------------------------------------------------------------------- Closing The Dons Case - Marijuana Task Force, Business As Usual - Activists Advocate 'Suspension And Review' Of Task Force (Bulletin From American Antiprohibition League In Portland Cites Second Death In Wake Of Warrantless Break-In By Marijuana Task Force, Notes Protests Continue Weekly 4-6 PM Fridays - Mayor Invited To Community Forum Against The Task Force 7 PM Wednesday, April 8, And Monthly Thereafter, To Be Shown On Cable Access, Web TV) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 14:49:05 -0800 (PST) From: Anti-Prohibition Lg (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Mayor Vera Katz (email@example.com) cc: Portland OR City Council -- Comish Charlie Hales (Chales@ci.portland.or.us), Comish Erik Sten (Esten@ci.portland.or.us), Comish Gretchen Kafoury (firstname.lastname@example.org), Commish Jim Francesconi (email@example.com) Subject: Closing the Dons' case... The AMERICAN ANTIPROHIBITION LEAGUE Sponsors of the OREGON DRUGS CONTROL AMENDMENT http://ns2.calyx.net/~odca Drug War, or Drug Peace? 3125 SE BELMONT STREET PORTLAND OREGON 97214 503-235-4524 fax:503-234-1330 Email:AAL@InetArena.com As of Tuesday, March 24, 1998 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Closing the Dons case Marijuana Task Force, business as usual Activists advocate "suspension and review" of task force "We recognize that there will always be some people who will question our findings, but we are satisfied that there is no reasonable doubt that the death of Steven D. Dons was a suicide," wrote Paul D. Driscoll, foreman of the Grand Jury panel who investigated the Feb. 25 death of Dons, a suspected cop killer. And so the official close to a series of tragic events which started with a blotched Marijuana Task Force raid on Dons' Southeast Portland house which resulted in a shoot-out that left one police officer dead, and another very seriously wounded. Then a month later, Dons' apparent suicide while in custody and the subsequent investigation into it. All this has left many Portlanders shaking their heads in dismay, asking "is it [adult marijuana prohibition] really worth it?" "No! Of course not," said League director Floyd Landrath, in reply to the question during a recent telephone interview with the Oregonian. "These folks in the MTF are rogues, a disgrace to law enforcement. They are arrogant and disrespectful of innocent peoples' rights, and they have the full support of the mayor and city council behind them 100 percent. It's a case of drug war politics and the really screwed- up law enforcement priorities that come with that," Landrath accused. The MTF is out of control. Anyone can initiate an investigation against anyone else, and they often do. All it takes is an anonymous phone call to your local Neighborhood Watch. Next thing you know the MTF is at your door accusing you of growing pot. They'll yell at you, create a scene on your front porch and demand that you better let them in to search, or they'll get a warrant and trash your house. It's happening as you read this, every day, it's called 'knock and talk.' In 1996, in more than half of over 400 'knock and talks,' the MTF found nothing. Dons was certainly no model citizen and in all likelihood associated with people who would resort to violence. Given that and the evidence we've seen so far, it seems entirely possible Dons did not know who was breaking down his door. There should be no mistake about the obvious lesson to be learned here: cops do not appear to be cops without their uniforms, badges and patrol cars. But has it been learned? Sorry to report, no. According to our sources, the MTF cowboys are hard at work catching up on all those neighbor's "complaints," driving around in a red pick-up truck, dressed in civilian clothes. In the light of day it becomes obvious the MTF serves no useful law enforcement or drug control purpose. But no one in City Hall or the District Attorney's office will admit it. And what's worse, the mainstream press and media have not, on the record, asked any of them: "Do we really need the MTF? And if so, why?" At this time the Antiprohibition League is pursuing a 3 pronged approach to help resolve this mess: 1) A very conservative, measured request to Mayor Katz to suspend & review the MTF. We are building a list of endorsers to help convince the Mayor and other city commissioners to act on this petition. 2) Weekly protest and speak-out against the MTF, 'knock and talk,' and adult drug prohibition in general. Every Friday, 4 p.m. in the park block across from the Justice Center, 1120 S.W. Third, downtown Portland. 3) In April and every month thereafter the League and other drug law reform groups in our coalition are organizing community forums on the negative impact the MTF and the drug war are having on our kids, our families, and our neighborhoods. Mayor Katz will be invited to come or send a representative. The first forum is scheduled for Wed., April 8, 7 p.m., at It's a Beautiful Pizza, 3341 SE Belmont Street. We will also be broadcasting these forums on local cable access and on web-TV in the near future. Let's get rid of the MTF now. Before they tarnish the noble profession of law enforcement anymore. Before things go terribly wrong, again. *** Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 01:35:33 -0800 From: Paul Freedom (firstname.lastname@example.org) Organization: Oregon Libertarians Patriots To: Constitutional Cannabis Patriots (email@example.com) Subject: [cp] MTF PROTEST PHOTO 1- MTF PROTEST AFTER DONS RAID IN DOWNTOWN PORTLAND ORGANIZED BY FLOYD LANDRATH OF THE AMERICAN ANTI-PROHIBITION LEAGUE.
------------------------------------------------------------------- California Medical Marijuana Clubs Head To Court ('Reuters' Notes The Hearing Scheduled Today In San Francisco In The Case Of A Federal Lawsuit Against Six Northern California Dispensaries Coincides With A Public Rally And The Arrest By San Jose Police Of Peter Baez, Co-Founder Of The Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center, Charged With Repeatedly Selling Marijuana To A Man Who Had No Doctor's Prescription) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 19:00:43 -0500 From: Scott Dykstra
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: CanPat> Calif. Medical Clubs head to court. Sender: email@example.com 01:55 PM ET 03/24/98 Calif. medical marijuana clubs head to court By Andrew Quinn SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Federal officials readied a fresh legal bid to close California's medical marijuana clubs Tuesday as supporters rallied for the right to dispense the drug to critically ill people. Police, meanwhile, reported the arrest of the co-founder of one marijuana club, charging him with a felony count of illegally selling drugs without a prescription. The legal tussles mark a sharpening conflict over California's Proposition 215, the state law voters approved in 1996 that legalized marijuana use for people suffering from AIDS, cancer and other serious ailments. The Justice Department, contending that the clubs regularly violate federal drug laws, planned to file suit in a San Francisco federal court Tuesday demanding that six clubs be closed down. Supporters of the marijuana clubs, including patients, politicians and San Francisco's district attorney, gathered for a march and rally in front of the U.S. Courthouse, demanding that marijuana be treated like any other medicine. Dennis Peron, the founder of San Francisco's Cannabis Cultivators Club and the author of Proposition 215, vowed Tuesday that his operation would continue to dispense marijuana to patients who say it relieves pain, nausea and other symptoms of serious disease. ``We contend it may be illegal to sell marijuana, but it is not illegal to sell it to save a life,'' Peron said. Peron and other club organizers have won strong support from a number of local officials, who say the federal government should respect the will of California's voters and allow local governments time to develop an ``airtight'' system to monitor club operations. Four California mayors wrote a letter to President Clinton last week asking him to drop the legal push against the clubs, and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown has pledged that if the clubs are put out of business, the city will step in to distribute marijuana to seriously ill patients. ``After all, even those drugs that are on the restricted list can be administered with the proper federal supervision,'' Brown said. But federal officials and state law enforcement leaders, including California Attorney General Dan Lungren, say there should be no exceptions made to federal laws prohibiting the illegal distribution of drugs. Lungren's legal efforts were boosted last month when California's Supreme Court sided with a lower court ruling that said the clubs were illegal because they were not ``primary care givers'' for the patients they supply -- which is a condition set by the California proposition. Whether or not the clubs are ``care givers,'' and whether or not their members all carry bona fide doctors' prescriptions for marijuana, are two key questions expected to be addressed in federal court. The second issue was highlighted Monday when police in San Jose arrested Peter Baez, the co-founder of the Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center, and charged him with repeatedly selling marijuana to a man who had no doctor's prescription for the drug. Deputy District Attorney Denise Raabe said the arrest was ordered because of the method of sale and that county officials ''are mindful of the needs of legitimate patients.''
