drugs

[kosmonaut]

How do you all feel about drugs in general now?  We all know about how they were demonized in Straight, and are demonized now in the media and by the federal government, but what is your personal experience?  Looking back I've done my share, and I still use certain ones on occasion.  I regret some of the things I did, because really they had no use other than as a party drug, but others I totally do not regret one bit (i.e. certain psychedelics) and will do again.  I think it's every adults choice whether or not to be allowed to do certain "drugs".  What do you think?

[85 Day Jerk]

For me it is not the drugs themselves, but the core reasons that people are taking them.  If you come home and smoke a bomber joint because your job sucks and your boss is an asshole, guess what? When you go back to work the next day, it could very well suck just as bad, and if you still have the reefer in your system, your reaction time to the bullshit will be that much slower than the day before.

I myself chose the John Wayne All American approach to my problems.  My old Buddy Weiser, and his partner Evan Williams were always there to comfort me after a hard day's work. (And hey kids, the best part of it all is that it is 100% legal to own, use, and buy)  Of course the draw-backs are the hangovers, dehydration, beer-gut, vitamin deficiencies, screwed up digestive tract, and poor diet.  Acid reflux disease?  I've been around since 1962 and this is a new one on me.  I think that it is from pounding too many drinks, not eating right, and the stomachs way of fighting back.  As soon as I gave up the nightly 6 pack, my "Acid Reflux" said Sayanara!  I think Prevacid is some bullshit cooked up to enable people to keep abusing alchohol so they don't rise up and kick the President's ass!

As far as mushrooms, peyote, and all that stuff goes, as long as it is done right, I don't care.  As far as legislating it all, I think pot should be legal, packaged in packs of 7, taxed highly, and available wherever fine products are sold.  This way maybe they will finally start patching some of the moon sized craters we have on our interstate system.

As far as drug testing goes, if the fat-cat corporate execs have their heads so far up their ass that they can't tell that a stock-boy returning from lunch wearing dark glasses and stocking tampons next to Kellogg's Pop Tarts  is'nt stoned off his ass, then they have no right to run a business as far as I am concerned.  If anyone wants to test my piss, they can follow me into a restroom and hold a cup out.  Oops!  Did ya get any on ya?

[ehm]

I don't do bad drugs, only the good ones.
::soapbox::

[Froderik]

If it feels good, do it...if it starts to cause problems for you like -  

not being able to breathe thru your nose, running off the road, wanting to beat the fuck out of people when you normally wouldn't want to, getting the shakes, feeling paranoid, stocking tampons next to the pop-tarts, etc..

 - then you probably should cut back a little.

I strongly believe that EVERY drug should be completely legal. Blah, blah, blah...The CIA brings it in and then blah, blah, blah and the government blah and the mafia blah (pow) blah ooops, i better shut up now... :scared:

[ehm]

On 2003-06-03 16:26:00, Mo wrote:

"I don't do bad drugs, only the good ones.

::soapbox:: "

Bad attempt at humor... I take drugs when I see fit. Assume whatever but I don't really wear hemp, GOT IT?

[Antigen]

I'm just gonna repost a post I made to Don's list.

>Some other things that will make you go hmm? If one has a behavioral problem and self medication was ones way of dealing with this, then wouldn't it stand to reason that if one remedies the behavioral problem one no longer needs to self medicate? Also, if straight convinced us that we were dope fiends because of our self medication then straight's diagnosis was incorrect. One is not a dope fiend, one has behavioral issues.

Or, taking it a step further (as I have a wont to do sometimes) one could look at it from entirely the opposite side. The behavioral problems could be a direct result of drug deficiency.

It's only been in the last hundred years or so, since the Industrial Revolution really took off, that our society has tried to draw a sharp and indelible line between drugs and ordinary food nutrients. If you eat lettuce, crave it, can't live without it, it may be that you need that trace amount of opium that it provides. If you're a real die hard, you can press about a dozen heads of regular, store bought lettuce, reduce the resulting juice over gentle heat for some number of hours and, viola! A small amount of opium tar suitable for ingesting as is, smoking or whatever (but not injection... too many foreign compounds in that!). This, of course, is only worthwhile as an experiment. Far cheaper and easier to just get pharmaceutical morphine if that's what you're after.

