------------------------------------------------------------------- On The Road To Addiction? (A letter to the editor of the Oregonian expresses curiousity about whether Oregon's first authorized medical-marijuana user, No. 00001, will suffer all the dire consequences the government has been warning about for the last 75 years.) Newshawk: Portland NORML http://www.pdxnorml.org/ Pubdate: Sun, Jun 06, 1999 Source: Oregonian, The (OR) Copyright: 1999 The Oregonian Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Address: 1320 SW Broadway, Portland, OR 97201 Fax: 503-294-4193 Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/ Forum: http://forums.oregonlive.com/ Author: Gerald Reed, Myrtle Creek ON THE ROAD TO ADDICTION? Now that Oregon's first authorized medical-marijuana user, No. 00001, has her card (May 22 article), is she going to become addicted to pot? Then is she going to go on to harder drugs and go out and commit some terrible crimes, as we have for so long heard? Or, has the government been lying to us about marijuana for 75 years? Gerald Reed Myrtle Creek
------------------------------------------------------------------- Smokers, not industry, pay (A letter to the editor of the Oregonian points out who is really paying for the multistate tobacco-industry settlement - $4 a carton more since December. And it looks like none of the settlement money will be be used to address smokers' health problems.) Newshawk: Portland NORML (http://www.pdxnorml.org/) Pubdate: Sun, Jun 06, 1999 Source: Oregonian, The (OR) Copyright: 1999 The Oregonian Contact: email@example.com Address: 1320 SW Broadway, Portland, OR 97201 Fax: 503-294-4193 Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/ Forum: http://forums.oregonlive.com/ Author: A.J. Warren, Northwest Portland Smokers, not industry, pay I would like to make a little correction to the May 24 editorial covering the tobacco settlement. This concerns the statement, "Remember where this cash came from." I believe it should have read, "Remember where the cash comes from." It comes from the dedicated cigarette smokers who have been paying an additional $4 per carton since December 1998 and who will continue to pay for some time. The tobacco companies have placed the financial burden for paying the "settlement" on the cigarette smokers, and in the long run it will not cost the tobacco people, as was intended. I thought the settlement was originally negotiated to cover a health problem. I would think that it should be used for the people who are paying for it.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Prisons Near Capacity (According to the Oakland Tribune, Robert Presley, a former cop and California state senator who heads the state's correctional agency, says that in just two years, "every nook and cranny" in the state's huge prison system will be filled with inmates. There are 160,000 inmates now, eight times the 1980 prison population. And despite massive prison construction in the 1980s and early 1990s, all but a few inmates are doubled up in cells designed for one person or housed in gymnasiums and other temporary quarters. Legislative Democrats quickly trashed Gov. Davis' prison construction program. Republicans are not displeased with Democrats' no-prisons posture. "Let's say a federal judge steps in and begins releasing inmates and let's say one of them rapes and murders someone," muses one senior Republican legislator. "Who'll get the blame?") Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 19:48:45 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: Prisons Near Capacity Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jerry Sutliff Pubdate: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 Source: Oakland Tribune (CA) Copyright: 1999 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Address: 66 Jack London Sq., Oakland, CA 94607 Website: http://www.newschoice.com/newspapers/alameda/tribune/ Author: Dan Walters (Sacramento Bee) PRISONS NEAR CAPACITY ROBERT Presley, the highly respected former cop and state senator who heads the state's correctional agency, says that in just two years, "every nook and cranny" in the state's huge prison system will be filled with inmates. There are 160,000 inmates now, eight times the 1980 prison population, thanks to get-tough policies adopted by legislators and voters. And despite massive prison construction in the 1980s and early 1990s, all but a few inmates are doubled up in cells designed for one person or housed in gymnasiums and other temporary quarters. The projected moment at which the system will be filled to the absolute brim has changed from time to time. But there's no question that it's coming and that it will arrive before more prisons can be built, due to construction lead time. No one knows what will happen when absolute capacity is reached. But prisoner rights groups probably will ask a federal court to begin ordering releases on humanitarian grounds and if they succeed, an unknown judge would assume effective control of prisons. The politics of the situation are, to say the least, complicated. For years, former Gov. Pete Wilson asked legislators to restart prison construction, but liberal legislators, who disliked the concept on principle, and conservatives, who disliked spending the money, formed an odd-bedfellows alliance to rebuff Wilson's