------------------------------------------------------------------- US Challenges California Medical Marijuana Law (Different 'Reuters' Version Notes A Ruling Is Expected After April 15) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 05:57:33 -0500 From: Scott Dykstra
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: CanPat> California in the News Again.....Feds trying to shut down.... Sender: email@example.com 10:52 PM ET 03/24/98 U.S. challenges California medical marijuana law (Adds ruling expected after April 15, paragraph 4) By Andrew Quinn SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice Tuesday launched the strongest challenge yet to California's medical marijuana clubs, asking a judge to shut them down for violation of federal drug laws. In a bid to quash the nation's first large-scale experiment with medical marijuana use, government lawyers told a U.S. District Court that California's 1996 state law allowing sick people to use marijuana must take a back seat to national laws forbidding the cultivation and distribution the drug. ``What this case is about, make no mistake about it, is upholding federal law,'' government attorney Mark Quinlivan said. ``A state initiative cannot supplant the will of the people of the United States.'' After hearing impassioned arguments from both sides of the medical marijuana debate, Judge Charles Breyer told attorneys to file final legal briefs by April 15, after which he would make a ruling. The federal case against six northern California marijuana clubs is the toughest legal battle to emerge in the wake of California's Proposition 215, the medical marijuana provision approved by 56 percent of the state's voters in 1996. The clubs, spearheaded by San Francisco's Cannabis Cultivators Club, dispense the drug to thousands of victims of AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, and other serious diseases, many of whom say it is the only treatment which works. ``Without marijuana, I cannot function,'' Dixie Romango, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, told a rally of about 100 people outside the San Francisco courthouse. ``The doctors know our needs, not the federal government.'' California's courts have already ruled that the 20-odd clubs around the state are illegal because they are not ``primary caregivers'' to their members -- a condition set by the state law. Federal officials Tuesday broadened the attack, saying club operations are an ``outright and flagrant'' violation of the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, under which Congress categorized marijuana as a dangerous drug subject to the strictest possible controls. ``We have requested these injunctions in order to send a clear message regarding the illegality of marijuana cultivation and distribution,'' U.S. District Attorney Michael Yamaguchi said. The clubs have won strong support from a number of local officials, who say the federal government should respect the will of California's voters and allow local governments time to develop an ``airtight'' system to monitor club operations. Four California mayors wrote a letter to President Clinton last week asking him to drop the fight against the clubs, and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown has pledged that if the clubs close the city will step in to distribute marijuana to seriously ill patients. At the rally, as the sweet scent of marijuana smoke drifted over the courthouse steps, local politicians, patients and clergy vowed to fight for the drug. San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan, one of the clubs strongest official supporters, said he always supports the right of a sick person to take ``a harmless puff on a marijuana cigarette.'' ``I do feel that truth and justice will prevail and in the end we will be able to continue supplying marijuana to people who require it,'' Hallinan said to cheers from the crowd. Lawyers for the clubs said they would approach the battle from a number of angles, arguing that they fulfill a ``medical necessity'' for patients and are beyond the scope of federal drug laws designed primarily to stop trafficking. ``This is not a backdoor way to legalize marijuana. This is a frontdoor way to deal with a real problem in our society,'' said lead attorney Bill Panzer.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Pot Club Hearing - Video (KRON-TV In San Francisco Offers RealAudio Broadcast About San Francisco Rally And Federal Lawsuit Hearing) From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Matt Elrod) To: email@example.com Subject: KRON-TV (http://www.kron.com/) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 22:13:56 -0800 --- Forwarded message --- From: "G F Storck" (firstname.lastname@example.org) For those with Real Audio KRON San Francisco has this video report on the med mj rally and events in SF today. Gary Pot Club Hearing - Video Anthony Moore reports on the battle over medical marijuana, which pits the White House against California voters who passed the act. 6:00pm - 3/24/98 http://www.kron.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------- One Jailed In San Jose Pot Club Raid ('San Jose Mercury News' Says Santa Clara County Cannabis Club Co-Founder Peter Baez Was Booked Into A Santa Clara County Jail On One Felony Count Of Illegally Selling And Furnishing Marijuana - Police Say They Found No Evidence Of A Doctor's Authorization For A Patient Named In The Case, But Club Officials Say They Did Have Approval) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 10:26:17 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US CA: One Jailed in S.J. Pot Club Raid Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 Author: Rodney Foo and Sandra Gonzales, Mercury News Staff Writer ONE JAILED IN S.J. POT CLUB RAID Co-founder arrested: Police say Peter Baez sold marijuana to a customer who didn't have a prescription. For the first time since it opened last year, police raided San Jose's only medicinal marijuana club on Monday, arresting its co-founder on an allegation that he sold pot to a person without a prescription. Santa Clara County Cannabis Club co-founder Peter Baez was booked into a Santa Clara County jail on one felony count of illegally selling and furnishing marijuana, a prosecutor said. His bail was set at $5,000. A club official insisted Monday that Baez had done nothing wrong and that he had a doctor's approval to sell marijuana to the customer named in the case. But authorities said they had found no evidence of a doctor's authorization for that patient. The arrest was a surprising development for an operation that has generally avoided the kind of conflict with law enforcement that other California cannabis clubs have encountered since voters approved Proposition 215, the 1996 medical marijuana initiative. In a separate action, the U.S. Department of Justice planned to ask a federal judge today to shut down six other Northern California marijuana clubs, on the grounds that the state ballot measure is superseded by a federal prohibition on the sale of pot. But federal authorities haven't targeted the Santa Clara County club, which has operated with approval -- and under strict regulation -- by the district attorney's office, police and the San Jose city attorney. On Monday -- as officers with a search warrant went through the club's Meridian Avenue office -- club officials said Baez had followed the law. ``We've done everything we can,'' said Jesse Garcia, club co-founder and executive director. ``Our clients are legitimate users.'' Under Proposition 215, patients suffering from cancer, AIDS, glaucoma or a variety of other illnesses are allowed to possess and grow marijuana for medical use, with a doctor's recommendation. The raid came after authorities won a conviction against a local man, Enrique Robles, on a misdemeanor charge of possessing marijuana, according to Deputy District Attorney Denise Raabe. She said Robles told authorities that he had been getting marijuana from the center for medical purposes. After investigating his claim, Raabe said, authorities concluded that Robles had no medical prescription. They also found that Baez allegedly had sold him marijuana nine times from Oct. 22, 1997, to Feb. 25. No comment from Robles Robles does have a medical condition, Raabe said, although details couldn't be learned Monday. Robles could not be reached for comment. While declining to name Robles, Garcia said the club had an oral OK from a doctor to sell marijuana in the case that led to Baez's arrest. But Raabe said authorities checked with three doctors whose names were obtained from the center and all three denied authorizing a prescription for Robles. The raid began just before 3 p.m. when about nine officers arrived to execute a search warrant at the club's Meridian Avenue office, Garcia said. Under the warrant, officers sought records, audio or video tapes that might show the club was selling marijuana illegally. Officers took the names of two clients and searched them before letting them go, Garcia said. ``It scares me,'' said Darlene Lutz, a clerical employee of the club, who was present during the search. ``They were grilling me -everything about the business, about the client, how we in-take them and what kind of (documentation) they have to have.'' ``Our biggest concern is client-patient confidentiality,'' added Garcia. Baez was taken away by officers. He is scheduled to be arraigned today in Municipal Court on the felony charge that carries a maximum four-year sentence in state prison. The club will reopen on Wednesday, Garcia said. ``Our intent is not to close down the cannabis center,'' Raabe said. ``We're very much aware that there are people with legitimate requisite medical recommendations that are receiving marijuana.'' Court order in June Still, she added: ``We don't know what the investigation will turn up and what will happen in the future.' The club, which has 267 clients, is the only one of its type in Santa Clara County. Last June, the city of San Jose obtained a court order to stop another man, Robert Niswonger, from selling marijuana for medicinal use at a location on Race Street. Mercury News Staff Writer Howard Mintz contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------- San Jose Police Raid Cannabis Club ('San Francisco Examiner' Version) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 09:52:37 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US CA: San Jose Police Raid Cannabis Club Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: "Frank S. World"
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/ Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 SAN JOSE POLICE RAID CANNABIS CLUB San Jose Police raided a San Jose cannabis club and arrested its owner on a felony warrant that charged him with the illegal sale of marijuana, officials said. Peter Baez, proprietor of the Santa Clara County Medical Cannabis Center, was arrested at about 2:30 p.m. Monday, police said, during regular business hours at the center, located at 265 Meridian Ave. The San Jose police narcotics and covert investigations unit served Baez with a search warrant and an arrest warrant as part of an ongoing investigation, according to police.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Senate Hearing On Bar Smoking Ban ('San Francisco Examiner' Says The Bill That Would Repeal California's Unique Prohibition On Smoking In Bars, AB 297, Which Passed The State Assembly In January, Is Slated To Get Its First Hearing In The Senate On Wednesday, But Observers Say The Bill Lacks Support On The Committee That Will Consider It) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 09:51:21 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US CA: Senate Hearing on Bar Smoking Ban Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: "Frank S. World"
