HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maxwell@deep-13.gizmo.com
Subject: a W.F.Buckley qoute pointer
Organization: Gizmonics Institute Inc.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:14:47 GMT
X-Posted-From: vango.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

I found the following quote in a net.backwater.  Thought you'd like the 
pointer.  Original poster's identity deleted as a courtesy.

"As for drug proscription, I don't think it's possible except by
inaugurating a society in which we wouldn't want to live.  Legalize
drugs for those over 21, and execute anyone convicted of selling
drugs to a minor.  That will leave us with about $25 billion per
year to spend on therapy and education and will reduce the crime
rate overnight by more than 50 per cent".
- William F. Buckley, "National Review" magazine, Dec. 28, 1992, p 55



14-days.max

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: gambrose@engr.UVic.CA (Gene  Ambrose)
Subject: lsd
Reply-To: gambrose@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 01:00:11 GMT

i think the popularity of acid is caused by its low price.  For less than the price
of a sixpack of beer or a joint you can get a double of acid which has an effect greater than the other two combined.  

acid is $5 a double here.  How much is it in the states?  

gene
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Drug Prices (was: What's happening to George Bush?)
Date: 13 Jan 93 02:54:34 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <1993Jan12.094736.17091@cbnewse.cb.att.com> doctor1@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.b.hailey) writes:
>
>A study in Florida a couple years ago looked at a year's worth of Floridians
>sent to jail for drug prohibition violations.  Of these 45,000 people, 88% of
>them had never been arrested for any other crime.  According to the head
>researcher, this study "suggests we are incarcerating people who have not
>committed other crimes and who tend not to commit other crimes".
What study, by whom?

Does anyone publish a newsletter to keep up with the latest drug-related
laws, beatings, killings, and studies exposing the WOD?  It is impossible
to get references to original sources on the network reliably, and printed
material is more convincing anyway.  In this case it could be in one of
the books, but the anti-WOD books are not outstanding literature either.
Can I find this and related material in something that doesn't look like
it was produced by a bunch of druggies?

	 George Tucker        tucker@shiva.hac.com
	Signature line awaiting FDA approval.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: lintz@dori.cis.udel.edu (Brian Lintz)
Subject: Re: 48 Hours: LSD Returns
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:37:39 GMT

In article <24566@alice.att.com> garry@alice.UUCP () writes:
>
>Also, they talked to one doctor who treats people with
>"Post Hallucinogenic Visual Disorder", or something like that.
>He claims these folks live with continuous (not flashbacks)
>hallucinations from years of LSD use.

I wouldn't be too surprised if something like this is true. The guy they
interviewed that he had it, said he took LSD 500 times over 4 years.
Think about that: that's 125 times a year which averages slightly over twice
a week, for a period of 4 years.

Given the fact that too much WATER can do damage to your body, I'm not
surprised that the guy had suffered some side effects. Of course the doctor
claimed it could happen if someone only tried it once, but IMO, this is 
false.

Brian Lintz
lintz@udel.edu
From: nick@gepard.msk.su (Ovcharenko Nickolay Yurievich)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: BEE VENOM If you need it for pharmacology,drugs and cure.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 15:11:52 +0200
Distribution: world
Organization: GEPARD, Ltd
Reply-To: nick@gepard.msk.su

Hello!
  If you know who is interested in bee venom for pharmacology, drugs
and cure, call us. May be you know who is dealing with bee venom in science.
Any information is helpful. Thank you. Sincerely Nick Ovcharenko
                                                 Moscow Russia
                                                 nick@gepard.msk.su
                                               fax  (095)-135-7030 for Gepard


Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:8109 misc.legal:22156
From: dreitman@oregon.uoregon.edu (Daniel R. Reitman, Attorney to Be)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Oppose the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Date: 7 Jan 1993 13:53 PST
Organization: University of Oregon
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: oregon.uoregon.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <merlyn.726359537@digibd>,
 merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) writes...
>Similar laws [to the Oregon peyote statute] could outlaw kosher butchery, or 
-male & female circumcision
>(I think both are barbaric, and very nearly within the "compelling state
>interest" scope, but people would do these things to their children
>even if illegal, so I'd go with simply arguing against it, and allowing
>children to sue their parents over it).

I am a vegetarian, but I would like to point out that Kosher butchering is not
necessarily "barbaric".  The purpose of Kashrut (Kosher practices) are ritual
cleanliness, and most of the practices apparently evolved out of general
Babylonian-era safety concerns.  The ban on pork, for example, avoids
trichomiasis.  As for traditional Kosher slaughtering, the intent is to kill
quickly (by severing a major artery) and remove as much blood (considered
the essence of life and therefore not consumable) as possible from the animal.