demands. Both said they wanted the state to explore less intensive and/or less expensive alternatives to incarceration. A major player has been the powerful California Correctional Peace Officers Association, which paid lip service to alternatives but backed construction. More prisons mean more guards and more CCPOA members. The CCPOA, which had been a strong supporter of Republican Wilson, last year became an equally ardent and generous backer of Democrat Gray Davis' ultimately successful campaign for the governorship. And this month, Davis returned the favor by designating $355 million from the state's revenue windfall to build a new prison at Delano and begin designing another near San Diego. It also burnished Davis' carefully nurtured image of being a Democrat who's as tough as any Republican on crime. Legislative Democrats just as quickly trashed Davis' prison construction program. "Keep prisons for those who are violent," Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa said this week. And that's where the situation sits as the annual budget dance begins its final steps. Republicans are not displeased with Democrats' no-prisons posture. "Let's say a federal judge steps in and begins releasing inmates and let's say one of them rapes and murders someone," muses one senior Republican legislator. "Who'll get the blame?" Still another factor in the prison melodrama is Corrections Corporation of America, which has built a 2,300-bed prison on speculation in the Southern California desert and is offering, in effect, to help the state solve its overcrowding problem. One of the Legislature's leading opponents of state prison construction, Senate Democratic floor leader Richard Polanco, is openly championing the private prison campaign. But the ever-powerful CCPOA is, for obvious reasons, strongly opposed, and the Davis administration has given the private prison firm a cold shoulder. So how will all of this play out? Negotiations are under way among legislators and Davis aides on a compromise -- similar to one last year with Wilson -- that would add a few prison beds in return for more nonprison treatment programs. The only certainty, however, is that as each day passes, the moment the prisons overflow grows closer.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Appeals Court Rules In Favor Of Pot Advocate (The Hawaii Tribune-Herald expands on Tuesday's news about the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Hawaiian hemp activist Aaron Anderson is entitled to bring a civil lawsuit against Hawaii County. The court said Anderson provided enough evidence to show that prosecutor Jay Kimura either knew about alleged ongoing constitutional violations by former deputy prosecutor Kay Iopa and approved of them, or was deliberatey indifferent to them.) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 07:18:35 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US HI: Appeals Court Rules In Favor Of Pot Advocate Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Roger Christie Pubdate: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 Source: Hawaii Tribune-Herald (HI) Copyright: Hawaii Tribune Herald. Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.hilohawaiitribune.com/ Author: Hunter Bishop APPEALS COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF POT ADVOCATE Deputy prosecutor gave grand jury false evidence, judges say Did Hawaii County Prosecutor Jay Kimura know that his deputy was violating Aaron Anderson's rights when she prosecuted him for possession of marijuana in 1991? That would be the main question if a lawsuit filed against the county prosecutors comes back to Hawai'i, according to an Appeals Court ruling in San Francisco Tuesday. The three-judge panel reversed a lower court decision and ruled in favor of Anderson, saying that former Deputy Prosecutor Kay Iopa gave a grand jury false evidence to indict him and then tried to silence him in a plea agreement. Anderson, an outspoken marijuana advocate and frequent candidate for political office on the Big Island, sued Kimura, Iopa and the County of Hawaii in 1995 for prosecuting him on a felony charge of second-degree promotion of a detrimental drug. Anderson and fellow advocate Roger Christie, also a plaintiff in the federal lawsuit, had been arrested in 1991 for receiving a 25-pound mail order package of supposedly sterile hemp seeds, which they said they would use in food products. Anderson and Christie alledged that they were prosecuted for possession of the seeds because they are vocal supporters of legalizing marijuana. Iopa sought grand jury indictments against Anderson and Christie in January 1992, "at least in part because of their advocacy for the legalization of marijuana," according to the appeals court ruling. When somebody known as a potential marijuana grower buys 25 pounds of hemp seed, the purchase "is very vocally, very outwardly advocating the legalization of marijuana," Iopa told jurors when the case came to trial in 1992. But to obtain the indictment, Iopa presented false evidence that Anderson and Christie's hemp seeds had germinated when tested, wrote Judge Susan Graber for the appeals panel. "After obtaining the indictment, Iopa offered to enter into a plea agreement..., However, Iopa refused to negotiate unless (Anderson and Christie) agreed to not write any more