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/ Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 Author: Tyche Hendricks of the Examiner Staff SENATE HEARING ON BAR SMOKING BAN DESPITE DISCONTENT among bar owners and a tobacco industry-funded lobbying campaign, a bill that would repeal a controversial ban on smoking in bars faces an uphill battle in the state Senate. The measure, AB297, which passed the Assembly in January, is slated to get its first hearing in the Senate on Wednesday, but observers say the bill lacks support on the committee that will consider it. The bill is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Health Committee. But Assemblyman Ed Vincent, D-Inglewood, said through a staff member that he was not planning on presenting his bill to the committee. Vincent could not be reached for comment. It was unclear Monday if or when Vincent planned to present the bill to the committee. John Miller, chief of staff for Sen. Diane Watson, D-Los Angeles, chairwoman of the health committee, said even if Vincent does not present the bill, the committee will hold an informational hearing on the issue. Miller said Watson, a supporter of the smoking ban, is eager to see the repeal bill get a prompt and full hearing. "The possibility that the ban would be lifted has been exploited by its opponents," he said. "They have argued you don't need to comply because we're going to change the law. The existence of this bill has tended to undermine the effectiveness of the law." He said an informational hearing would give the anti-smoking lobby a chance to make its case to the public. "Much of the contest has been carried out in the media, and supporters (of the repeal) have employed a very successful company to make their case," he said. "The tobacco control people don't have that access or level of sophistication to counter it. This will be their first chance to speak on an equal footing." Gary Auxier, senior vice president of the National Smokers' Alliance, a tobacco lobbying group based in Virginia, said he hoped that "some sort of relief measure" for smokers and bar owners would go to a floor vote in the Senate. "We have a lot of people out there that need some relief, want some relief, wherever they can get it," he said. The alliance, in conjunction with Burson-Marsteller, the world's largest public relations firm, has been organizing bar owners and patrons to voice their opposition to the smoking ban. The ban, which went into effect in January, is the final component of California's smoke-free workplace law, which eliminated smoking in most indoor workplaces beginning in 1995. Bars, taverns and gaming clubs -- which employ 850,000 people in the state -- were exempted until 1998. The law is designed to protect employees from the dangers of secondhand smoke. Mert Mehmet, owner of Beck's Farmhouse in Newark, said business at his bar dropped by 35 percent since the year started. He's been writing his state senator and has been asking customers to sign repeal petitions. "All the local bars around here, they're deader than doornails," he complained. "Smoking in a bar goes hand in hand. People like to smoke and they like to drink. What are you going to do, play with your thumbs? Government control has got to stop somewhere." What makes Mehmet especially angry is that just last year he installed an expensive smoke filtration system that he says removes most of the smoke -- and its health hazards -- from the air. He believes that system is the real solution to the problem of secondhand smoke, and he's frustrated that it's not good enough for state legislators. In San Francisco, Gary McGowan, proprietor of The Swallow on Polk Street, said he, too, has joined the repeal campaign. He hasn't seen a measurable drop-off in business, he said, but he said his main complaint is one of principle. "Our government keeps chopping away at our civil liberties," said McGowan. "This is a legal product. I own the bar. I should be the one to be able to say, "This is a no-smoking bar or a smoking bar.' " The real issue is not civil liberties, but worker safety, insists Ann Wright, a spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society, which is spearheading a coalition of repeal opponents that includes the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the California Medical Association, the California Nurses Association and the state Labor Federation. Wright acknowledged that the law creates a big change for bars, but said she didn't think it was a catastrophic one. "When the (initial portion of the workplace smoking) law first went into effect in 1995, the tobacco industry said the same thing: Everybody will go out of business; nobody will go out to eat. That didn't happen." In fact, she said, she believes almost 90 percent of bars and cardrooms are complying with the law, including many in San Francisco. Though it seems unlikely, she added that she hopes the matter will go to a vote in the Senate Health Committee Wednesday, and meet its final defeat. "There needs to be some resolution to this," she said. "The public and people in business need to know this is a done deal." 1998 San Francisco Examiner
------------------------------------------------------------------- Initiative Number 692, Yes - On To Victory In November (Washington State Secretary Of State Has Assigned A Number To The Medical Use Of Marijuana Initiative - Ballot Title And Ballot Summary Released) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 22:23:38 EST Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Randy Chase
To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Fwd: Re: HT: Initiative #692, yes - on to victory in Nov (fwd) To all the folks out there who are tracking Medical Marijuana in Washington: The Secretary of State's office has assigned a number to the Medical Use of Marijuana Initiative - it is #692. Good news in that another step in the process is under our belts. Next is printing, ballot title, and summary. Ballot title and summary are expected on Friday. After the above steps will come the signature drive which must be completed the first week in July. Regards to all, George Bakan Chairperson Medical Marijuana NOW PAC (voice) 206-322-2333 (fax) 206-860-8279 (e-mail) Rgbakan@aol.com Tim Killian added this information: Hi Hemp-Talk: As George as announced, the number is 692. And, actually, we now have the Ballot Title and Summary as provided by the Attorney General's office. They are as follows: Ballot Title: Shall the medical use of marijuana for certain terminal or debilitating conditions be permitted, and physicians authorized to advise patients about medical use of marijuana? Ballot Summary: This measure would permit the medical use of marijuana by patients with certain terminal or debilitating conditions. Non-medical use of marijuana would still be prohibited. Physicians would be authorized to advise patients about the risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana. Qualifying patients and their primary caregivers would be protected from prosecution if they possess marijuana solely for medical use by the patient. Certain additional restrictions and limitations are detailed in the measure. We are very pleased with both of these, and are progressing forward with the initiative. Timothy W. Killian Campaign Coordinator Washington Citizens for Medical Rights em: email@example.com Postal Box 2346 Seattle, WA 98111 ph: 206.781-7716 fx: 206.324.3101
------------------------------------------------------------------- Initiative 692 Web Site (Campaign Coordinator For Washington State Medical Marijuana Initiative Sponsored By Washington Citizens For Medical Rights Posts URL For Web Site With Initiative Text, More) Subject: HT: Init 692 Web Site Date: Tue, 24 Mar 98 19:10:52 -0800 From: YES on 692 (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: "Hemp Talk" (email@example.com) Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Hi Hemp Talk: I have just placed the Initiative 692 Web site online. I have had many requests for the full text of the initiative, and it is on the site. This is only a skeleton for now, but will grow quickly during the next few months. So, it is a bit bare now... http://www.eventure.com/i692 You can get the full text, ballot title, and summary there... Timothy W. Killian Campaign Coordinator Initiative 692 Washington Citizens for Medical Rights *** em: email@example.com url: http://www.eventure.com/I692 *** Postal Box 2346 Seattle, WA 98111 ph: 206.781-7716 fx: 206.324.3101
------------------------------------------------------------------- Letter From Jim McDermott (List Subscriber Posts Endorsement Of Medical Marijuana By District 7 US Representative From Washington State, A Physician) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 16:40:58 EST Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Randy Chase
To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: [Fwd: HT: letter from Jim McDermott] To all, This is a letter from US Congressperson in response to a letter from a constituent about Medical Marijuana. Rep. Jim McDermott is a medical Doctor which gives him great credibility with his colleagues about medical issues. Rep McDermott's' staff has given us permission to talk about his position on the issue. Please note the second paragraph and the argument that McDermott uses to support the issue. It might be beneficial if we were to use the same language when lobbying other congresspersons about HR 372 and other related issues. In Washington State we are trying to get the support of several of our representatives for the Medical Marijuana initiative and having the support of a Medical Doctor in Congress cannot hurt. Randy Chase Medical Marijuana NOW! Seattle, Washington 206-323-1229 *** Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 12:00:37 -0800 (PST) From: Turmoil To: email@example.com Subject: HT: letter from Jim McDermott Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org WOW! Look at the response I got from my US Congressman in the 7th District. *** Thank you for contacting me regarding legislation which would allow marijuana to be rescheduled under federal law so that physicians might prescribe it to patients in limited, and very specific, circumstances. I recognize, of course, that America continues to struggle against widespread drug abuse and the criminal behavior that frequently accompanies it, and I am aware that marijuana is among the illicit drugs readily available to young people. I share the deep concerns of most Americans about the destructive consequences drug abuse invites. Its ravages are all too familiar because almost every American family has been touched directly or indirectly by it. The costs associated with our War on Drugs continue to rise, particulary as our drug trafficking interdiction efforts have been expanded. I regulary have supported these initiatives because I believe they are critical to the well-being of society. I also consistently have encouraged substantial expansion of our drug treatment programs and facilites so that those eager to overcome drug abuse might receive the professional help they need to do so. At the same time, it is important to note that over the last several years, marijuana has been shown to be helpful in combating the unpleasant symptoms and side effects of particular medical treatments or conditions. Patients report significant relief in certain instances, and consequently may be able to complete courses of treatment that otherwise would be intolerable. As a physician, I am keenly aware that modern medicine is far from perfect, and that advances often come from unexpected sources. If carefully supervised use of marijuana brings relief of suffering for certain patients in certain circumstances, prescription of the drug by the patient's treating physician is sensible and compassionate. I believe it possible to closely regulate marijuana's use for particular medical purposes in an arrangement that benefits seiously ill patients without worsening America's illicit drug problems. I appreciate hearing from you and hope you continue to share your views with me. Sincerely Jim McDermott
------------------------------------------------------------------- What Does Mark Sidran Have Against The McCoys? ('Seattle Times' Columnist Michelle Malkin Continues Her Expose On How The City Of Seattle's Lawsuit To Close Oscar's II With A 'Drug-Abatement Action' Victimizes The Owner, Who Poured Everything Into Working With Police And The City, Only To Have Them Abandon Him)Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 06:50:18 -0800 (PST) To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Alan Randell) Subject: What does Mark Sidran have against the McCoys? Newshawk: Alan Randell Pubdate: March 24, 1998 Source: Seattle Times Contact: email@example.com URL: http://www.seattletimes.com/news/editorial/html98/altmalk_032498.html What does Mark Sidran have against the McCoys? Michelle Malkin/Times staff columnist "UTTER nonsense." In a KOMO-TV interview aired last Friday, Seattle City Attorney Mark Sidran dismissed the concerns of beleaguered business owners Oscar and Barbara McCoy. Sidran's words were punctuated by an impatient smirk and the preening indignation of a tough- on-crime commissar. What does Sidran have against the McCoys, anyway? The McCoys are struggling to fend off a civil drug-abatement action that would effectively shut down their 22-year-old family tavern. They want other entrepreneurs to know that government agencies responsible for protecting law-abiding citizens sometimes work against them. Rather than protect the McCoys, the city removed police protection from their neighborhood and conducted a two-year undercover narcotics operations at their soul-food restaurant, Oscar's II, on 2051 E. Madison Ave. This cruelly cost-effective detective work became the foundation of the city's case for closure. The police department paid anonymous informants (with charming code names such as "Bright Eyes") for their service. But not a single drug dealer was arrested nor a single search warrant issued at Oscar's II as a result. Sidran told KOMO: "It's not acceptable to simply say `Well, yes, there's drug trafficking on my property but that's not my problem. That's for the police to deal with.' " The McCoys, however, never said any such thing. Indeed, even police witnesses who testified against the McCoys acknowledged that the McCoys worked hard to reduce crime on and around their property. And King County Superior Court Judge Joseph Wesley, who recently ruled in the city's favor, nonetheless determined that "the McCoys have responsibly if not successfully combated the ongoing problem for many years . . . The McCoys have not