							Daniel Reitman
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: 48 Hours: LSD Returns
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 07:58:51 GMT

In article <24566@alice.att.com> garry@alice.UUCP () writes:
}Hi Folks -
}
}Just watched the 48 hours episode on LSD last night, and was curious
}what people thought about it.

I think that at least some of those involved with field acquisition of
video for it are liars.  I was at the rave they had footage from, and we
asked the crew what they were doing.  They said they were doing a special
on raves, not on LSD, and refused to come by the libertarian table I was
staffing.

Cocaine has been the main focus of drug prohibition enforcement, and most
suburban kids don't use cocaine if they use drugs.  However, suburban
kids are at "risk" of going to rves and doing LSD, so...

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,misc.legal
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: Oppose the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:32:17 GMT

dgross@worf.acs.calpoly.edu (Dave Gross) writes:

>The Supreme Court recently decided that you can't break the law just because
>your religion teaches that it's okay to do so.

[peyote decision omitted]
...

>The drug legalization movement should oppose the Religious Freedom Restoration
>Act.  For a change, the Supreme Court was right about something.  It's a shame
>that nobody noticed.

Sorry Dave, I think you're reading this decision very badly.  I'd say the
SC ruling significantly weakened first amendment protections by allowing
laws to restrict religious practices without a compelling state interest.
This puts religious practices at about the same level of protection as
other non-first amendment practices; it should have at least as much
protection as speech, and not be restricted at some politico's whim.

The peyote decision could easily be used to pass laws forbidding minors
from being served alcohol in public under any circumstances, thereby
making it impossible for Catholic children to receive communion wine
(and no, not all Catholics think a nonalcoholic drink is an acceptable
substitute).

Santerians in Florida are in danger of having their animal-sacrifice
religion outlawed, because the town has made it illegal to pray over
an animal before killing it (but you can pray over it after killing
it; saying grace is still legal).  Since hunting is still legal in this
area, we have the absurd situation where it's illegal to kill an animal
for religious purposes, but OK to kill it for the entertainment value.

Similar laws could outlaw kosher butchery, or male & female circumcision
(I think both are barbaric, and very nearly within the "compelling state
interest" scope, but people would do these things to their children
even if illegal, so I'd go with simply arguing against it, and allowing
children to sue their parents over it).

This won't make it legal for e.g. people to kill other people for
religious reasons; such laws easily pass the older "compelling state interest"
test.  Unfortunately, without the RFR act, the new test (I forget what it
is, but it seems to come down to "anything the legistlature thinks is a
good idea") will allow almost any restrictions on religious practices.
I think first amendment rights should be much harder to restrict.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: km9985@sarah.albany.edu (MADIGAN KEVIN M)
Subject: Re: 48 Hours: LSD Returns
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 17:08:58 GMT

In article <24566@alice.att.com> garry@alice.UUCP () writes:
>
> (bunch of stuff deleted)
>

>So, what gives?  I was under the impression that research had found
>no real damaging side effects from LSD.  Would those of you with access
>to the facts care to comment?


I am under the same impression. Please post some facts.

Kevin

Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: 48 Hours: LSD Returns
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 21:03:06 GMT

In <24566@alice.att.com> garry@alice.att.com (garry hodgson) writes:

>They did let some BS sneak through, though, like "3 out of every
>hundred" people who use LSD are likely to suffer serious psychological
>damage.  Seems like there'd be a whole lot more f*cked up people
>out there if that was the case.  They also treated this whole
>thing as a dramatic upsurge.  I was under the impression that
>LSD use has been relatively constant for years, and is only
>periodically rediscovered by the media.  Facts, anyone?

Not a dramatic upsurge, but there has been an increase in LSD usage because
nowadays, because of its compact nature and general purity and safety, it's
easier to get and cheaper than marijuana and cocaine in most areas I'm
familiar with.  Some medical research has suggested that while LSD cannot
cause psychological illnesses, it can be the triggering agent in many
people who have tendencies towards some conditions.  Sorry, I don't have
references on me at the moment....anyone is welcome to correct me.


>Also, they talked to one doctor who treats people with
>"Post Hallucinogenic Visual Disorder", or something like that.
>He claims these folks live with continuous (not flashbacks)
>hallucinations from years of LSD use.

I could see some truth in this.  Though I've only tripped a few times, I
can notice very subtle visual distortions at times, especially when I'm
tired.  However, it's unclear as to whether this was actually caused by the
LSD, or if LSD use simply called my attention to a phenomenon that was
already there but previously unnoticed.


>So, what gives?  I was under the impression that research had found
>no real damaging side effects from LSD.  Would those of you with access
>to the facts care to comment?

