack@access.digex.com (Stuart Reges) writes:
>>I don't believe that smoking and tattoos cause people to become criminals.
>>Similarly, if we're going to outlaw drugs that cause people to become violent,
>>we should outlaw alcohol along with the other "violent" drugs and legalize the
>>"peaceful" (loving?)  drugs like marijuana, shrooms, LSD, ecstasy, MDA, etc.
>>Can't you see it now?  The Partnership for a VIOLENT-Drug Free America does a
>>commercial showing the violent, antisocial behavior of misfits who smoke
>>crack, shoot up heroin, or drink alcohol, and then they show the happy, loving
>>behavior of those who smoke pot, drop acid, and rave on ecstasy.

>One small correction -- heroin tends to make the user less aggressive,
>not more.

True, but the nasty affects of being-an-addict-without-a-source *has* been
known to make people violent.

later,
bobo
bowman@reed.edu
George Clinton in '92
From: tms@cs.umd.edu (Tom Swiss (not Swift, not Suiss, Swiss!))
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Cannibaderm, anyone?
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:27:22 GMT
Organization: The Reality Liberation Front (pixels to the people!)

gaspar@inf.ethz.ch (gaspo) writes:
>
>well, personally speaking, its one or the other.  I don't drink when I
>toke, and I don't toke when I drink.  
>
>reasoning: when tokin, the alcohol seems more powerfull, the hangover 
>is worse, and none of the "beneficial" effects of booze really 
>work (lowered inhibitions, relaxation).  Basically, you get the 
>hang-over without the high. 

     Interesting. My "friend" who does these things (I, of course, would
never, ever, ever, use an illegal drug...) reports that he doesn't
get much of an enjoyable effect from cannabis unless he drinks at least
a small amount of alcohol, at least one beer or glass of wine.

===============================================================================
Tom Swiss/tms@flubber.cs.umd.edu| "Born to die" | Keep your laws off my brain!
     "What's so funny 'bout peace, love and understanding?" - Nick Lowe 
          This is a .signature antibody. Vaccinate your .sig!
"Duty then is the sublimest word in the English language.  You should do your
 duty in all things.  You can never do more, you should never wish to do less."
 -- General Robert E. Lee
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,soc.culture.usa,talk.politics.drugs
From: morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan)
Subject: Re: USEnet and US gov. property (was Re: Satanic Crime)
    <1992Aug27.195505.265@coli.uni-sb.de> 
    <1992Aug27.214513.30237@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:31:52 GMT
Organization: The Puzzle Palace, UKentucky

kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>
>Just as religious (and antireligious) speech is allowed on sidewalks
>and in parks, it is allowed in other government-owned free speech
>forums (such as Netnews facilities at a state university).
>

This is correct AS LONG AS that particular topic has been 'enabled for
discussion', i.e. if that newsgroup has been established/carried.

The maintainers of a 'limited public forum', such as Netnews, have the
right to determine the topics which will be open to discussion.  Within
the Netnews environment, this determination is usually executed through
the newsgroup mechanism.  If the owners of a particular forum wish to
'enable' the discussion of, say, abortion, they can carry the talk.abortion
newsgroup.  If the owners choose not to enable such discussion, they won't
carry the newsgroup.

Please note that, once a given forum is opened to a particular topic, the
owners cannot merely 'shut it down'.  Once a given forum is opened to a
topic, the owners have no control over the discussion; free speech rights
prevail within the forum.

In short:
	If a given site doesn't support a particular discussion, you do not
	have the right to initiate such a discussion.  As the owners of the
	forum, they have the right to determine which topics will be discussed.

	If, however, the site HAS supported a particular discussion, they do
	not have the right to arbitrarily stop the discussion. (i.e., they
	can't just yank the newsgroup from circulation.)

Carl and I came to agreement on this particular point over a year ago; I'm 
sure he can provide a pointer to the relevant Supreme Court ruling on "limited
public forums".


