********* War on Drugs Information File ***************
Contents:
Drug strategy issues proposed to Pres. Clinton
Sex, Ecstacy and Psychedelic Drugs, from Playboy, Nov. 1967
American Drug Policy: What's the Real Problem? by Joe Germuska
Drug Book source
Conservative Hyde Teams With Liberal ACLU Seek Curb On Property Seizures
"End The Drug War" stamps for snail mail envelopes now available!!!
Drug testing false-positive nightmare
Excerpts from _Our Right To Drugs: The Case For a Free Market_
by Thomas Szasz
***************************************************************************
/** pn.alerts: 53.0 **/
** Topic: POINTER: Drug Policy Under Clinton **
** Written 7:38 pm Dec 1, 1992 by peacenet in cdp:pn.alerts **
From:
Subject: POINTER: Drug Policy Under Clinton
Posted below is an ACTION MEMORANDUM by the National
Drug Strategy Network, which details the 'priority drug strategy
issues for the President.
CLINTON TRANSITION OFFICES:
105 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Ark. 72201
Tel: 501-399-7000 Fax: 501-399-7096
Office of the President Elect, 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: 202-273-2600
Governor Clinton's Arkansas Office (501-682-2345)
Senator Gore's Senatorial Office (202-224-4944)
Included is a list of national columnists and their phone numbers.
** End of text from cdp:pn.alerts **
/** justice.usa: 397.0 **/
** Topic: Drug Policy Under Clinton **
** Written 7:39 pm Dec 1, 1992 by peacenet in cdp:justice.usa **
From:
Subject: Drug Policy Under Clinton
From esterling Tue Dec 1 15:58:19 1992
From: Eric Sterling
November 17, 1992
TO: AMERICANS WORKING FOR DRUG POLICY REFORM
FROM: ERIC E. STERLING, NDSN COORDINATOR
NATIONAL DRUG STRATEGY NETWORK
A C T I O N M E M O R A N D U M
INFLUENCE THE PRIORITIES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
Political commentators report that "interest groups" are
bombarding the Clinton transition team with their priorities for
the first hundred days.
Commentators and the transition team need to get calls from you
now about priority agenda items for drug policy reform. Call them
today! Politics DOES NOT end on election day.
NOW, YOU MUST BE A PERSUADER.
Following my personal list of reforms, are the addresses, phone
and fax numbers of many leading political commentators and the
Clinton transition offices.
PRIORITY DRUG STRATEGY ISSUES FOR THE PRESIDENT
(1) To head the Office of National Drug Control Policy, choose a
public health expert, a doctor, or someone whose orientation for
addressing the drug problem is through a public health or
treatment and prevention approach, e.g. former Surgeon General
Koop.
(2) Provide immediate pain relief for cancer patients, anti-
nausea treatment for HIV+ persons, and aid other patients by
directing the Attorney General to reschedule marijuana to schedule
II in the first 30 days to follow DEA Chief Administrative Law
Judge Young's recommendation.
(3) Reduce Federal prison system overcrowding and make room for
violent, predatory criminals by immediately commuting the
sentences of all marijuana users, possessors, and nonviolent
sellers and growers in Federal prison.
(4) Fight AIDS by sending legislation to Congress to repeal the
limitation on Federal aid to cities & states conducting clean-
needle programs; and by outlawing discrimination against HIV+
persons by drug treatment programs.
(5) Restore confidence in, and among, Federal judges by sending
legislation to Congress to repeal mandatory minimum sentences.
Pending enactment, appoint panels to review mandatory sentences
for commutation where appropriate.
(6) