HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chroma@hoptoad.uucp (Steve Kudlak)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: MDMA alternative?: a rat example
Date: 12 Apr 92 13:59:52 GMT
Reply-To: chroma@toad.com (Steve Kudlak)
Organization: Skyline Genetic Engineering

In article <qmtjkca.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>There has been mention here about an analog act.  Could anyone elaborate?
>Would this neat sounding 3a and 3b be covered?  I mean 3a and 3b don't
>sound very analogous to X to me.
>-- 
>Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007
>
>"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
>                                                    Victoria Roberts


Read PiKHAL .....I suspect DOET...I also suspect one of those
agents might work as a photographic developer. What a neat idea...


				Have fun,
				Sends Steve

Reply to:chroma@toad.com


Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7193 talk.politics.drugs:2700
From: bell@beethoven.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: just a question
Date: 6 Apr 92 06:46:24 GMT
Followup-To: alt.drugs
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

In article <+thjtm=.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>A-fucking-men.  You can't compare different drugs to each other.  Each
>substance needs to be considered in its own right rather than with the
>mindless "a drug is a drug is a drug"  mentality exhibited by both the
>pro and the anti camps.  Only a couple of them even *feel* remotely
>similar. (I'm told.)

Time to be obnoxious to a fellow pro-legalizer...

Certainly,  the psychoactive effects of various drugs are radically
different.  After all,  if everything felt a lot like alcohol,  why would
anyone use any of the illegal drugs?  Obviously,  the difference in
effects is the reason that people use different drugs,  and choose to
use the illegal ones despite their high price.

However,  other than the above observation,  what difference does it make?
All drugs exhibit some tendency to encourage dependence (although some have
a physiological factor that contributes,  while with others it is purely
psychological).  People tend to use the same potency of different drugs
in the same situations.  Most drugs have been associated with health-
related problems in fetuses.  There's a high correlation between use of
one drug and use of others,  and likewise a high correlation between
dependence on one drug and dependence on others.  The problems with
prohibition of one substance and prohibition of another are very similar.

As far as legalization discussions go,  the difference in effects are
to a large extent irrelevant.  T.p.d (and discussion on this thread
in alt.drugs) is talking about legalization.  

>I wish that nonsense could cease.

'Tain't nonsense,  son,  it's a valuable tool for finding and discussing
parallels.

>The incredible amount of bandwidth
>wasted here on the relative whatever of alcohol, mj, nicotine, cocaine,
>lsd, etc (new one, kick-ass) is mind bogling and brain numbing.

No,  you've got it confused.  It's drugs that are "mind bogling and brain
numbing",  I suppose with LSD being mind boggling and cocaine(?) being
mind numbing...

   -Andrew Bell
bell@cs.unc.edu
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7370 talk.politics.drugs:2797
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Update on me [ Stuart Reges ]
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:51:00 GMT
  <1992Apr8.014144.10341@nntp.hut.fi>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>Stuart Reges asked to sign a paper promising not to break loosely
>defined tules again brings to my mind the retraction asked to be
>signed by the surgeon Tomas after the "Prague Spring" in Milan
>Kundera's _The Unbearable Lightness of Being_.  Here's the quotation
>posted earlier on Usenet by someone else:
>
>
>"...In a society run
>by terror, no statements whatsoever can be taken seriously.  They are
>all forced, and it is the duty of every honest man to ignore them..."

You can't compare this to the Stuart Reges case.  Sure, the Czechs
faced arrest and imprisonment for resisting, but a Stanford adminstrator
who put his honor first would suffer the horrors of missing a
mortgage payment on his $800,000 bungalow in Portola Valley.


   Alan T. Furman           |       Vote Libertarian--Marrou/Lord in '92
----------------------------+--------------------------------------------
   atfurman@cup.portal.com  |  Stamp out signature viruses!  Pass it on!
From: cgy@cs.brown.edu (Curtis Yarvin)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Legalization of Drugs: Why Not?
Date: 7 Apr 1992 19:49:00 GMT
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: cslab8f.cs.brown.edu

In article <1992Apr6.163236.2315@news.nd.edu> gsmith@cleveland.next.nd.edu (george smith) writes:

>I think that the concern about addiction that people reluctant to legalize
>so- called hard drugs have is legitimate to some degree, with respect to
>highly addictive drugs such as crack, etc.  

Crack is not addictive.

It's damn habit-forming, but it's not addictive.

c
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: voss.bbs@cybernet.cse.fau.edu
Subject: shrooms...pot and ...(cont)
Organization: Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 19:23:58 GMT

however this does not  apply to cocaine or heroin since these are under
fall under congress'es power to protect general welfare since the 
physically addictive,socially destructive nature of these drugs are known 
even among us who favor legalization of pot and mu
shrooms
From: jsattin@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Justin A Sattin)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: marijuana, alcohol and driving
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:48:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Apr6.175002.26324@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> andersom@spot.Colorado.EDU (Marc Anderson) writes:

>In _Marijuana Medical Papers_, (editted by Tod Mikuriya who occasionally
>posts to the net) there is a study that compared the driving of sober people,
>people who were drunk, and people who were stoned.  People who were drunk,
>of course, scored significantly worse than the other two groups.  People who
>were high drove actually quite well.  (if I remember right, actually BETTER
>than the group of sober drivers, in the first trial.)

I read that study as well, but I remember it a little bit differently:  The
study concluded that people drove progressively worse the more alcohol they 
consumed.  However, it found that while stoned drivers drove somewhat worse
than sober ones, the amount smoked had little effect.  Drivers who only had
one joint didn't drive that much better than those who had three, although
both were a little worse than the sober drivers.

_______________________________________
Justin Alan Sattin
jsattin@eniac.seas.upenn.edu

"Leges Sine Moribus Vanae" - Laws Without Morals Are in Vain
University of Pennsylvania motto (hypocrisy in action).     
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Re: WARNING ! Hot New Drug of Abuse
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 16:34:55 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

The FDA has confiscated oxygen on the grounds that people were taking
it to get high.
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
= Candidate Bush wouldn't recognize principle if he were standing upon it =
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Kesey's back!
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:51:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.=g1jxwj.rcain
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Yes! There were three famous Ralphs.  Ralph Metzner, Ralph Gleason and 
Ralph Barger.  I don't think Sonny came into the situation until La Honda
though. Thanks folks.
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
From: vu0350@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (allen h. lutins)
Subject: Hyperventilating [was: Re: WARNING ! Hot New Drug of Abuse]
Keywords: Fun with fainting
Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 20:02:53 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.160712.27287@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> cmcgav@coos.dartmouth.edu (Christine B. McGavran) writes:

>when i was in middle school my best friend and i experimented with fainting.
>you would hyperventilate until you got very dizzy, and then the other person 
>would hold you against the wall while you held your breath.  in a few 
>seconds you would be on the floor, dreaming away.  you would generally only
>be gone for a few seconds, but in that time you would have the freakiest 
>dreams!  i would wake up and would feel as if hours had gone by.  always 
>wondered if that was bad for me, but it was definitely fun.

...this is common phenomenon.  In his well-known book "The
Natural Mind" (1972), author Andrew Weil notes (p. 19) "It is my
belief that the desire to alter consciousness periodically is an
innate, normal drive analogous to hunger or the sexual drive. [...]
Anyone who watches very young children without revealing his presence
will find them regularly practicing techniques that induce striking
changes in mental states.  Three- and four-year-olds, for example,
commonly whirl themselves into vertiginous stupors.  They
hyperventilate and have other children squeeze them around the chest
until they faint.  They also choke each other to produce loss of
consciousness."

...i remember twirling & hyperventilating, but `choking for fun' is
not one of *my* childhood memories...anyone else?




-- 
***************************************************************************
Don't like my .sig?  Dial (800)NULL-DEV|  allen h. lutins
                                       |  vu0350@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu
"Individualists of the world, Unite!"  |  VY8934@bingvaxa.bitnet
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: This id Di Dio,my account was suspended for a week,so don't mail to
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 00:37:16 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

Tough break Dio. I just know you didn't deserve it. :-)  I'll still talk to ya
anyway no matter whose account you use.
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7829 talk.politics.drugs:3008
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: All Drugs WILL Be Legalized!!!
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 01:23:01 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Apr13.171817.12178@bradley.bradley.edu>
  <1992Apr14.013417.4649@ncsu.edu> <joshua.703260652@coombs>
  <ISBELL.92Apr14143429@pop-tarts.ai.mit.edu>
  <1992Apr14.201524.19244@ncsu.edu>
  <1992Apr15.122951.16821@news.cs.indiana.edu>

>>>> Can anyone name one black leader who supports legalization besides
>>>> Mayor Schomke? I asked this question about a year ago and no names 
>>>> surfaced.
>
>Dick Boddie, Libertarian candidate for President (he lost to Marrou
>at the convention).

Boddie is now running for U.S. Senator from California...and running
HARD.  He has been traveling around the state and doing interviews on
radio stations etc.  At one stop he got 100 people to JUST SAY NO to
the Thug War by registering Libertarian.  He is a professionally
experienced orator and loves school and college gigs.

Boddie for U.S. Senate Committee
P.O. Box 2056
Laguna Hills, CA 92654

800-6-BODDIE


   Alan T. Furman           |       Vote Libertarian--Marrou/Lord in '92
----------------------------+--------------------------------------------
   atfurman@cup.portal.com  |  Stamp out signature viruses!  Pass it on!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
From: backpack@access.digex.com (Stuart Reges)
Subject: A bit of my intro
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:24:36 GMT

As I mentioned in my previous message, I'm posting a bit of the intro to the
book I'm working on, in case anyone is interested.  This is actually the last
page of a 23-page intro:

I will close this introduction with one related observation.  As a senior in
high school I read 1984 by George Orwell and loved it, although I found it
difficult to believe that people would willingly live in such a society.  Since
that time I have become increasingly convinced that even America, which I
consider the most free society on the planet, has alarming similarities to
Orwell's conformist state.  The antidrug campaign provides one of the best
examples of this.  The government could almost adopt, with only slight
modification, the Party slogans for its antidrug campaign:
				       
				 WAR IS PEACE

			      FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

			     IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
				       
 My own "bad" conduct is related to the third of these slogans, because I
supposedly threaten the well-being of our young people by telling them
"dangerous" truths.  Slightly cleaned up, these make excellent antidrug
slogans:
				       
	   ONLY BY WAGING RELENTLESS AND UNCOMPROMISING WAR ON DRUGS
			     CAN WE LIVE IN PEACE.

		      THERE IS NO FREEDOM IN DOING DRUGS.
		 THAT PATH LEADS INEXORABLY TOWARDS ADDICTION,
			  THE WORST KIND OF SLAVERY.

		  TO KEEP OUR YOUNG PEOPLE STRONG AND HEALTHY
	       WE MUST GIVE THEM A CONSISTENT MESSAGE ON DRUGS.
		CASUAL USERS MUST BE FORCED INTO REHABILITATION
		      TO KEEP THEM FROM INFECTING OTHERS.

The great tragedy of any parallel with Orwell's state, of course, is that
unlike the powerless victims in 1984, we the people of the United States have
brought this campaign upon ourselves and have it within our power to change it
overnight, if only we'd make up our minds to do so.

+---------------+---------------------------------------------------------+
|  b	  p	| Stuart Reges (target uSeRs?)	backpack@access.digex.com |
|   a	   a	|							  |
|    c	    c	| You've gotta live, live, live!  Life is a banquet and   |
|     k	     k	| most poor suckers are starving to death.  --Auntie Mame |
+---------------+---------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7431 talk.politics.drugs:2825
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Air Force uses uppers ...
Date: 10 Apr 92 07:55:59 GMT
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'

allanc@cs.su.oz (Restless Wanderer) writes:
>The US Air Force used amphemetines during the Gulf War.Although they knew
>of the effects ,such as hallucinating etc,they were able to control this

I doubt anyone would hallucinate off of the doses of dexedrine they were
most likely recieving.  "Jitteryness" was probably the worst they had to
put up with...

>adverse effects.The pilots used uppers to stay alert for the strike,and then
>used a sleeping tablet (some bezodiazpen (?) ) to help them recoup for the next
>flight (hit).
>
>How come its Ok for the Air Force  to do it and not the general public.?

Take coffee and get your doc to prescribe you halcion for insomnia -- nearly
the same damn thing.

-- 
Lamont Granquist  lamontg@u.washington.edu  (anon: ap.4497@layout.berkeley.edu)
University of Washington, Seattle.    Disc: if UW ever finds out what I post... 
alt.drugs FTP site: milton.u.washington.edu[128.95.136.1] dir:/public/alt.drugs
               For quotes and other useless info see my .plan
From: hardrock@underg.UUCP (hard rock)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: chemical structure of various drugs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 16:33:40 EDT
Organization: Underground Computing Foundation

Can anyone please e-mail any sort of chemical structure of any kind of drug 
which you know of.  I am interested in any kind.  It is for a chemistry 
extra-credit project.
Thanks
in advance.
hard rock

---
Well I will see you in hell my Friend!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.postmodern,alt.stupidity,alt.exploding.kibo,alt.religion.kibology,alt.whine
From: saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu (Brian E. Saunders)
Subject: Re: Cascade, la, la, la,
Organization: Univ. of Wisconsin - Madison
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:12:07 CDT
Originator: saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu

In article <8x2Hn5&p6@cs.psu.edu> krobinsn@alqualonde.endor.cs.psu.edu (Kenneth J Robinson) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.044507.23038@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> drumm@crs.cl.msu.edu.UUCP (Steve Drumm) writes:
>>In article <wcsjc.702969488@cunews> wcsjc@alfred.carleton.ca (John Coughlin) writes:
>>>In <1992Apr11.014745.24406@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> bur@ultisol.gsfc.nasa.gov (Mike Bur) writes:
>>>>Elvis died of a drug overdose.(What kind of pills were they?)
>>>Elvis fried while comatose.
>>Elvis died of a drug overdose. (Downers, i would imagine...)
>>drumm...sometimes ya just gotta say 'what the fuck'
>
>Terminate yourselves at once. This nonsense is being removed from alt.flame.
>Please take your childish playtoys elsewhere.
>
>K e n   R o b i n s o n


-- 

Brian E. Saunders			saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7534 talk.politics.drugs:2870
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: FDA on the net (was Re: WARNING ! Hot New Drug of Abuse)
Date: 12 Apr 92 15:59:53 GMT
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland

>The FDA has confiscated oxygen on the grounds that people were taking
>it to get high.

By the way, FDA is on the net - fda.gov.

//Jyrki
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: 60 Minutes piece on the Forfeiture Law
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 19:50:34 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.043832.2253@ducvax.auburn.edu> kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu writes:
>I suspect that this law may be 
>ruled unconstitutional, go to the Supreme Court, and be ultimately upheld
>by the ultra right-wing court.  Maybe, maybe not.  But it is a very bad
>law.  

Actually, I believe the seizure portion of the RICO statutes have already
been upheld by a previous Supreme Court.  I'd like to be wrong about that,
though.  I don't see how ANYONE can hold civil seizures by government to
be legal under the US Constitution, expecially under Amendments IV and V.

Unfortunately, civil seizures have been found Constitutional because the
charge is against the property, not the person who previously owned the
property, and it has been ruled that property "tainted" by crime can be
legitimately seized by the government.

Since the charge is against the property -- and property isn't a citizen of
the US, the property is deemed to have no rights.  This is basically a
loophole that could not be foreseen by the writers of the Constitution and
a loophole that *should* have been shot down by the Supreme Court.

I agree, it is very, very bad law, very, very bad legal precedent, and very,
very bad justice.

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

The Official MBA Handbook on business cards:

	Avoid overly pretentious job titles such as "Lord of the Realm,
	Defender of the Faith, Emperor of India" or "Director of
	Corporate Planning."
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7849 talk.politics.drugs:3016
From: hagerp@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Paul Hager -- candidate??
Keywords: ballot access options
Date: 17 Apr 92 16:11:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Apr17.111145.8234
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University

In response to Bill d'Amico's post -- Dennis has contacted Steve
Dillon, Libertarian Candidate for Senate and Steve would be willing
to front for us.  This means that we would have a legally qualified
candidate -- I think.  I'll have to get a little more information
to make sure.  Obviously, the thrust would shift a bit if Dillon
were the focus.  I talked with Dennis about an hour ago and we'll
have to have a more thorough discussion with HCRC members before
we proceed.

This is a good time to indicate that HCRC has not endorsed any
political candidates.  Dennis is personally supporting Marrou/Lord
and I recently decided to support Bill "Cannabis Interruptus"
Clinton (no, I didn't come up with this name but it seems apt).

As to my own candidacy, I think I might run in '94 -- for real.

-- 
paul hager		hagerp@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu

"The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is reason."
			-- Thomas Paine, _The Age of Reason_
From: mystic@weird.miami.fl.us (Victor Marrero)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: just a question
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:21:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: weird.mystic.065o
Organization: Weird BBS [Amiga] (305)553-3207 S. Miami, FL USA

About the "curfew" thing, yes its true.
        
In cerain cities, well maybe all, they have a curfew for minors (people
under the age 18!) to be in before mainly 12AM weekdays and 1AM
Friday/Saturday. Now most cities don't enforce them, and most police officers
don't even know about it.
        
There are lots of laws that people don't know of, here are a few:
        
Open container of alchohol in a street.
   ^illegal unless in paper bag.

The selling of liquor on Sundays. 
   ^this includes beer and wine.
        
Closing buisneses on Sundays.
   ^What protestants call the Sunday Blue Law. Its written up, thats
    why the majority of commercial buisnesses close on Sundays, or open
    after 12:00.
        ^^the law that is in written is not opening before 12:00 PM.
        
Oral Sex
        
Sodomy
        
The playing of loud music from ones car.
        
The playing of loud music from ones home after 1:00 AM.
        
        
There are thousands of them. Shameful hugh?
        
Mystic Magic
        
Is this really the land of the free?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 'We live our lives to ride the mindway!"
                        - My Life With The Thrill Kill Kult
        
Send all cash, money orders or credit card #'s to:
mystic@wierd.miami.fl.us
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,misc.legal,talk.politics.drugs
From: eris@tc.fluke.COM (Chris Beckmeyer)
Subject: Re: Legal Cocaine? (WAS Re: Drug legalization)
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 20:21:04 GMT

In article <kphj1_l.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>Yeah, I understand.  Just who the fuck am I standin' up here pissin' in
>the wind tryin' to tell y'all something you know better?  Some of you know
>and that's cool.
>
>
>> "`Blues For Michael' is just blues.  I wanted to write the simplest
>> easiest song - when you're young, you want to write the most difficult
>> forms because you want to prove you can do it.  But sometimes doing
>> the simple is really hard.  This one ges back to Country Joe and
>> the Fish stuff, the really slow simple stuff we did.  The chords are
>> simple, the lyrics are simple, it means exactly what it says. And
>> I hoped Jerry [Garcia] would play this song with me because we both

   I believe jerry *DID* play on this song.  Joe could've added some-
   thing like "and I'm glad he did".  Because someone "hoped" for    
   something does not mean it didn't happen.

>> die.  It's real sentimental - Jerry Garcia and Country Joe, singing 
>> about Michael Bloomfield, a very famous blues musician with a drug
>> 
>
>What he doesn't say for some reason is that cocaine and heroin
>took Micheal. He also doesn't say that Jerry couldn't join him
>because he was sorta indisposed during the time the disk was being
>cut 
>
   I might be wrong about the particular track but jerry being *indisposed*
   during the time the disk was being cut is patently false.  I own a copy
   of the recording and the main reason I bought was to add to my collection
   of jerry's work... he's there and in fine form.

   Sorry if this is really old hat.  Don't get into this group often.
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:7266 misc.legal:8936 talk.politics.drugs:2742