in any sense `permitted' the existence of a nuisance in the sense of having allowed it, furthered it, or condoned it." Sidran blamed the McCoys for not implementing all the components of the police department's supposedly non-binding "Drug Elimination Plan." But take a closer look at that "plan" - an informal, unsigned, makeshift list handed to the McCoys by drug-abatement officer Linda Diaz in 1994: -- Seattle Police Department record check of all employees. Employees required to have good identification. -- No violations of state liquor codes. -- Bathrooms locked with the bartender in control of the keys. Only one person in the bathroom at a time. -- Security on duty on weekends and evenings. The security should not only keep control of the inside but also the area directly outside the tavern and all parking areas. The security should wear clothing that clearly identified them. Security should check all customers for weapons . . . -- An `86' list should be maintained behind the counter and with security so that the bartender and security can keep track of unauthorized persons. The `86' list should be posted for Seattle Police Officers(') review. -- Inside and outside lighting should be such that the bartender and security can observe actions of customers. -- A video camera installed in the tavern with the police able to remove the tape and review it at any time. -- Post signs on the front door that state: "No loitering, No drug activity allowed - 911 will be called." -- Inside pay phone should be removed. No incoming calls accepted for customers. Any behind-the-counter phone should be for employee use only. -- All customers required to have and show I.D. -- A criminal trespass agreement should be initiated with the Community Police Team to stop non-customers from loitering on the property. -- An entry fee should be charge (sic) at the front door. Customers that leave should be charged again for re-admittance . . . -- The Precinct Anti-Crime Team, Community Police team or 911 should be contacted anytime anyone is suspected of selling narcotics on the property. -- The back door should be exit only, with an alarmed emergency exit bar installed. -- Install a dress code and do not allow any gang attire. The McCoys had already taken several of these common-sense steps - signs, security, no-trespass list, IDs - before the 15- point plan was concocted. They took several additional steps - more security, a metal detector, better lighting, modified pay phone - after receiving the list. But the McCoys could not afford a video camera. The bathroom policy was impractical. Nor could they impose a re-entry charge without deterring many of their customers. Now those minor failures are being used as a justification for closing Oscar's II down. How many other institutions and establishments where drug activity invariably occurs could meet such unforgiving standards? This city's high schools? The Kingdome? Key Arena? UW? The goal of the city's 15-point list is all-too-transparent: It is a selective business elimination plan, not a drug elimination plan. While Sidran and the city continue to vilify the McCoys, scores of individuals have sent notes of encouragement and donations to the McCoy Justice Fund totaling over $2,500. Supporters see in the McCoys' plight what Seattle's blinded city authorities cannot: Utter arrogance. Utter injustice. Utter nonsense indeed. Donations to the McCoy Justice Fund can be mailed to 605 First Ave., Suite 350, Seattle WA 98104. Michelle Malkin's column appears Tuesday on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is: firstname.lastname@example.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Cocaine Mom' Hearing Closed ('Milwaukee Journal Sentinel' Notes That, Despite The Constitutional Prohibition On Secret Trials, A Wisconsin Circuit Judge, J. Mac Davis, Closed Monday's Hearing And Later Declined To Make Public Any Decision In The Case Of A Woman Who Is Seven Months Pregnant Who Is Thought To Have Tested Positive For 'Drugs') Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 22:10:06 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US WI: 'Cocaine Mom' Hearing Closed Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: "Frank S. World"
Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (WI) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax: (414) 224-8280 Website: http://www.jsonline.com/ Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 Author: Lisa Sink of the Journal Sentinel staff 'COCAINE MOM' HEARING CLOSED Waukesha -- A judge Monday ordered all parties connected to the "cocaine mom" case to remain mum about a closed-door hearing requested by the district attorney, who wants to determine whether the woman, who is seven months pregnant, tested positive for drugs. Circuit Judge J. Mac Davis closed Monday's hearing to a Journal Sentinel reporter and later declined to make public any decision on the release of the records. "It's a confidential case," Davis said. "There's nothing I can say." District Attorney Paul Bucher said that he could not say whether his office was granted access to the results of the drug test. "Judge Davis has requested that we not discuss the matter outside of court," Bucher said. "It wasn't a gag order per se. But he did indicate that the parties should not discuss the matter." But Bucher said that he still wants to review the results to determine whether the Waukesha woman, 26, had violated her bail on a drug paraphernalia charge by using drugs. If she did, Bucher said, he would seek to have her bail revoked and would likely charge her with bail jumping, a move that could land her in jail or drug treatment for her final weeks of pregnancy. "We're still in the same mode," Bucher said. "We want to obtain access to those results" for a possible bail jumping charge, he said. Craig Mastantuono, an assistant state public defender representing the woman, also remained tight-lipped. "I can't comment on the hearing today," he said. "It dealt with confidential matters." Asked about his reaction to Bucher's request for records, Mastantuono said: "I don't think it's a criminal justice issue. I think it's a public health issue." The woman, known only as Angela to protect the identity of her children, made national headlines in 1995 when county officials obtained a Juvenile Court order to detain her to protect her unborn son from her cocaine abuse. In that case, Angela was eight months pregnant when she was forced into a local drug abuse treatment facility until she delivered her son, who is now 2 1/2, healthy and living in a foster home. Angela and her attorneys appealed the detention, and last spring the state Supreme Court ruled that the detention was illegal because the fetus was not a child. Two weeks ago, Angela acknowledged to a reporter that she had failed a drug test during the first week of March. She has been ordered to undergo biweekly drug tests as part of a Juvenile Court case involving one of her two older children, who are living with their grandmother. Mastantuono would not comment on whether his client was abusing drugs or endangering the health of her viable fetus. "She's very concerned about it," he said of her unborn son. "I don't know if the baby is going to be harmed." Angela declined to comment on the case as she left the Courthouse on Monday. She was arrested and charged in December with misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia. At her initial court appearance on that charge, Court Commissioner Gerald Janis released her from custody on a $250 signature bond with conditions that she not possess or consume any illegal drugs, that she attend all court appearances in the case and that she not commit any other crimes.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Plano Chief Defends Drug Stings ('Dallas Morning News' Says Plano, Texas, Police Chief Bruce Glasscock On Monday Defended His Department's Undercover Stings In Plano High Schools, But Attorney Phillip Wainscott Said An Undercover Detective Knew A 16-Year-Old Boy Was Battling A Two-Year Addiction To Drugs When She Lured Him Into Using Heroin Again, Giving Him The Cash To Buy It, Driving Him In A Little Red Sports Car To The Pushers Who Sold It And Then Allowing Him To Use It) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 22:11:22 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US TX: Plano Chief Defends Drug Stings Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org Source: Dallas Morning News Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.dallasnews.com Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 Author: Linda Stewart Ball / The Dallas Morning News PLANO CHIEF DEFENDS DRUG STINGS But suspect questions tactics of investigation Plano Police Chief Bruce Glasscock defended his department's undercover stings in Plano high schools Monday against allegations of entrapment and child endangerment by a student and his parents. "We . . . are confident this investigation was handled in a professional manner," the chief said during a news conference Monday afternoon. He said the Collin County district attorney's office reviewed his department's information before any warrants were issued, and that a Collin County grand jury indicted those arrested. But an attorney for Jonathan Kollman, 17, questioned the Police Department's tactics. The teen was among 31 people arrested as part of "Operation Rockfest," the undercover investigation that has led to 84 cases against 33 adults and four juveniles. Specifically, attorney Phillip Wainscott said the undercover detective knew that Mr. Kollman, who was 16 at the time, was battling a two-year addiction with drugs when she lured him into using heroin again. She gave him the cash to buy it, drove him in a little red sports car to the pushers who sold it and then, Mr. Wainscott said, she allowed him to use it. "This is a lot of temptation for anyone, for any kid," he said. "But to prey upon and to be a predator upon a kid who is trying to kick the drug habit . . . is disgusting." Angela Kollman, Mr. Kollman's mother, said, "We feel like the Plano Police Department was our son's drug supplier." Mr. Kollman, who is out on $40,000 bail, plans to enroll in a drug treatment center in Hunt County on Tuesday. He said that he could have said no to the undercover cop, but it wasn't that easy. "I was trapped," he said. "The police officer always called me." Chief Glasscock said Plano Police Department policies and practices prevent him from elaborating on the allegations. Because of ongoing investigations, he also declined to discuss the methods they use for undercover operations. "The facts of this case will come out in trial," he said. "At that time you will be able to draw a more accurate picture of this defendant and the circumstances which led to his arrest. "This is diverting our attention away from what the real issue is: dealing with and responding to the drug problem that is in this community," the chief said. At least a dozen youths with Plano ties have died of heroin overdoses in the last 18 months. "We're proud to live in Plano," said Mrs. Kollman, a science teacher at a Plano high school. "It's a great city. They've got a drug problem. They need to clean it up - just not this way." Last fall - prior to meeting the young woman who, unbeknownst to Mr. Kollman, was a police officer - the youth tested negative for drugs 12 times, his parents said. "Police should not be contributing to making him worse," said Jonathan's father, Victor Kollman, a Lutheran minister. Jonathan Kollman, an A and B student who takes honors classes, said he wants to go to college and be successful. But first he must kick his addiction to drugs that began out of a curiosity about marijuana, he said. Mr. Kollman was arrested on two counts of delivery of a controlled substance on March 16. Mr. Wainscott said he wants a grand jury in either Collin or Dallas county to investigate the Plano Police Department's methods to determine whether there was any criminal conduct on the officer's behalf. "I'm a former police officer of 21 years and I've never come across anything like this," Mr. Wainscott said, adding that he is considering filing suit against the department. "You don't put on the street what you're attempting to take off." But Bill Schultz, first assistant district attorney in the Collin County district attorney's office, said different rules apply when police go undercover, and they don't always agree with everyone's sense of propriety. "It's the only area where police must lie to the people they're dealing with to achieve results," he said. "If Kollman thinks he's been entrapped I guess he can lay that on the jury and see what it thinks."