letters to the newspaper about the case," Graber wrote. The criminal charge against Christie was dropped in 1995. Anderson went to trial on the drug-possession charge last year, but it ended in a mistrial with a deadlocked jury. Prosecutors wanted a retrial, but last fall the case was dismissed by Circuit Court Judge Greg Nakamura. Christie and Anderson filed their civil rights lawsuit in 1995 alleging that Kimura, Iopa, and Hawaii County had violated their rights to speak freely, to petition the government and to be free from government oppression. The county argued that it wasn't legally responsible for Iopa's alleged violations, and the case was essentially dismissed on that basis by U.S District Court Judge David Ezra. Ezra's ruling was appealed on behalf of the plaintiffs by Hilo attorney Steven D. Strauss. In Tuesday's ruling, the appeals court said Anderson had raised enough questions about Kimura's role in the prosecution to take the case to trial. The judges cited evidence that Kimura knew of Iopa's alleged ongoing constitutional violations and either approved of, or was "deliberately indifferent" to them. The judges ruled that the lawsuit should go to trial in Hawaii in order to determine whether the county is liable for cash damages for violating Anderson's constitutionally protected right to free speech. The ruling only pertained to Anderson., not Christie, however, because Christie's criminal case had been dismissed before the civil case was filed. Also at issue is whether or not the seeds police took as evidence from Anderson and Christie were actually sterilized. Strauss said Thursday that a report by the Hawaii State Department of Agriculture indicated "zero germination" from Anderson's seeds, and that some "abnormal" seeds had cracked open but could not continue growing into plants. Kimura insisted Thursday that police had actually germinated some of the seeds and that the University of Hawaii experts who tested the batch have a higher standard for the definition of germination that police and prosecutors. Hawaii County police Detective Dennis DeMorales testified at Anderson's trial that police grew 11 plants up to eight inches tall from Anderson's batch of supposedly sterile seeds. Kimura said he did not see those plants, nor were there any photographs of them, but that there were "some storage problems" that could have affected the seeds tested later by state agriculture officials. Anderson and Christie were the first arrests in Hawaii County for possession of commercially sterilized hemp seeds, which are sold at Wal-Mart and Miranda Country Store in Hilo. Anderson and Christie also alleged that others in possession of similar seeds were known to prosecutors but not prosecuted. In reversing the District Court's decision, the appeals panel held that while the county is not liable for Iopa's actions, Anderson had provided enough evidence to show that Kimura, "a person with final policymaking authority, knew of Iopa's alleged ongoing constitutional violations and ...approved of thse violations or was deliberatey indifferent to them." Strauss said that if Kimura did not know what Iopa was doing with the case, he should have, and that the Ninth Circuit's ruling Tuesday "could cause grief for prosecutors all over the country." Kimura said Thursday that he will recommend an appeal of Tuesday's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. Short of that, the county could request a review of the ruling by all Ninth Circuit Court judges first. "We have a few options," he said. County Corporation Council Steve Christiansen said Thursday that the judicial review option is rarely sought or granted. He said the county might either allow the case to return to trial in District Court, which could take several more years to resolve through the appeals process, or seek an out-of-court settlement with Anderson. "We're looking at all our options," he said. Iopa resigned from her job as deputy prosecutor in December after a Circuit Court judge found that she had "misrepresented information" regarding evidence to the court on two occassions that led to a mistrial in a high-profile murder case. Iopa is now in private practice and working as a court-appointed public defender. She did not return a telephone call to her office seeking comment on the ruling. Also on the three-judge federal appeals panel were Jerome Farris and John T. Noonan.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Terence McKenna ~ New Update (A list subscriber forwards a note from the ailing psychedelic author's brother. Future bulletins will be posted at a web site.)Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 01:41:03 EDT Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Remembers@webtv.net (Genie Brittingham) To: Multiple recipients of list (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Terence McKenna ~ New Update More from Terence's brother, Dennis *** Date: 06/06/99 From: DJMcKenna@aol.com To All, Thanks for your love and support for Terence and his family at this sad time. We do appreciate your concern very much. I originally offered to send out regular updates on Terence's condition and progress, and as a result have been indudated with such requests. We realize that people do love Terence and want to be kept informed, but in service of the need to reduce email volume, (and to make time to give attention to the many other emails that are coming in regarding possible additional therapies) We've set up a website where these bulletins will be posted. go to www.levity.com/eschaton to look at all bulletins sent so far and new ones as they appear. Please feel free to forward this to all of your friends who may be interested. Please if you can help it do not send further requests to me to put you on the list...this is quickly becoming a full-time job...hopefully the website posting will free me for more pressing matters... At the same time, please know that we *do* appreciate your love and support; and, *we love you back*! Thanks so much, the good vibes and good wishes are the best healing energy anyone can ask for...and we are just drinking it in... To those of you who asked about Terence's condition; he is doing well. He is neither unconscious, demented, or suffering in any way at this point. His seizures are being controlled with medications, the swelling of the tumor (an expected result of the gamma knife treatment) is under control with steroid anti-inflammatory medications. Steroids are fine for short-term use, but have adverse side effects, so the goal is to reduce the levels of steroids he must take before the severe side-effects manifest. So far they have not, and Terence is feeling good, looking good, and taking all this with as good an attittude and with typical good humor as can be mustered in view of what is going on...so to all those who are worrying that T is suffering or otherwise in distress...please do not worry. Suffering may well come, but for right now, things are good and he is enjoying life. In love and light, with much gratitude, Dennis
------------------------------------------------------------------- Ethics panel rejects fine of UF professor as 'pitifully low' (The Miami Herald says the Florida Commission on Ethics on Thursday rejected a $2,000 fine for Charles Thomas, a criminology professor at the University of Florida who earned $3 million as a consultant to Wackenhut while he was also being paid to advise the state on prison policy. The decision means Thomas, a nationally recognized expert on prison privatization, now faces a much stiffer fine for his conflict of interests, perhaps as high as $30,000.) Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 10:42:47 +0000 To: email@example.com From: Peter Webster (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject:  Prisons: Ethics Panel Rejects Fine Of Uf Professor As `Pitifully Low' Ethics panel rejects fine of UF professor as `pitifully low' By STEVE BOUSQUET Miami Herald Capital Bureau TALLAHASSEE -- Stunned by a University of Florida professor's ethical conflict that earned him a $3 million consulting fee, the state Commission on Ethics on Thursday rejected imposing a $2,000 fine, which one member called "pitifully low." The decision means Dr. Charles Thomas, a nationally recognized expert on prison privatization, now faces a much stiffer fine -- perhaps as high as $30,000 -- for being on the payroll of a private corrections firm while he served as a paid advisor to the state on prison policy. Thomas, 56, who earns $84,000 a year as a UF criminology professor, also served as a paid state employee advising the Correctional Privatization Commission, which made him subject to the same code of ethics that applies to elected officials. He also held substantial stock in Wackenhut and other firms in the industry and served as director of UF's Private Corrections Project, a research venture financed by private prison firms. Ethics Commissioner Scott Clemons, a former state legislator from Panama City, called the $2,000 fine "pitifully low" and pushed for rejection of the penalty. "If the purpose of this sanction is to deter similar conduct in the future, then a $2,000 fine on a $3 million gain is not much of a deterrent," Clemons said. "I think they have to increase it significantly in order to have a deterrent quality ." Thomas had agreed to a $2,000 fine after negotiations with Assistant Attorney General Eric Scott. Last year, Thomas was the target of an ethics complaint filed by Ken Kopczynski, of the Florida Police<< Benevolent Association, a group that opposes privatization of the prison system. Although not a criminal matter, an ethics case is prosecuted by the state attorney general's office. Defending the $2,000 fine, Scott told ethics commissioners that university policy encouraged professors to seek outside work, that Thomas did not act with a corrupt<< intent, and made no attempt to hide the relationships. Thomas also has agreed to resign from the research position at UF, effective Aug. 13. What opened the eyes of ethics commissioners is this: Thomas pocketed $3 million as a fee in a single transaction, a merger involving Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) in January. Scott said he would open a new round of negotiations with Thomas, who is not represented by an attorney. He said it was obvious from the tone of Thursday's discussion that the next recommended fine will have to be much larger. e-mail: email@example.com *** sent by the Prison Activist List (firstname.lastname@example.org), a project of the Prison Activist Resource Center. See the Prison Issues Desk at http://www.prisonactivist.org. *** To subscribe: email "subscribe prisonact-list" to email@example.com Email firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions or problems. See the Discussion Forum at http://www.prisonactivist.org/forum