I don't think there's any real physical damage, if that's what you mean.
However, we're talking about brain chemistry here, and it seems possible
that one's brain chemical balance might not completely return to its
pre-psychedelic state.  However, I don't think LSD is the only agent that
you could say that about.

-- 
*davE*   Making the world safe for intelligent dance music.  dave@bradley.edu.
########## David L. Vessell -- Bradley University Computing Services #########
Your shame is neverending. Just one psychological drama after another.-Erasure
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,misc.legal
From: merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy)
Subject: Re: Oppose the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Organization: DigiBoard, Incorporated, Eden Prairie,MN
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:13:37 GMT

dreitman@oregon.uoregon.edu (Daniel R. Reitman, Attorney to Be) writes:
>In article <merlyn.726359537@digibd>,
> merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) writes...
>>Similar laws [to the Oregon peyote statute] could outlaw kosher butchery, or 
>-male & female circumcision
>>(I think both are barbaric>..

>I am a vegetarian, but I would like to point out that Kosher butchering is not
>necessarily "barbaric"....

I was actually referring to (male) & (female) circumcision, not (kosher
butchering) and (male and female circumcision), when I referred to "both".
"Barbaric" isn't a precise term, anyway; I'm sure there are people who
consider almost anything barbaric, and other people who find the same
act non-barbaric.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Xref: sparky talk.politics.drugs:8099 misc.legal:22100
From: pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell)
Subject: Re: Oppose the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:22:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan06.211446.102016@zeus.calpoly.edu> dgross@worf.acs.calpoly.edu (Dave Gross) writes:
>The usual government way of granting exceptions to the law for religious
>groups is to say that only certain, well-established religious groups (with
>certain, well-established law-breaking traditions) may break the law.  This
>puts the government in the shady (and, frankly, unconstitutional -- check your
>First Amendment) business of establishing the two categories of official and
>unofficial religions, and of official and unofficial religious practices.

They already have. See the various parts of the Social Security Insurance
statutes.

Social Security Exemption Form 4361 is entitled "Application for Exemption
From Self-Employment Tax for Use by Ministers, Members of Religious Orders
and Christian Science Practicioners". Another one is Form 4029, "Application
for Exemption from Tax on Self-Employment Income and Waiver of Benefits".

Okay, the current hoops that one must jump through amount to the following:

Either
   (1) Get a government job or
   (2) Assure the IRS that your belief system opposes both the means and
       the ends of the social security system, AND meet the following
       additional criteria:
       (a) A person who is not subject to social security taxes before 1969
       (b) Who filed the IRS exemption form before 1969
       (c) Be a member of an IRS "recognized religious sect having
           established teachings or doctrine opposing social security
           benefits"
       (d) Whose religious organization provides for its members and has
           done so for a period of time in the past (subject to the
           specifications and satisfaction of the Secretary of the
           Department of Health, Education, and Welfare)
       (e) Whose religious organization has existed "at all times" since
           December 31, 1950.

So, as you can see, the IRS and the Social Security Administration at
least have had vast experience in handling religions and giving them the
blessing and privileges they deem proper.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: jones@ori.cis.udel.edu (Mark Jones)
Subject: Italy Decriminalizes Some Drugs
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:12:36 GMT

I just caught a little blurb on NPR's "marketplace" that
Italy has just decriminalized a number of previously less-legal
drugs including marijuana and cocaine.  The reason given was along
the pragmatic lines that the cure was worse than the disease.

I hope to find more detailed descriptions later (hopefully from
more prominent news services)!


- Mark Jones                                 Usenet: jones@udel.edu

   He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of
   officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
     --The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America


Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: fasano@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (Matthew John Fasano)
Subject: CBS LSD show
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: fasano@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: IUCF
Distribution:  world
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:34:14 GMT

	I saw "48 Hours"  on CBS last night.  It was the rising use
of LSD by our impresionable youth.  they refered to a person who had
after taking LSD many times had parinoia and depresion.  The Dr. they
were interviewing said that he thought people were following him.  I 
don't think this is unwarented; He was probably followed by a couple 
of DEA spies.
	The tone of the program was that this may be the scourge of 
the ninties the way cocain was in the eighties.  but they did mention 
the unfairness of weighing the packaging the LSD is in.  There were a
couple of parents who used LSD in the sixties interviewed.  They of course
were saying they couldn't stand it if their babies did drugs.  They set
up a group to spread the word about the dangers of drug use.  There are
far too many concerned parents in this country.
	If use is really rising my guess is that the unavalability  
and the high cost of pot is the reason.  They didn't mention that 
posability.
From: garry@alice.att.com (garry hodgson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
Subject: 48 Hours: LSD Returns
Summary: What did y'all think?
Date: 7 Jan 93 15:51:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24566
Reply-To: garry@alice.UUCP ()
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs

Hi Folks -

Just watched the 48 hours episode on LSD last night, and was curious
what people thought about it.  I thought they did a better job than
I expected, pointing out therapeutic uses and debunking some of
the bogus claims about LSD (chromosome damage, etc.)  They even avoided
spreading the Mickey Mouse Tatoo urban myths.

They did let some BS sneak through, though, like "3 out of every
hundred" people who use LSD are likely to suffer serious psychological
damage.  Seems like there'd be a whole lot more f*cked up people
out there if that was the case.  They also treated this whole
thing as a dramatic upsurge.  I was under the impression that
LSD use has been relatively constant for years, and is only
periodically rediscovered by the media.  Facts, anyone?

Also, they talked to one doctor who treats people with
"Post Hallucinogenic Visual Disorder", or something like that.
He claims these folks live with continuous (not flashbacks)
hallucinations from years of LSD use.

So, what gives?  I was under the impression that research had found
no real damaging side effects from LSD.  Would those of you with access
to the facts care to comment?

-- 
Garry Hodgson			A slow winter day
AT&T Bell Labs			A night like forever
garry@alice.att.com		Sink like a stone
att!alice!garry			Float like a feather
Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: CBS LSD show
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 21:07:44 GMT

fasano@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (Matthew John Fasano) writes:

>	The tone of the program was that this may be the scourge of 
>the ninties the way cocain was in the eighties.  but they did mention 
>the unfairness of weighing the packaging the LSD is in.  There were a
>couple of parents who used LSD in the sixties interviewed.  They of course
>were saying they couldn't stand it if their babies did drugs.  They set
>up a group to spread the word about the dangers of drug use.  There are
>far too many concerned parents in this country.

I don't think so.  We need concerned parents.  What we need more of, though,
is *informed* concerned parents.  If I were a parent, I'd be concerned
about my child's drug use, but I would be more interested in making sure
they knew the objective facts rather than hand down ultimatums saying
'Don't Do It'.  That would make me a hypocrite, since I myself have not
exactly led a drug free life.  We need to have the same attitude towards
other drugs as we do towards alcohol.  Caution, moderation, and informed
opinion.  We need fewer laws and more responsibility and facts.

>	If use is really rising my guess is that the unavalability  
>and the high cost of pot is the reason.  They didn't mention that 
>posability.

That would be my guess as well.

-- 
*davE*   Making the world safe for intelligent dance music.  dave@bradley.edu.
########## David L. Vessell -- Bradley University Computing Services #########
Your shame is neverending. Just one psychological drama after another.-Erasure
From: jafoust@cco.caltech.edu (Jeffrey Alan Foust)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: NASA Administrator
Date: 11 Jan 1993 00:03:26 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

In article <371010b6b@ofa123.fidonet.org> David.Anderman@ofa123.fidonet.org
pithily writes:
>Bill Nelson? Aaaarrrggghh!

Uh, what exactly does this mean?  Is it "has been named NASA Administrator" or
"will be named NASA Administrator" or "is being considered as a potential NASA
Administrator" or et cetera.  I haven't heard anything about a replacement for
Dan Goldin (although I must admit between X-mas break and a rained-out
observing run at Palomar I may have missed a fair amount of rumor and
scuttlebutt on the issue).

"Inquiring minds want to know!" :-)



-- 
Jeff Foust                        Senior, Geophysics/Planetary Science, Caltech
jafoust@cco.caltech.edu   			   	 jeff@scn1.jpl.nasa.gov
 	  Final score of the Interstellar Space		Deep Space 9
	  Station Championship Softball Game:		Babylon    5
From: prb@access.digex.com (Pat)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.space
Subject: Re: NASA Administrator
Date: 13 Jan 1993 04:39:09 GMT
Organization: UDSI
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <1993Jan11.174333.11027@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain) writes:
>	Following the recent posting I asked my congressman's
>assistant if he knew of any new information as to a possible new
>adminstrator for NASA. His response was that the only two names he has
>seen floated around DC have been Bill Nelson and Sally Ride. He
>specifically had not heard anything new, nor that there was any action
>on replacing Goldin. He said that these have been discussed since the
>election. 
>
>	It sounds like some trial balloons are in the air, likely
>comments or opinions should be directed to the new administration. 
>


THis weeks issue of washington high tech says that there is an
organized campaign to trash Goldin.  Damn shame if true.  he's been
one hell of an administrator, and should be given a real term.
Maybe we should all call around congress and give a vote of support for
goldin.