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Instructor Charged With Cocaine Trafficking (Massachusetts' 'Standard-Times' Says A New Bedford, Connecticut, Vocational School Substitute Teacher Was Popped With Almost A Pound Of Cocaine At His Residence) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 10:01:18 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US MA: Instructor Charged With Cocaine Trafficking Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: John Smith Source: Standard-Times (MA) Contact: YourView@S-T.com Website: http://www.s-t.com Pubdate: Tue., 24 Mar 1998 Author: Maureen Boyle, Standard-Times staff writer INSTRUCTOR CHARGED WITH COCAINE TRAFFICKING Police and school officials said yesterday they do not believe a part-time teacher at Greater New Bedford Regional Voc-Tech sold drugs to students -- or on school grounds -- but cannot rule it out until an investigation is complete. Eugene DeSouza, 43, an adult education instructor and substitute teacher at the school, was arrested on drug trafficking charges with his wife, Linda, 39, a home health aide, at their Martelle Street home in Acushnet Saturday night after police found more than $50,000 worth of cocaine in the house. The arrests and raid followed a three-month probe by police from the two communities. The couple were arraigned in 3rd District Court yesterday and held on $25,000 cash bail. "There is nothing that we know of at this point that indicates he sold drugs at the school or to students," said New Bedford Lt. Melvin Wotton, head of the Police Department's narcotics unit. "We don't have any evidence at this time that was going on." But school officials said they are taking the charges seriously and are conducting an internal investigation. Mr. DeSouza was teaching at the night school, but that program ended a few weeks ago, said Luis Lopes, program coordinator at the school. Mr. DeSouza -- who had no contract with the school -- is no longer employed at the school and no longer will be a substitute teacher, Mr. Lopes said. Jeffrey E. Riley, school superintendent and director, said in a prepared statement that Mr. DeSouza was hired as a substitute on an "as-needed basis." "During that time there has been no indication of any activities requiring disciplinary actions. However, Greater New Bedford Voc-Tech High School administration takes these charges very seriously. In addition to the New Bedford and Acushnet police departments' investigations, the administration has initiated its own internal investigation," Mr. Riley said, noting that the probe is continuing. Although there was no evidence that the suspects sold drugs at the school, one investigator said Mr. DeSouza tried to blame students for drugs found at the house. "For him to try to put the blame on the kids, that was pretty low," said New Bedford Detective Paul Oliveira, who investigated the case with Acushnet Detective Thomas Carreau. The couple's home -- bought 11 years ago -- is along a dirt road in a quiet part of town, Acushnet Chief Michael Poitras said. "If four cars come in at night, that's unusual," he said. But the seizure of nearly a pound of cocaine from the house illustrates that drug dealing can occur anywhere and is not just a city problem, Chief Poitras said. "They may live here and move the drugs elsewhere. That seems to be a recurring theme," the chief said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drug Abuse Policy (Letter To Editor Of Spokane, Washington, 'Spokesman-Review' From Nora Callahan Of The November Coalition Says Addiction Is A Medical Problem And It's Far Past Time To Let The Medical Establishment Take The Reigns From Legislators And Law Enforcement - Are We Going To Build Schools Or Prisons For Our Children?) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 22:11:35 -0800 To: email@example.com From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: US WA: PUB LTE: Drug Abuse Policy Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Nora Callahan
Source: Spokesman-Review (WA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 DRUG ABUSE POLICY Misguided policy ever more costly In Wednesday's paper we read in the headlines, "Physicians criticize U.S. drug policy". Saturday we read that Gov. Locke signed three bills designed to crack down on people who operate methanphetamine labs. U.S. physicians urge our country's citizens to realize that drug addiction can be treated as effectively as any chronic disease. Our legislators ignore scientific studies and so we raise the risk that will raise the price of an addictive drug. When the price goes up, so do the profits and meth labs will operate in greater numbers than ever before. So will prisons. The public has little understanding of drug issues because legislators fan the flames of hysteria about drug use and abuse. Appearing tough on crime wins votes - but isn't it time we get smart? Addiction is a medical problem and it's far past time to let the medial establishment take the reigns from legislators and law enforcement. We have also read that in Montana the growing demand for prison cells is taking their entire budget for schools this year. Will our new laws do the same to our state? We are fast heading in that direction. Our own Department of Corrections budget is expected to triple in the next two years! The money will be siphoned from education, just as it has in every state across America. So what is it going to be? A medical problem or a criminal one? Are we going to build schools or prisons for our children? Nora Callahan, director of The November Coalition
------------------------------------------------------------------- Reno Wants Inmate Drug Treatment ('Associated Press' Notes US Attorney General Janet Reno And US Health And Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala On Tuesday Urged Public Support For President Clinton's Proposal To Allow States To Use Prison Construction Money For Drug Treatment) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 08:07:32 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: Wire: Reno Wants Inmate Drug Treatment Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: G. A ROBISON Source: Associated Press Pubdate: 24 Mar 1998 RENO WANTS INMATE DRUG TREATMENT WASHINGTON (AP) -- Declaring the nation cannot arrest its way out of the drug problem, two Cabinet secretaries urged public support Tuesday for President Clinton's proposal to allow states to use prison construction money for drug treatment. They said "zero tolerance" for drugs in prison, along with vigorous testing, extensive treatment and consistent follow-through once prisoners are released from jail will lower rates of both addiction and crime. "We need to speak clearly to the American people and let them know that treatment and testing does work," Attorney General Janet Reno told a national conference on drug addiction and crime. "We have a twofold policy: `Zero tolerance but maximum assistance,"' said Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala. "Because frankly, when a drug user actually lands in prison, we have a unique opportunity to get them into treatment, to break their addiction and to break the cycle of drugs, violence and criminality." "It's almost a no-brainer," said Barry McCaffrey, who convened the conference in his current role as the administration's director of drug-control policy. "We need a tough love approach." The three administration officials sought to rally support for a Clinton initiative to earmark $200 million in the next federal budget to identify prison drug users through testing and to make sure drug users get treatment. Clinton also asked that all states report on the level of drug use in their prisons and that they be allowed to use prison construction money for drug testing and treatment. Their calls for bipartisan approval of the proposals on Capitol Hill followed by a day the release of a Justice Department survey of people on probation from jail sentences. It found that nearly half of the probationers had been drinking or taking drugs or both at the time of their crimes. Another Justice Department study released in January showed that more than 60 percent of adult men arrested for an array of crimes tested positive for at least one drug. A study by the Federal Bureau of Prisons of recently released inmates who had received drug treatment in prison indicated that they were less likely to be rearrested or return to drugs. "We know that drug users who undergo testing and treatment while in prison are twice as likely to stay drug free -- and to stay crime free," Shalala said. Reno said: "To do just incarceration is not going to work. To do just prevention and treatment, that's not going to work either. We need a balanced approach."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drug Treatment Not Likely To Replace Jails (Version In 'Daily Arizona Star' Would Seem To Ignore Arizona Voters Who Endorsed Proposition 200 By A Two-To-One Ratio) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 15:53:25 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US: Drug Treatment Not Likely To Replace Jails Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Alan Randell Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 Source: Daily Arizona Star (AZ) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Author: Lawrence O'Rourke DRUG TREATMENT NOT LIKELY TO REPLACE JAILS A new conflict between politics and science has emerged from a recent recommendation that the nation treat drug addicts as sick people rather than jail them as criminals. More emphasis on medical treatment rather than jail for addicts was endorsed by a group of doctors, including top officials from the administrations of Presidents Reagan, Bush and Clinton. But there was an immediate negative reaction from Capitol Hill, where a lock-them-up-and throw-away-the-key attitude to drug addicts dominates. Rep. Bill McCollum, R-Fla., chairman of the subcommittee on crime, says the country needs to spend more money, not less, on catching drug pushers. The Clinton administration, aware that the public prefers a get-tough approach to drug addicts, has no plans to move big amounts of money from law enforcement to medical treatment. Public support for drug treatment is diminishing, says Robert Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health. Four in five Americans believe that the war on drugs has failed. So the tide of public opinion and political instinct is running against any change in emphasis from prison and aggressive law enforcement to prevention and treatment. The recommendation by the group called Physician Leadership on National Drug Policy declares that "enhanced medical and public health approaches are the most effective method of reducing harmful use of illegal drugs . . . The current emphasis - on use of the criminal justice system and interdiction to reduce drug use and the harmful effects of illegal drugs - is not adequate to address these problems." The physicians contend that medical care for addicts either on an out-patient or residential basis is cheaper than the $25,900 it costs annually to imprison a drug addict. It prices regular outpatient care at $1,800 to $2,500 a year, methadone maintenance at $3,900, and residential treatment at $4,400 to $6,800. "We recognize that sometimes treatment does not work," says Dr. Lonnie Bristow, an internist in San Pablo, Calif., and past president of the American Medical Association. But studies show that drug addicts are as likely to meet treatment requirements as people with other chronic diseases, such as diabetes, smoking, alcoholism, stroke, and heart disease. "Drug abuse is very treatable," says Bristow. Jeffrey Merrill of the University of Pennsylvania says that Americans might be more sympathetic to treatment for drug addicts if they realized that most addicts are not minority group members in big cities. Studies show that among young people who use cocaine, whites outnumber African-Americans nearly 10 to one, and Hispanics more than two to one. And young cocaine users come from what the nation regards as the best families. Some 53 percent of cocaine users have fathers who are college graduates. About two-thirds of monthly cocaine users are employed full-time. "The major, false stereotype is that drug addicts are social misfits and outcasts even though drug use is common throughout all segments of society," says Merrill. "Stigma is a barrier to those who would otherwise seek treatment, to doctors who would otherwise do more in treating addiction, and to legislators and public health officials who would otherwise do more to make treatment available," says Merrill. For every $1 invested in treatment, $7 is saved in medical and societal costs, says Dr. Philip Lee, former assistant secretary for health in the Clinton administration and faculty member at the University of California school of medicine in San Francisco. In sum, the physicians see treatment as an investment that will save money and cut down on crime, two goals that are found on Capitol Hill. But Congress doesn't want to be seen as soft on drug addicts by sending addicts to hospitals rather than behind bars. It will continue to put federal drug control money into law enforcement and new prisons. Lawrence M. O'Rourke writes in the McClatchy Newspapers Washington Bureau.