-- 
MORGAN@UKCC         |       Wes Morgan       |        ...!ukma!ukecc!morgan 
morgan@ms.uky.edu   | Engineering  Computing |   morgan@wuarchive.wustl.edu
morgan@engr.uky.edu | University of Kentucky | JWMorgan@dockmaster.ncsc.mil
  Mailing list for AT&T StarServer S/E  - starserver-request@engr.uky.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: Effadrine hydrochloride
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:01:46 GMT

In article <azdn23n.despair@netcom.com> despair@netcom.com (Scott Hanson) writes:
>The research I did indicated bronchial and sinus trouble were the main hazards.
>Apparently the blood vessels become permanently enlarged rather quickly.
>Any conclusive studies would be welcome, my information was basically folklore.

_TOPICAL_ decongestants (nasal sprays and drops) can cause chronic nasal
stuffiness if they're used to excess over a period of time.  Oral decongestants
and bronchodilators do not have this side effect.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
From: carnes@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Richard Carnes)
Subject: Re: Definition of an addict.
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:16:50 GMT

mazur@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur) writes:

>There's a book called "The Truth About Addiction and Recovery" and
>its author's (whose name escapes me) premise is that most people
>simply outgrow their addictions.

There is plenty of evidence in the research literature that many,
perhaps most people with addictions outgrow their problem without
treatment (it's called "maturing out", originally a street term).  For
example:

Barry Tuchfeld calls untreated but recovered alcoholics the "silent
majority" in "Spontaneous remission in alcoholics," _Journal of
Studies on Alcohol_ 42 (1981): 626-41.  Problem drinkers who recover
without treatment are less visible to the public than those who
recover through AA and other programs.

George Vaillant's study _The Natural History of Alcoholism_ found that
very few of the subjects who had overcome a drinking problem had
sought formal treatment.  Vaillant also found that the relapse rate
was *worse* for those who relied on AA than for those who quit on
their own.

D. Cahalan and R. Room, _Problem Drinking Among American Men_ (Rutgers
Center of Alcohol Studies, 1974).  The authors conducted national
surveys and found that the great majority of problem drinkers outgrow
their addiction.

C. Winick, "Maturing out of narcotic addiction", _Social Problems_ 14
(1962): 1-7.  This study found that most young heroin addicts in New
York outgrew their addiction by their mid-thirties.

L.R.H. Drew, "Alcoholism as a self-limiting disease," _Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcohol_ 29 (1968): 956-67.

There is also evidence from common experience.  Smoking is often
considered the hardest addiction to quit.  Compare the number of
people you know who have kicked cigarettes on their own with the
number you know who have quit by means of a treatment program.

Of course there are people who will benefit from an treatment program.
But note how different the research cited above sounds from the
familiar propaganda telling us that everyone with an addiction problem
needs to be in lifelong treatment in order to "arrest" the incurable
"disease".

The research suggests that what enables people to overcome addictions
is more or less what your common sense would suggest: "a strong desire
to change; learning to accept and cope with negative feelings and
experiences; development of enough life resources to facilitate
change; improved work, personal and family dealings; a changed view of
the attractiveness of the addiction brought on by a combination of
maturity, feedback from others, and negative associations with the
addiction in terms of the person's larger values" (Stanton Peele).

Richard Carnes
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: gdm7238@zeus.tamu.edu (MCBRIDE, GARY DEAN)
Subject: Re: Trip tapes (audio) and trading dubs?
Summary: Bauhaus is tops!
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:01:00 GMT

In article <3SEP199210053446@acad3.alaska.edu>, jscsp@acad3.alaska.edu (PARKER CHRIS S) writes...
]In article <Bu0IoA.o5@ais.org>, dc@ais.org (David Daniels) writes...
]> 
]>Anyone interested in trading dubs of your favorite tapes to lie back a smoke
]>a joint to ?  Or maybe just recommend some... 
]>I've got this tape Galaxies, which is just a whole tape of music that is
]>like the music on the 2001/2010 movies... Also I have an entire tape of
]>thunderstorms... Sound kinda dumb at first but it's pretty weird when you're
]>stoned.. Also I have a tape of a couple trip songs (most rap) and some other
]>good songs (rap again)... If ya want any of the above and you have anything
]>you want to trade drop me some mail. 
]>-- 
]>________________________________________________________________________
]>\ E-Mail: dc@ais.org        /\ Comin' from the unpolitically correct    \
]> \__________________________\/\ half of this world refered to as       //
]>                             \_\ The ProjectZ!________________________//
] 
]Go out to your local music store and order _Swing_the_Heartache_ by Bauhaus.
]You'll thank me for it.