Lots of foods and herbs that we eat all the time contain psychoactive compounds. Never mind coffee, tea and chocolate that we all know about. Dandilion tea will reduce your blood pressure. Willow decoction is a good replacement for aspirin. Mugwort, as a tea or flavoring, helps induce a mild hypnotic state. Certain colorful fungi can induce an overwhelming hypnotic state.

Check out this page (like so many others) on herbal medicine:
http://members.aol.com/evenstar8/homepage.html

Lots of these medicinally active herbs can be found in any well stocked spice cabinet. These aren't drugs. These are foods. In fact, if you wanted to cut all medicinally active foods out of your diet, you'd probably starve to death.

What if, as some people theorize, humans and cannabis have coevolved in the same way that humans and garlic have? (did you know that garlic, as we know it, grows 'wild' everywhere humans are settled and nowhere else?)

What if cannabis and other potent herbs are a natural part of a healthy human diet and all these kids diagnosed with one disorder or another are only manifesting signs of deficiencies in their diets?

Something to think about. How much would we all have to learn to get back to knowing how to feed ourselves? Not just how to grow a garden, but what to grow to ensure proper variety and complete nutrition.

--------->8 snip!

Now, as for re-legalizing drugs, I'm with the good Dr. Bejamine Rush on that one:

Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize an undercover dictatorship. To restrict the art of healing to one class of men, and deny equal privilege to others, will be to constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic, and have no place in a Republic. The Constitution of this Republic should make special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom."
--Abridged quote-Benjamin Rush, M.D., a signer of the Declaration of Independence

I wonder if he ever even imagined anything like the ATF, DEA, NIDA, Straight and ONDCP?

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense

--Buddha

[Don Smith]

IMHO I think pot should be legal.  Treat it like alcohol is treated.  Must be 21, no driving under the influence, etc.  

I won't do it unless it is legal simply because the company I work for does random drug screens and if I melt the cup I'll get fired.

Don

[Antigen]

Yeah, most Americans agree. Except, of course, those whack jobs inside the beltway.

Check this out:

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonia ... 158832.xml
Source: Oregonian, The (Portland, OR)
Copyright: 2003 The Oregonian
Contact: http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/
Author: Jim Barnett

06/04/03
JIM BARNETT

WASHINGTON -- Law officers in Oregon, Washington and seven other states  that allow people to smoke marijuana for medical purposes could lose $11.5  million in federal money to investigate drug traffickers under a bill  pending in Congress.

The shift is part of a new, five-year plan for the White House Office of  National Drug Control Policy.

Crafted by House Republicans, the plan would give broad spending discretion  to the office's director, also known as the nation's "drug czar."

At risk for Oregon and Washington is an annual budget totaling $6.5 million  under the High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program. The money could be  diverted to federal agents, who would enforce national drug laws  prohibiting the use of marijuana.

Critics, including Democratic members of Congress, said the provision could  punish local law enforcement officials unfairly. It also could undermine  efforts to control drugs that are more damaging and costly to society than  marijuana.

"However one feels about that decision by the citizens of our state, to  take resources away from our already overtaxed law enforcement is just  irresponsible, and the priorities are simply cockeyed," said Rep. Brian  Baird, D-Wash.

Law officers in the Northwest agreed, saying they needed federal money to  help track heroin dealers in urban areas, as well as methamphetamine  laboratories in rural areas.

They said they were blindsided by news that their budgets might be cut.

"This came out of the blue," said Chuck Karl, director for a high-intensity  enforcement zone covering seven counties in Oregon.

Dave Rodriguez, director for Washington, said his office has continued  aggressive pursuit of marijuana smugglers and dealers because they aren't  protected by the state's law. Budget cuts would hamper what has proved to  be an effective effort, he said.