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Kicking The Quick Fix - War On Drugs (Staff Editorial In 'Saint Louis Post-Dispatch' Contrasts Two Studies Released This Month, One Showing Addiction Treatment Works, Another Showing The Public Prefers Punishment) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 18:15:28 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US MO: Editorial: Kicking The Quick Fix - War On Drugs Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Mike Gogulski Pubdate: 24 Mar 1998 Source: Saint Louis Post-Dispatch Website: http://www.stlnet.com/ Section: Editorial Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org KICKING THE QUICK FIX - WAR ON DRUGS When it comes to the so-called war on drugs, Americans are hooked on quick fixes. We require the immediate gratification of harsher sentences, stiffer fines and slick slogans - even if that means forfeiting real progress. And while we're deluding ourselves with costly approaches, we shortchange more proven ways of combating the national drug problem. Two contrasting studies this month highlight the disparity between what scientific evidence shows we should do to win the war on drugs, and what public opinion dictates. First, the science: Drug and alcohol addiction are medical problems. The best way to beat them is to treat them - medically. That's the view of the Physician Leadership on National Drug Policy, a bipartisan group of prominent doctors and public health specialists. Second, public opinion: Nearly everyone knows that the war on drugs is a miserable failure. Nearly 80 percent of the people say so. But the popular answer to drug abuse is longer and longer jail time. It's easy to understand the appeal of longer jail terms to the public and the politicians who come courting. To citizens whose communities are besieged by junkies and dealers, the goal is to get these guys off the streets. Police busts appear to the public to do just that. At least for a while. Or until the junkie serves his sentence, is released without treatment and finds his way back to the street corner. When forming a national strategy to deal with drug abuse, we should consider these facts: * Drug treatment curbs crime - by up to 80 percent, according to one study. Jail sentences don't produce those results. * Drug treatment is relatively cheap. Jail is expensive. Traditional treatment costs an average of $1,800 per person per year. Jail costs $25,900. * Every dollar invested in drug treatment saves $7 in societal and medical costs, according to the physicians' report. Money spent on locking up users does little more than provide human warehousing unless there is effective treatment in prison. One last gap between perception and truth: Most people think drug abusers are primarily poor, uneducated and black. Yet most are whites, many from well-educated families. Despite the facts, we continue to spend just 20 percent of our drug-fighting dollars on treatment. The rest is thrown at politically popular, but fundamentally flawed, get-tough policies. If we really want to beat the national drug problem, it's time we kick the habit of the quick-fix, feel-good solutions, and pay attention to serious science. Copyright (c) 1997 Post Dispatch
------------------------------------------------------------------- A Kinder, Gentler FDA - Firms Say New Policies Make It Easier To Handle ('San Francisco Chronicle' Article Notes The US Food And Drug Administration Is Changing Its Procedures To Better Cater To Pharmaceutical Companies - Preceding Comments By List Subscriber Contrast Agency's Mendaciousness With Its Past Contortions Regarding Marijuana) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 09:34:15 -0800 From: email@example.com Subject: A Kinder, Gentler FDA-- Debating Points [Sender's note:] Throwing out old papers today, I found this article about the FDA rejivving its procedures to better cater to the needs and profits of big pharmaceutical companies. The FDA expresses its sell out with rules minimizing study and research into new drugs, products and therapies. This is exactly the opposite of the government's view of marijuana research which if done to their satisfaction would be completed sometime around the year 3,278. Going by past behavior, no marijuana research is good enough to settle the debate no matter how thoroughly, how well done or how big the study might be. Pharmaceutical research for prescription drugs, on the other hand, is often so sloppy that the dangers only appear when people start dropping dead from an "FDA approved" medication. Bad drugs are found as much by their deleterious effects and the trail of bodies they leave as by development research. This article proves the hypocrisy of the establishment in dealing with marijuana and other illicit drugs. Marijuana has been tested, checked, surveyed, analyzed and studied a hundred times more than any other drug submitted for approval. All of the science flatly contradicts the prohibitionist accusations against marijuana. No ordinary drug would be denied FDA approval for the petty "it causes hangnails" kind of aspersions Reefer Maniacs use against cannabis. They tried to stop one study because they claimed cannabis's appetite enhancing qualities would cause AIDS patients using marijuana to boost their food intake might raise their cholesterol levels, putting them at long-term risk of developing hardening of the arteries. That's the lunacy we need to expose in our debates. Debaters should cull this article for contradictions between the way cannabis research is done and the way Tylenol (a lethally dangerous drug) and other dangerous standard medications get approved. If I can, I'll try to get some references to drugs which were hastily approved and then recalled after a few dozen patients dropped dead. You can find this data in a publication called "Side Effects" in medical libraries. "Side Effects" tells you all of the things about drugs the manufacturers would like to bury at the bottom of the Marianis Trench. Aggressive debaters who don't mind holding the opposition up to ridicule, condemnation and possible lynching will find enough contradictions in the new FDA procedures to barbeque any narcomaniac who dares stand up for their corrupt science. The killer question is why a different scientific (?) standard is appied to marijuana research than for potentially lethal medications. R Givens *** Tuesday, February 24, 1998 San Francisco Chronicle Business Section C 1 A Kinder, Gentler FDA Firms say new policies make it easier to handle Carl T. Hall, Chronicle Staff Writer A new era is dawning at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Key provisions of the 1997 FDA Modernization Act finally took effect last week, capping a three-year battle [Image] on Capitol Hill to streamline the U.S. system for approving new drugs and medical devices. Biotech and medical devices companies say the changes, coming at a time of rapid technology innovation, promise to help transform medical tools and techniques. For patients, the new ``user friendly'' FDA law will mean quicker access to cutting-edge drugs and devices. Although it will take months for the FDA to translate the law into specific new procedures, medical technology firms say the agency -- which began making some changes while the law was being debated -- already is much easier to work with. ``I'm very happy with the changes,'' said Stuart Edwards, chief executive at Somnus Medical Technologies Inc., who recently showed off his Sunnyvale plant to U.S. Representative Joseph Barton, R- Texas, a leading congressional champion of FDA streamlining. Somnus just won FDA approval, after a mere 90-day review, for its latest ``Somnoplasty System'' -- a sort of handheld microwave tool doctors can use to treat chronic stuffy noses. ``We demonstrated that we have a product that does the job, and the FDA worked with us in a way that's been very beneficial,'' Edwards said. But some consumer advocates worry that the FDA is getting too cozy with companies it should be policing. Maura Kealey, legislative advocate for the Ralph Nader-founded group Public Citizen in Washington, D.C., helped lead the opposition to ``FDA reform'' on Capitol Hill. Now, Kealey warns that the FDA product-review system is being systematically watered down. One of her main concerns is that many product-makers will no longer have to track how new products work in actual use. Another big controversy focuses on a plan to let manufacturers hire private firms to test products. ``It's very scary,'' she said. ``The attitude now basically is, `Let's just put stuff out quicker, with less review, and hope for the best.' '' Defenders of the new system maintain that safety standards remain intact, and that new timetables and disclosure rules merely eliminate unnecessary delays in getting lifesaving products to patients. Under the leadership of former FDA head Dr. David Kessler, the FDA was world famous for its skeptical approach -- and notoriously difficult for product makers, as well as many organized patient groups, to figure out. ``It was always a bit of a black box,'' recalled Ginger Howard, president of the Silicon Valley-based vascular-products division of Guidant Corp. ``We didn't know what they would require, because we couldn't talk with the agency.'' Her company received approval in October, following a 113-day review, for a cardiovascular stent, a metal truss used to patch weak spots within a blood vessel. It was only the second product of its kind to win regulatory approval in the United States. Because of the relative novelty of the product and the high risk of fatalities should it fail, Howard said the company still had to conduct a ``very rigorous'' clinical study involving 1,040 patients. ``In today's environment (FDA reviewers) work with us collaboratively,'' Howard said, and try to reduce delays. ``They ask us a question today and we answer it tomorrow and they keep on reviewing. So we don't lose a lot of time.'' Whereas the FDA used to give few signals in advance, productmakers now say they can find out early on just what kind of data they need to gather to support an application. That has been the most profound change so far, said William Starling, CEO at Cardiac Pathways Corp. in Sunnyvale. His company submitted an application at the end of January for a new electro-surgical device for treating a heartbeat abnormality called ventricular tachycardia. Although the review is only beginning, Starling was stunned to get a call back within three days of filing: A senior reviewer just wanted to confirm that the documents were received and that a timetable was being set for the next steps. ``In the old days you would never have heard anything back from them,'' Starling said. ``Clearly they have a different attitude.'' In certain cases, manufacturers now can use previously published medical literature as a benchmark for comparing how well their products work. That eliminated the need to conduct a whole new set of expensive, time-consuming studies. Just because a product clears the FDA more quickly doesn't mean doctors will necessarily adopt it, or more importantly, get it covered by insurance. In the past few years, the bottleneck holding back medical innovation has shifted from the Washington regulators to the more complex landscape of insurance and managed care. ``The big problem now is not getting something through the FDA, it's getting it covered,'' said Don Freeman, head of Freeman Healthcare Technology, a San Francisco consulting firm. ``You can have the greatest product . . . and it can still be nearly impossible to get it reimbursed by managed care and the Medicare program. The regulatory issues by comparison are much easier to deal with.'' Nor have the regulations gotten so simple that the lawyers have nothing to do anymore. They just switched from fighting the FDA to explaining how the new system works. ``We have more work than ever before,'' said David Hoffmeister, a specialist in FDA affairs at the Palo Alto law firm Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati. (c)1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page C1