------------------------------------------------------------------- Why Losing Food Stamps Is Now Part of the War on Drugs (An op-ed in the Los Angeles Times by Herman Schwartz, a professor of constitutional law at American University and author of "Packing the Courts: the Conservatives' Campaign to Rewrite the Constitution," explains the cruel, counterproductive consequences that have resulted from an amendment by Sen. Phil Gramm to the 1996 welfare law. No one convicted of a felony state or federal drug law after Aug. 22, 1996, can ever get food stamps again. It makes no difference if the offender is sick, pregnant, a parent of a small child, in a treatment program, has been drug-free for years, is a first-time offender, works or is seeking work, a student or anything else. Nothing the offender can do will restore food-stamp eligibility, and administrators are allowed no discretion. There is one escape hatch: A state may choose not to go along with the federal ban or modify it.) Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 16:57:37 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: OPED: Why Losing Food Stamps Is Now Part of the War on Sender: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield Pubdate: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Copyright: 1999 Los Angeles Times. Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax: (213) 237-4712 Website: http://www.latimes.com/ Forum: http://www.latimes.com/home/discuss/ Author: Herman Schwartz Note: Herman Schwartz Is a Professor of Constitutional Law at American University and Author of "Packing the Courts: the Conservatives' Campaign to Rewrite the Constitution." WELFARE : WHY LOSING FOOD STAMPS IS NOW PART OF THE WAR ON DRUGS WASHINGTON--The nation's never-ending war on drugs, that perpetual futility, has always fallen most heavily on poor people. This has usually been the result of discriminatory enforcement or, as with laws against crack and cocaine, an unfair penalty structure. The latest blow, however, has led to a direct attack on the poor. Under a floor amendment, proposed by Sen. Phil Gramm (RTexas), to the 1996 welfare law and quickly adopted, anyone convicted of a felony for violating either a state or federal drug law after Aug. 22, 1996, can never get food stamps again. It makes no difference if the offender is sick, pregnant, a parent of a small child, in a treatment program, has been drug-free for years, is a first-time offender, works or is seeking work, a student or anything else. Nothing the offender can do will restore food-stamp eligibility, and administrators are allowed no discretion. There is one escape hatch: A state may choose not to go along with the federal ban or modify it. So far, at least 27 states, including New York, Florida and Ohio, have opted out in whole or in part. California has chosen not to opt out. For those caught by the law, the loss of food stamps can be little short of catastrophic. For example: * Henry Turner is a 50-year-old disabled Indiana man. His sole income is Supplemental Security benefits, and he had been receiving food stamps since 1990. He suffers from arthritis, diabetes, gastritis and high blood pressure. In 1997, he was convicted for possessing marijuana and now cannot get food stamps. Treatment for his diabetes requires four fruits a day and other special foods that he now cannot afford. He survives on whatever he can get from friends and charities. * A 40-year-old fisherman in Massachusetts with HIV became disabled after contracting pneumonia and has been unable to work. In 1997, he was convicted of a drug felony and thereafter denied food stamps. Now he cannot pay for the food he needs, which leaves him vulnerable to severe weight loss and viral infections, life-threatening conditions for people with HIV. Inadequate nutrition also reduces the efficacy of his medication. There are many other such cases. Losing food stamps is especially rough on women, particularly black and Latino. Children also suffer; in 1996, 89% of welfare families were headed by a single mother. Many poor women are ill-educated, have physical or mental disabilities and thus are forced to resort to selling drugs, one of the few ways for them to make ends meet. As a result, women constitute a disproportionately high number of drug offenders, and the number is increasing: 40% of today's female prisoners are in for drug offenses. The draconian food-stamp law also hurts those who try to help the poor. Hunger is a growing national problem, even for many who are working. Many jobs pay barely enough to cover rent. Food charities, which now number more than 30,000, are overwhelmed by demand even as their food supplies are shrinking. Food manufacturers, which formerly donated millions of tons of surplus food, have learned how to make use of imperfect products and accordingly have cut down on donations. This has also affected quality, as pantries and food kitchens are forced to buy cheaper foods to stretch shrinking budgets. Residential drug-treatment centers are particularly hard hit. These centers usually require residents on food stamps to turn them over to the facilities, which then get the food. A