"Why would they want to do something like that?" he said. "I think this is  a vast overreaction to what in fact this (medical marijuana law) does."

The drug-control bill, sponsored by Reps. Mark Souder, R-Ind., and Tom  Davis, R-Va., would give the drug czar authority to shift 5 percent of the  $230 million program to federal agents from states that have laws  decriminalizing the medical use of marijuana.

The $11.5 million would "assist in enforcement of federal law where state  law permits the use of marijuana in a manner inconsistent with the  Controlled Substances Act," according to the bill, HR2086-.

Aides to Souder and Davis couldn't be reached for comment on Monday or  Tuesday.

John Walters, the drug czar, didn't ask for the provision, said Brian  Blake, a spokesman. Walters would prefer to help local authorities  understand regional drug markets and crack them.

"It's not the direction Director Walters wants to take it," Blake said of  the bill. "In fact, it's the opposite."

Nevertheless, critics said the language could allow the drug czar to  commandeer entire budgets for Oregon and Washington, which get $2.5 million  and $4 million, respectively, under the High-Intensity Drug Trafficking  Areas program.

A more likely scenario is that the provision could be used to target  California, where state law is broader and allows medical marijuana users  to form buyers' clubs, said Steve Fox, director of government affairs for  the Marijuana Policy Project.

"California has always been the whipping horse," he said. "This could be  just an additional threat."

Critics said the bill contained additional provisions that would give the  drug czar discretion that could invite abuse.

The bill would lift restrictions on about $200 million earmarked annually  for antidrug advertising, making it possible for the White House to mount  media campaigns against state marijuana law initiatives and candidates who  support them, Fox said.

Blake said the drug czar already has authority to use federal money to  fight legalization of drugs. But Baird questioned whether the provision was  constitutional.

"This is not just providing candidates on both sides of the issue with  money so they can express their opinions," Baird said. "This is  deliberately skewing the outcome of an election."

Of greater concern to enforcement officials in the Northwest is a new  funding formula included the bill. It would channel money to drug  enforcement at border crossings and in big U.S. cities such as New York.

Karl said his $2.5 million base budget for Oregon could be cut by $400,000  or more. The formula appears to be stacked against places where the  production of drugs, mostly in rural areas, is as big a threat as  distribution by international dealers, he said.

"We've got to deal with not just the cartels, we've got to deal with the  local and regional organizations as well," he said.

Rodriguez said he faces the possibility of similar reductions. The program  is operating at a minimal level in Washington state, he said, and any cuts  could undermine its goal of coordinating law-enforcement efforts across  jurisdictions.

"This completely, in my estimation, is going to pull the program apart," he  said.

The bill passed subcommittee last month and could move to the House floor  within weeks, critics said. But as more members learn the details, it could  face stiff opposition.

Rep. Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., said she plans to rally members from the nine  states with medical marijuana laws to try to make changes.

"When you put the power of that many states together, you can get things  turned around," she said.

Jim Barnett: [email protected]; 503-294-7604.

I think this is an issue worth watching. I don't buy for a moment that Walters didn't want this. Right now, he's facing serious accusations of violating the Hatch Act (which prohibits Federal agents and representatives from using their offices and federal resources from influencing elections.) This new language sort of codifies an exception to the Hatch Act. And I have to wonder how these same people would respond if another agency, say the EPA or Endowment for the Arts, tried a stunt like this.

I think the bottom line is that, since there is no provision of the Constitution giving the Federal government authority to prohibit any drug, then the Federal government should not be in the business of prohibiting any drug.

When we repealed the XVIIIth Amendment, we didn't declare alcohol to be legally and freely available everywhere. We only eliminated Federal interferance in the States' ability to set their own laws. So we had 48 different states trying out different approaches with the ability to make adjustments rather quickly. Except, of course, my state, PA. Here, the state still has a monopoly on alcohol production, import and most distribution. Nothing moves quickly in PA, except the rivers. :wink:

I think that's what we need to do with all drug policy. Just get the Federal government the hell out of the medical business and let the states craft policies in competition with each other and in line with their own community standards.