------------------------------------------------------------------- Needle Exchanges Can Save Lives (Op-Ed In New York's 'Newsday' Notes Federal Legislation Prohibiting Federal Support For Needle Exchange Expires On March 31, And Gives Several Reasons US Health And Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala On April 1 Should Authorize Needle Exchange Programs To Fight AIDS And Reduce Drug Abuse) Date: Sat, 28 Mar 1998 17:29:49 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: OPED: Needle Exchanges Can Save Lives Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Kevin Zeese Source: Newsday (NY) Pubdate: 24 Mar 1998 Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.newsday.com Author: Robert Dawidoff Note: Robert Dawidoff is a professor of American history at Claremont Graduate University. NEEDLE EXCHANGES CAN SAVE LIVES IMAGINE IF YOU were the nation's top public health official and you could save thousands of lives and curb the spread of AIDS with your signature. That is the opportunity facing Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shallala. On April 1, she can authorize federal support for needle exchange programs for intravenous drug users and thereby significantly reduce the transmission of HIV. Intravenous drug users habitually share their hypodermic needles, exposing each other as well as their sexual partners and their offspring to the deadly disease. In an exchange program, addicts turn in their used dirty needles for clean ones. April 1 date is significant because federal legislation prohibiting federal support of needle exchange expires on March 31. If these programs can be shown to reduce the spread of AIDS without encouraging drug use, then HHS may proceed with the exchange. Needle exchange has been shown to meet these conditions. So what are public health officials waiting for? They must seize this chance to save American lives. Needle exchange is nobody's ideal solution to the problems of AIDS transmission or intravenous drug use. But there is no doubt that it works. According to studies of five New York City needle exchange programs, the HIV-infection rate was cut by two-thirds. The urgency and effectiveness of needle exchange have been endorsed by the president's own advisory council on AIDS, the American Medical Association, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Public Health Association, the National Commission on AIDS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the American Bar Asssociation, to name a few. Between 650,000 and 900,000 people in the United States are infected with HIV, and more than a million Americans inject illegal drugs. New medical therapies have reduced AIDS deaths significantly but have no impact on the rate of infection. There is a scientific consensus that clean needles and safer sex significantly reduce the rates. But the focus of public response has been on treatment, not prevention, as if these were competitive goals. The habitual sharing of needles spreads AIDS among users, their sexual partners and their babies. A large proportion of the estimated 6,000 cases of pediatric AIDS can be traced to shared needles. One third of all AIDS cases and more than half of those involving women result from injections of drugs or having sex with people who do. Fighting drug use is hard enough. When you add AIDS and its transmission, however, the public health system is overwhelmed. Needle exchange programs safely dispose of used needles. Most programs refer clients to HIV testing and counseling and drug treatment programs. A 1997 study, published in The Lancet (a British medical journal), estimated that needle exchange programs might have prevented between 4,400 and 9,700 HIV infections, which would have saved as much as half a billion dollars in health care expenditures. The same study estimated that needle exchange might prevent 11,300 more cases among drug injectors, their sexual partners and their children. It isn't hard to figure out why the government is not preparing the public to support needle exchange. Officials seem to have confused saving American lives with saving their own skins. It may well be that the political consequences of instituting needle exchange will be as contentious as the administration apparently fears. But politics as usual will not stop the AIDS plague. Courageous, professional and mature decisions about public health will. Surely we have learned something from the deadly results of government inaction during the first decade of the AIDS epidemic. An informed public must make it politically dangerous for the administration not to act on April 1 to save lives. Otherwise a missed opportunity will become a fatal April Fool's joke. Copyright 1998, Newsday Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------- What The Antismoking Zealots Really Crave (Is Prohibition, According To 'Boston Globe' Columnist Jeff Jacoby In A Review Of Jacob Sullum's Book, 'For Your Own Good,' A Lucid And Superbly Researched Critique Of The Antitobacco Jihad) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 06:50:07 -0800 (PST) To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (Alan Randell) Subject: What the antismoking zealots really crave Newshawk: Alan Randell Pubdate: March 24, 1998 Source: Boston Globe Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org URL: http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe/globehtml/083/What_the_antismoking_z ealots_really.htm What the antismoking zealots really crave By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist, 03/24/98 A question for antitobacco militants: Why do you draw the line at private homes? To protect nonsmokers, especially young ones, you've made it illegal to smoke in more and more places. You have banished smoking from tens of millions of private workplaces; from airplanes and buses; from most government buildings. You have gotten hundreds of cities - Boston is your latest conquest - to ban smoking in restaurants altogether. In California, you've even driven smokers from bars. But smoking at home is OK. Curious, no? You militants routinely justify your crusade by claiming to act for "the kids," yet in the one place a kid is likeliest to encounter cigarettes, smoking is wholly unregulated. Why? It can't be because you respect the rights of private property owners. After all, restaurants and bars are private property. And it can't be because the state never interferes in the way parents raise their children - the state interferes in everything from the commercials children see on television to the paint that goes on their walls. So why aren't you clamoring to take away parents' freedom to smoke at home? Granted, that would just about outlaw all smoking. But isn't that what you want? One of the nation's foremost antismoking activists, Stanton Glantz, compares cigarette manufacturers to Timothy McVeigh, the mass murderer of Oklahoma City. A New York Times reporter likens tobacco employees to "the guards and doctors in the Nazi death camps." Over a decade ago, the Journal of the American Medical Association was calling for "a declaration of all-out war" against the perpetrators of "the tobaccoism holocaust." Such murderous rhetoric is typical. On taxpayer-funded billboards in California, a man about to light up asks, "Mind if I smoke?" The woman replies: "Care if I die?" Elizabeth Whelan of the American Council on Science and Health says smoking kills more people than "if every single day two filled-to-capacity jumbo jets crashed, killing all on board." A former director of the Centers for Disease Control has predicted that "the annual global death toll of tobacco will equal the total death toll of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany." Such hysteria is more than repugnant, it is false. In "For Your Own Good" (Free Press), a lucid and superbly researched new book on the antitobacco jihad, journalist Jacob Sullum pinpoints the deceit: "The rhetoric of tobacco's opponents implies a rough equivalence between a 65-year-old smoker who dies of lung cancer and a 40-year- old businessman killed in a plane crash, a 19-year-old soldier shot in the trenches of World War I, or a child murdered by the Nazis at Auschwitz. But there is a big difference between someone who dies suddenly at the hands of another person or in an accident and someone who dies as a result of a long-term, voluntarily assumed risk." Maybe so, you antismoking activists might say, but the harm caused by smoking isn't limited to the smoker. His smoke poisons everyone he comes into contact with. They shouldn't be made to suffer because of his vile habit. Nonsmokers have a right to a smoke-free society. In fact, the danger of secondhand smoke is more myth than science. Most epidemiological studies have found no statistically significant link between lung cancer and secondhand smoke. Exposure to cigarette fumes may not be good for your health, but the medical fact is that secondhand smoke is not likely to do lasting harm to anyone. Still - what about those kids growing up in smokers' homes? How can you sworn enemies of tobacco be so intent on criminalizing the smoke in smoky jazz bars, yet do nothing about the millions of children whose parents light up with abandon? Why don't you demand that cigarettes be outlawed in any house with kids? In other words, why don't you demand that cigarettes be outlawed - period? Maybe the answer is that even zealots like you realize it wouldn't work. Alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s was a hideous failure, drenching the country in corruption, crime, and oceans of impure alcohol. In a nation with 45 million smokers, Tobacco Prohibition would be no less a disaster, and most of you know it. Or maybe the answer is that you couldn't afford to end smoking entirely. Ban all tobacco, and there'd be no tobacco taxes or (legal) tobacco profits. No profits or taxes, no hundreds of billions of dollars to fund a settlement. No gusher of dollars for new "health care" programs. No bonanza for plaintiffs' lawyers. No lavish budgets for all your antitobacco outfits. No goose. No golden eggs. But I think the real answer is that you don't think you can get away with it - yet. Already some of you are targeting smokers' homes. At least one law review article has claimed that parents who expose their children to tobacco smoke "should be viewed as committing child abuse." A Pennsylvania legislator has proposed a ban on smoking in any vehicle carrying a minor. More intrusion is on its way. Nicotine may be pleasurable, but it's nothing like the high of forcing others to behave the way you want them to. Power over other people's pleasures is very addicting, isn't it? "The true nature of the crusade for a smoke-free society," Sullum writes, is "an attempt by one group of people to impose their tastes and preferences on another." It's illiberal, it's vindictive, it's intolerant. It's you.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Bloc Demands Marijuana Debate ('Ottawa Citizen' Says Bloc Quebecois Wants A Full Debate In Canada's Parliament On The Legalization Of Marijuana For Medicinal Purposes) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 23:50:12 -0800 To: email@example.com From: Chris Clay
Subject: Bloc demands marijuana debate SOURCE: Ottawa Citizen DATE: March 24, 1998 AUTHOR: Stephen Bindman CONTACT: firstname.lastname@example.org WEBSITE: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/ BLOC DEMANDS MARIJUANA DEBATE The Bloc Quebecois wants a full parliamentary debate on the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. MP Bernard Biras presented a motion yesterday in the Commons calling on the Liberal government to take "all necessary measures" to decriminalize marijuana for therapeutic reasons. Mr. Bigras said it's time for the government to stop studying the issue and come up with a clear position. Doctors, criminologists, the terminally ill and the media -- but not the elected representatives in the Commons -- have all begun to debate legalization, he complained. "It is unacceptable that terminally ill people are paying the price for the lack of political courage of this government," the 29-year-old Rosemont MP told a press conference. "Legislators have shown a total lack of comprehension and compassion towards the chronically ill who aspire to nothing but to live with dignity. The situation is urgent because every day of suffering counts for these people." A Reform MP has already introduced a similar private-member's motion asking that MPs debate the issue. Last year, an Ontario court ruled a Toronto man suffering from severe epilepsy has a constitutional right to cultivate, possess and smoke pot to alleviate his symptoms. The federal government is appealing that ruling but similar constitutional challenges are under way in courts across Canada. Justice Minister Anne McLellan said yesterday she has sympathy for people who believe marijuana can alleviate their suffering, but she would not say when a study by officials in her department and Health Canada will be completed. Until it is, she said, Canada's drug laws will be enforced. Advocates of the medicinal use of marijuana contend it promotes appetite and suppresses nausea, making it a potential lifesaver for cancer or battling the wasting syndrome caused by AIDS. An Angus Reid poll last year found 83 per cent of respondents supported the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes. "Buyers' clubs" have popped up across Canada for patients whose doctors advise them to smoke marijuana. The Bloc's motion was strongly endorsed by Ottawa physician Don Kilby, who has applied to Health Canada for a special permit to supply a patient with marijuana to help relieve some of his AIDS symptoms.