large proportion of their clients fall under the food-stamp ban for, as the director of one center observed, "It's rare to find anybody with a drug addiction who doesn't have some type of felony conviction." Residential centers in California already are having trouble in obtaining enough food because of the law and may have to curtail the number of people they treat. The food-stamp cutoff may actually encourage crime. The person most affected is the occasional minor offender. The big timer doesn't need food stamps, and repeat offenders are likely to get meals courtesy of the prison system, given the long-term sentences usually imposed on repeaters. Ex-drug offenders have a particularly hard time getting work, and since even drug addicts have to eat, without money or food stamps the temptation to steal or deal drugs will be strong. As Latosha McGee, convicted of a drug felony in California, said, "With no resources out there, it's easy to go back to what we know." The irrational severity of the law has led people like Turner, the disabled Indiana man, to challenge the law's constitutionality. Since the early 1970s, however, federal courts have effectively denied the poor any constitutional protection. To uphold a social-welfare law, the courts will accept any justification that is "reasonably conceivable." It makes no difference how basic the need, how harsh the law or how dire the applicant's situation. Just as long as a government lawyer can concoct some explanation that does not seem "patently arbitrary" to a judge, the law will be upheld, even if the explanation has no basis and is contradicted by evidence in the record. It is thus no surprise that Turner lost his suit. The trial judge found it "reasonably conceivable" that the law was intended to curb runaway welfare spending, deter drug use or reduce illegal food stamp trafficking. The judge cited no evidence to support his conclusions, nor could he, for none was presented to Congress and there is nothing reliable in the record. The food-stamp law is unlikely to produce substantial savings since more than half the states have opted out or modified it, and more are being urged to. Improved deterrence is just as improbable, for the loss of food stamps jeopardizes drug-treatment programs and is thus likely to increase, rather than decrease, drug abuse; an estimated 90% of imprisoned drug offenders who don't get treatment will be behind bars again within three years. Food-stamp fraud will not be reduced substantially, either, for little of it is attributable to drug users. In fact, there is little indication that any of these worthy purposes was on anyone's mind during the few minutes the legislation was considered. For millions of poor families, many with working members, food stamps are the last bulwark against hunger. In 1997, 24 million people obtained about $21 billion worth of food stamps. Meanwhile, the number of drug offenders in prison has shot up. In recent years, more than 300,000 people have been convicted of drug offenses each year. Though there is no way of knowing how many will fall under the lifetime food-stamp cutoff, one estimate is that the law could deny stamps to 200,000 people a year. In California, more than one-quarter of the large prison population is in for drug offenses; the number affected by the law is bound to be high, especially after post1996 offenders are released. Unhappily, once tough drug laws get on the books, it has proved almost impossible to get rid of them; the failure to substantially modify the harsh drug laws that former New York Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller pushed through in 1966, which have done nothing to reduce drug abuse in the state, are one example. But neither drug users nor the poor have any political clout. We will have to live with this latest assault on good sense and common decency for a long time to come.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Viagra Siezed In Drug Raids (Scotland on Sunday says Tayside police detectives found a stash of the impotence drug during dawn swoops in the Dundee area, proving a black market exists for it.) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 05:42:33 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: UK: Viagra Siezed In Drug Raids Sender: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org Pubdate: 6 June 1999 Source: Scotland On Sunday (UK) Contact: email@example.com VIAGRA SIEZED IN DRUG RAIDS Detectives who carried out a series of drugs raids have uncovered a black market in Viagra. The officers found a stash of the impotence drug during dawn swoops in the Dundee area. More than 30 people were arrested and have been reported to the procurator fiscal. A Tayside Police spokesman confirmed that over 30 homes had been raided and around 100 people searched. They also discovered cannabis, amphetamines and steroids with a street value of UKP4,500, and stolen property worth over UKP3,000. A force insider said the discovery of Viagra proved a black market in the drug. He said: "We have heard reports about it being used in clubs in combination with amphetamines." -------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the 1999 Daily News index for June 4-10
to the Portland NORML news archive directory
to the 1999 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/ii/990606.html