 

When the government's boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence.
-- Gary Lloyd

[bilabong69]

It's a wonderful day all, let's celebrate for Ed.
"San Francisco, CA: A federal judge today sentenced noted marijuana author and cultivation expert Ed Rosenthal to one day in prison with credit for time served. Rosenthal could have faced as many as 60 years in prison after being convicted in January on three counts related to marijuana cultivation. Rosenthal grew marijuana to supply local patients who use it in accordance with state law.
"This verdict is a marvelous victory for Ed Rosenthal, states' rights, and for the medical use of marijuana," NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said. "It should send a strong message to the Bush Administration to stop wasting federal resources arresting and prosecuting medicinal marijuana patients and their caregivers, and to focus their efforts on serious crime ­especially anti-terrorism efforts."
 :smokin:  :smokin:  :smokin:  :smokin:

[Antigen]

I'm kind of with Chris Conrad on this one. No doubt, this is great news for Ed. And thank God for it, too.

However, we should not forget that Judge Bryer probably would have given the govt just what they wanted had it not been for the jury raising all kinds of hell over the way the DOJ and the courts conducted the trial.

Ed's case is very unusual, probably because he's such a celebrity and because he's such an owlish, professorish old guy. Todd McCormick is still in prison. Peter McWilliams is dead. Brian Epis will be facing sentencing now that this decision is in AND the DOJ will probably appeal and likely win. So they may get what they wanted in the end, Ed in a cage for five years - the headlines, + the good PR from this decision.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned lately and which I think is significant as hell is that the Hon. Judge Bryer has a brother, Stephen, who is one of the same Supreme Court justices who helped Büsh sidestep the election. I bet he's getting nothing but the pope's nose this Thanksgiving! S'awright, though. I bet he'll be more than welcome at the Rosenthal's family dinner table.

Overall, this is a good thing if it marks the beginning of a trend. And I think that, with law enforcement (finally!) stepping up over the federal funding bullshit, it'll be a lot easier for judges and other politicians to do the right thing. That's really what we need, I think; for people in positions of public trust and authority--currently and in the near future--to start doing the right thing. It's just SO much easier and more civilized that way than having to pry them away from their illigitimate power. Just ask anyone who's experienced both voluntary and involuntary withdrawal either first hand or as an interested observer. :wink:

"Replace end user" (The Top Support Call Closer 10 Years Running)

--Bastard Administrator

[ehm]

On 2003-06-05 05:23:00, bilabong69 wrote:

"It's a wonderful day all, let's celebrate for Ed.

"San Francisco, CA: A federal judge today sentenced noted marijuana author and cultivation expert Ed Rosenthal to one day in prison with credit for time served. Rosenthal could have faced as many as 60 years in prison after being convicted in January on three counts related to marijuana cultivation. Rosenthal grew marijuana to supply local patients who use it in accordance with state law.

"This verdict is a marvelous victory for Ed Rosenthal, states' rights, and for the medical use of marijuana," NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said. "It should send a strong message to the Bush Administration to stop wasting federal resources arresting and prosecuting medicinal marijuana patients and their caregivers, and to focus their efforts on serious crime ­especially anti-terrorism efforts."

 :smokin:  :smokin:  :smokin:  :smokin: "

*STANDING OVATION!*

[Antigen]

Ok, I think the jig is up. I can see Melvin, Betty, Calvina, Walters and Ashcroft seeking refuge in Venezuela sometime soon...

**White House Prohibited From Using Taxpayer Money to Tell You How to Vote!
**Attacks on Medical Marijuana Defeated!!
**Higher Education Ban Reformed!!!


A couple of weeks ago we alerted you to an intense lobbying campaign  the Drug Policy Alliance was waging in Congress to defeat a number of  dangerous provisions in HR 2086, the "Office of National Drug Control  Policy Reauthorization Act of 2003." Our campaign, which was in  partnership with the Marijuana Policy Project, was gaining steam and  we urged you to call the Government Reform Committee. Your calls  launched a tidal wave of reform that ultimately cleaned up this bad  bill.