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Police Get Corporate Sponsorship ('Vancouver Sun' Says Police All Across Canada Are Accepting Everything From Cell Phones To Vehicles) From: email@example.com (Matt Elrod) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Police get corporate sponsorship Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:06:30 -0800 Source: Vancouver Sun Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: Tuesday 24 March 1998 Section: TOP STORIES Police get corporate sponsorship Catherine Porter Vancouver Sun Faced with the reality of tight budgets, community police stations across the country are increasingly calling for backup from corporate sponsors, accepting everything from cell phones to vehicles. "It's happening right across the country," RCMP national headquarters media relations officer Sergeant Andre Guertin said Monday in an interview from Ottawa. "Policing is so expensive that we have been more creative in forming new partnerships with the community, including businesses." Langley RCMP is leading the Lower Mainland in such efforts. Constable Pierre Lemaitre is especially gifted at garnering corporate support. Eight months after his arrival in the community from Prince George, the community policing officer has solicited six cars from six different local dealerships to outfit all of the region's community policing offices. In exchange, each of the vehicles flash dealer stickers on their tail ends. And White Rock victim-assistance officers started riding in a sponsored van five years ago, and today two of the six police bicycles flash company decals. Delta police spun a similar deal two years ago with the local rotary club and a car dealer for a van. Surrey RCMP's media liaison officer Constable Grant Learned just struck a partnership with a local dealership for a 1998 Ford Venture van. And it doesn't stop at that. Community policing offices across the Vancouver area are stocked with donated fax machines, furniture and supplies. All seven White Rock RCMP vehicles were recently equipped with cell phones by a local company in return for a small sticker on each bumper. And Langley's new community policing office was renovated entirely by local businesses, as well as outfitted with a new boardroom table and chairs. Even vehicles based in the RCMP headquarters community policing unit in Ottawa were sponsored by local companies, said headquarters media relations officer Sergeant Andre Guertin. Although the RCMP has guidelines governing such sponsorships, it is up to the officers in each community to venture into the field and solicit companies, Guertin said. Although this strategy might please taxpayers, the prospect of a privately funded police force raises questions of integrity. Will donations to police by individuals and private companies threaten the objectivity and independence of police offers? As Simon Fraser University criminology professor Paul Brantingham pointed out, even if community policing can't be bought off, the possibility of this happening in the public perception is potentially harmful. "There's the potential of cutting into policing credibility," he said. RCMP community relations officer Sergeant Russ Grabb said: "To answer that question, you have to understand the philosophy behind community policing that was brought in a few years ago." In contrast to the old "paramilitary" kind of policing, the concept of community policing is based on forming partnerships with the public and, together, generating more proactive attempts to curb crime, he said. Funding for law enforcement in Canada has been especially tight in recent years. Rank-and-file RCMP officers across the nation have not had a pay increase for more than five years. The wage freeze has had a real impact in the Lower Mainland, the area with the nation's high cost of living. Seven senior officers, including four homicide investigators, have resigned from the Surrey RCMP in the last year to earn more money in jobs with provincial agencies and the private sector. The departure of so many veteran investigators comes as Surrey police try to cope with a record seven homicides in the first two-and-a-half months of 1998. Community police offices, aimed at nipping crime in the bud before it surfaces, are considered one of the most cost-effective law enforcement tools. They are typically located in the heart of the municipality and are run largely by volunteers. Programs emerging from these offices, such as Block Watch and safety education at schools, are aimed at nipping crime in the bud before it surfaces. Also, by soliciting local involvement, police hope to foster a sense of community ownership, with neighbourhoods conducting their own policing. It is only natural, then, that many of the community policing programs are funded by the community, Grabb said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- But We Still Love Our Men In Blue ('Ottawa Sun' Says An International Survey By Statistics Canada Shows - Surprise! Canadians Rate Their Police The Best In The World) From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Matt Elrod) To: email@example.com Subject: ... BUT WE STILL LOVE OUR MEN IN BLUE Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:03:04 -0800 OTTAWA SUN: Top Stories March 24, 1998 ... BUT WE STILL LOVE OUR MEN IN BLUE Canadians rate their police officers the best in the world, according to an international survey. The big thumbs up comes despite one in four Canadians reporting that they were victims of crime, and the fact that the country has one of the smallest ratios of officers per capita, says Statistics Canada. An international study of 11 western industrial nations found 80% of Canadians thought their police were doing a good job -- compared to 77% in the second-ranked U.S. Canucks love their police far more than the English love their famed British Bobby, according to the survey -- the police approval rating in England and Wales was only 68%. The lowest approval rating of all was in The Netherlands -- only 45% gave the Dutch police the thumbs up.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Pot Growing Transplant Man Is Freed (Britain's 'Times' Says A Judge At Nottingham Crown Court Last Week Allowed A Liver Transplant Patient And Father Of Six To Go Free After He Admitted Growing And Using Cannabis To Ease His Pain - The Judge Said, 'It Does Seem From A Number Of Cases That Appear Before Me That It Is Of Benefit To A Number Of Persons,' But A Spokesman For Home Secretary Jack Straw Said, 'There Has Been No Compelling Research') Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 09:54:26 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com (Joel W. Johnson) Subject: MN: UK: Pot Growing Transplant Man is Freed Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: "(Zosimos) Martin Cooke"
Source: Times The (UK) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.the-times.co.uk/ Pubdate: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 POT-GROWING TRANSPLANT MAN IS FREED A JUDGE has allowed a liver transplant patient to go free after he admitted growing and using cannabis to ease his pain. Sympathising with him, Judge John Hopkin said: "I accept that's why you were growing it; to relieve the considerable pain you must suffer. That is against the law as it stands at the present time, but there is very substantial mitigation in your case." Richard Gifford, 49, a father of six, was given a two-year conditional discharge at Nottingham Crown Court last week after pleading guilty to producing and possessing cannabis. The judge said: "Whether this substance should be obtained by prescription is a matter for Parliament. But it does seem from a number of cases that appear before me that it is of benefit to a number of persons." Yesterday Gifford pledged to carry on smoking the drug: "While I am still alive, I intend to carry on using it," he said. His family doctor also backed his use of cannabis in a letter to the judge. The court heard that police found cannabis plants, some 8ft tall, growing in Gifford's back garden in Nottingham. Gifford said after the case that he first smoked the drug in 1968 after being medically discharged from the Royal Engineers because of a spinal disorder. He then contracted hepatitis and, in 1996, he underwent a liver transplant. His chances of surviving were put at less than 40 per cent. At the height of his suffering, the former garage owner was smoking up to 20 cannabis "joints" a day, drinking marijuana tea and even eating freshly picked leaves with his roast beef and Yorkshire pudding. "I couldn't begin to tell you the amount of pain and suffering I have had to endure. But I was able, once I had the availability of cannabis, to stop using prescribed drugs such as morphine and other strong painkillers which are habitually addictive," he said. Gifford's wife, Miriam, a clairvoyant, said she had never touched cannabis but would not hesitate to use the drug if she fell ill. Her husband said he had been buying it on the streets since the police cut down his 12 8ft plants. He has asked for a licence to grow the drug legally or be able to obtain it on prescription but he had been turned down. Medical experts have claimed that cannabis also brings relief to people with arthritis and multiple sclerosis, and stimulates appetites of Aids patients. Paddy Tipping, Parliamentary Private Secretary to Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, said that the Government had no plans to decriminalise cannabis: "People like Judge Hopkin say they acknowlege there is a valuable medical effect, but there has been no compelling research done to suggest that."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Protests Greet First Police Roadside Tests For Drug-Taking ('The Scotsman' Says That While Scottish Motorists Were Tested For Illegal Drugs For The First Time Yesterday, The Scottish Human Rights Centre Protested The Use Of New 'Drug' Detection Swabs For Cannabis As Having No Value In Determining Impairment) Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:27:28 -0300 (ADT) Sender: Chris Donald
From: Chris Donald To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Scottish Human Rights Group Criticizes Police Roadside Drug Tests from: http://www.marijuananews.com From: The Scotsman Scottish Human Rights Group Protests New "Drug" Detection Swabs; No Practical Use In Determining Impairment [note: this is a little old, but apparently the Scottish police are doing a second set of tests, announced yesterday. See the mjnews.com site] contact: Letters_ts@scotsman.com March 24, 1998 By Karen McVeigh PROTESTS GREET FIRST POLICE ROADSIDE TESTS FOR DRUG-TAKING Scottish motorists were tested for illegal drugs for the first time yesterday, as part of a Government crackdown on drugs driving. The roadside tests of motorists in Strathclyde, carried out in a pilot scheme of field trials on new scientific equipment, was condemned by civil rights groups. The trials were carried out by four police forces, including Strathclyde, which used the new device on motorists driving in Glasgow's Broomielaw. The Scottish Human Rights Centre said that use of the testing equipment, which can detect the presence of cannabis a month after it had been taken, was "premature". They fear that the equipment can detect minute traces of drugs long after they have been ingested, but cannot quantify the amount. The equipment is so sensitive that it could pick up traces of cannabis at one part in 100 million. Strathclyde Police stopped 150 drivers yesterday but none tested positive. They will test about 5,000 motorists for cannabis, cocaine, opiates and amphetamines over the next three weeks. In Glasgow, where Chief Inspector Stewart Daniels tested the use of Drugwipe on passing motorists, he said he fully expected drugs testing to become as common as the breathalyser. He said: "It looks like this is the road we have to go down. The incidence of driving while under the influence of drugs has risen fivefold in the last ten years, while drink driving has remained the same. The gap between the number of people drink driving and driving while illicit drugs are in their system is closing. "We need to look at whether we require a change in the legislation to ensure roadside testing, but that is a long way down the line." Alan Miller, the chairman of the Scottish Human Rights Centre, said: "The pilot scheme is premature. We have not been able to correlate between the level of drugs and the level of impairment. "Neither can we distinguish in some cases between lawful and unlawful drugs. This exercise is simply to prepare public opinion for police powers for drug testing." Driving while impaired by drugs or alcohol is an offence, but although there is a limit for alcohol above which a person is legally understood to be impaired, no level exists for drugs, whether legal or illegal, leaving it up to the police to prove impairment. Chief Insp. Daniels admitted that the device was unreliable as a method of measuring whether a drug impairs driving or even whether a substance was illegal or not. The medicine, codeine, which is an opiate, turns to morphine in the body. "There are a number of arguments still to be worked out - we don't have limits set, for instance. Another argument is, if we do set a level, would we be condoning drug taking below that limit? "The main aim of today's tests are to guage the public's reaction to the testing and to test out the practicality of the devices themselves." Motoring organisations welcomed the tests, albeit with reservations. A spokeswoman for the Automobile Association said she would like to see more research done on the levels of drugs that would cause impairment. A Royal Automobile Club spokeswoman said she doubted if the device would be used in its present form. The Drugwipes incorporate a cotton swab which is wiped on the forhead of motorists, catching a beat of sweat. Any drug traces detected by the device will result in a visible colour change on a strip of material. A spokeman for the Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions, which is co-ordinating the trials by Lancashire, Cleveland, Sussex and Strathclyde police said: "This scheme is about road safety. It will not be used to prove impairment, but will be used as a screening device to help the police in making the law more enforceable." -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to 1998 Daily News index for March 19-25
to Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980324.html