In my far from professional opinion ... good trip music is any music you like.
Oh, and avoid songs that have any really strong negative emotional connotation.
Like, the one you played over and over again after your ex-signifigant other
walked out.  Avoid it.  Like the plague.

Gary McBride
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: jah@mits.mdata.fi (Jani A. Heinonen)
Subject: Re: Timothy Leary on Comedy Central
Organization: Microdata International Telecomm Service, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:40:39 GMT

jmolinari@hamp.hampshire.edu writes:

>	Sorry to follow up with something that has nothing to do with the
>subject at hand (drugs; well, not directly anyway), but credit for the song
>"Timothy Leary" belongs to the Moody Blues, not the Beatles.  Of course, I
>could be wrong.  This wouldn't be the first remake in history.

   I don't know anything about that, but credit for the song "Come Together",
which was originally a campaign song for Leary, indeed belongs to The Beatles.
It is the opening track to the 1969 record, Abbey Road.
-- 
Jani Heinonen
jah@mits.mdata.fi

Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: Open container law -- intent (was Re: info on open ...)
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:35:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.081352.13602@genie.slhs.udel.edu> starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>Assume that the cork has been replaced so that its top is flush with that
>of the bottle.  Then it would be hard to prove that it had been opened, since
>checking the cork would require marking it up by opening it once again.  A

Nope.  Legally, once the seal is broken it is "open".  Even if you remove the
seal and never remove the cork, it is "open".

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

    Idiot:  A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human
    affairs has always been dominant and controlling.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: Re: Preparation of cannabis
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:41:03 GMT

In article <kaz.715559527@vincent1.iastate.edu>, kaz@iastate.edu (Jimmy Buffet) writes:
>I just had two questions about things I have heard recently.  They are mainly
>just out of curiosity, because they are both interesting. The first one is that
>hanging plants upside down and injecting them with alcohol will cause the THC to
>be much more "potent".  Is this true?  If so, is it simply hanging it uppside
>and putting some gin in it?

I don't know.  But how would you get the gin in it if it were hanging upside
down?

>The other one, which is something I've heard a long time, is:  Is 7-leaf
>marijauna always a breed of THC rich marijauna, or is it not related?  Thanks!

According to _Marijuana Botany_, hemp will produce more leaflets/cluster as
it gets larger and healthier during the vegetative stage.  The first true
leaves are usually singles, the second 3, then 5, and so on.  9-leaflet and
even 11-leaflet clusters are not uncommon.

In the flowering stage, the number of leaflets/cluster decreases as the
plant puts more energy into buds.

So a seven-leaflet cluster indicates that the plant is reasonably advanced
in its vegetative growth and is ready for flowering.  Actual flowering will
be induced when the days get shorter.

As far as relationship to THC goes, I don't know.  It seems logical that a
healthy plant would produce more THC, but coyote tobacco produces more
nicotine if it is attacked by bugs.

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: alt.drugs,alt.politics.marrou
From: fisherm@infonode.ingr.com (Matthew Fisher)
Subject: Crime and drug legalization
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:38:33 GMT

Hello all,


    I have a question for the Libertarians.  To start off, I am a member of
the party and believe in most Libertarian ideals.  I was reading the party
News this month and came across "In the Aftermath of the LA Riots."  It
is argued that the War on Drugs contributed greatly to the riots.  Further
more the WOD should be halted and drugs made legal.
    I was discussing the ideas in the article with a buddy.  He is totally
against drug legalization.  I, of course, was arguing for legalization.
I gave the usual arguements about a decrease in crime, comparison to alchol,
coherent policy in goverment, etc.  We got off on the decrease in crime 
arguement.  
    He claims that crime will not decrease but will simply shift
in focus.  Crime would shift from drugs to gambling, prostitution or some
new field.  He claims that the people who are in the drug trade are criminals
to the bone and will seek a new field if the drug trade become unprofitable. 
As an example, an under educated, poor, hopeless drug dealer or user from
south central L. A. is not suddenly going take up compter science because drugs 
are legal. He will instead find a new black market to make money in. 
    This is an interesting arguement.  I was unable to refute this arguement.
What is the Libertarian answer to long term crime in the inner cities?


take it easy,
Matthew E Fisher
fisherm@infonode.ingr.com