In a letter to the Government Reform Committee dated May 29th, the  Drug Policy Alliance urged the Committee to make seven amendments to  the bill. The Committee voted today: we got five out of seven!!!

We also won another important reform we were asking for in a separate  lobbying campaign.

What did the drug policy reform movement win?

The House Government Reform Committee:

* Repealed provisions allowing Drug Czar John Walters and the Bush  White House to spend up to $195 million a year in taxpayer money  to defeat medical marijuana ballot measures and pro-reform candidates;

* Added new provisions prohibiting the National Youth Anti-Drug  Media Campaign from ever being used to defeat pro-reform candidates,  legislation, regulations, and ballot measures;

* Eliminated provisions allowing the Drug Czar's office to run  anti-drug ads without telling voters the ads were paid for by the  government;

* Restored requirements that to the extent possible anti-drug ads  include contact information for local drug treatment providers;

* Repealed provisions allowing the Drug Czar to divert millions of  dollars away from local and state law-enforcement agencies to federal  agencies to arrest medical marijuana patients and their caregivers;  and

* Passed provisions requiring the Drug Czar to decertify the federal  budget if the Department of Education blocks school loans and grants  to former drug offenders; as well as compelling the Department to  develop a plan for providing financial assistance to people who have  been unfairly denied.  (This major reform was the result of years of  aggressive lobbying by the Coalition for HEA Reform http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt. ... 387&l=1959.

The campaign to reform this bill made national headlines, including  articles in the Washington Times, Las Vegas Review-Journal, and Roll Call: http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt. ... 387&l=1955

Newspapers across the country editorialized against the bad  provisions in it, including the Orange Country Register, Los Angeles  Times, St. Petersburg Times and the Baltimore Sun.  http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt. ... 387&l=1956

A letter to the Government Reform Committee urging the Committee "to  add provisions...explicitly prohibiting the media campaign from being  used to influence elections and legislation" was signed by the Ballot  Initiative Strategy Center, Common Cause, Drug Policy Alliance,  Justice Policy Institute, Initiative & Referendum Institute,  Marijuana Policy Project, National Black Police Association, National  Taxpayers Union, and Taxpayers for Common Sense. http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt. ... 387&l=1957    We are grateful for everything these and other groups did. But we are  especially grateful for what you did to persuade the Government  Reform Committee to vote for drug policy reform. We owe this victory  all to you. Thank you, thank you, and thank you!

Of course, these reforms still face a long road ahead. The full House  has yet to vote on the bill and the Senate has yet to take it up at  all. Over the next couple of weeks we may face challenges from drug war  extremists who will stop at nothing to try to undo our reforms. As  usual, we will speak truth to lies and fight them every step of the  way.

Thanks again for your help.


P.S.

If you want to help in our campaign, please consider becoming a  member of the Drug Policy Alliance, if you are not already. This  helps the Alliance in two ways. First, it helps pay for the cost of  our public education efforts, including our action alerts and fax  campaigns. Without contributions from people like you who believe in  freedom and justice, the John Walters and John Ashcrofts of the world  will get their entire drug war agenda through Congress. Secondly,  becoming a member of the Alliance improves our ability to educate  Congress on the need for reform. There's an iron law in Washington --  the more members you have, the more politicians listen. If we are  going to protect electronic music, stop the war on marijuana users,  eliminate the racial injustices of the drug war, and protect the Bill  of Rights, we need people like you to join the Alliance.

You can become a member for an investment of as little as $35. Find out more at:  http://actioncenter.drugpolicy.org/ctt. ... 387&l=1958

To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical.
http://laissezfairebooks.com/product.cfm?op=view&pid=FF7485&aid=10247' target='_new'> Thomas Jefferson

[bilabong69]

Ginger, Thanks much for the link. I am becoming a member this evening.There are lots of positive things going on, and your right some of them coming up soon may be a battle, but as you stated there is a power in numbers, and I for one will fight for our rights till the last day of my life.
Smoke em if ya got em  :smokin:
TTYL
Chitwood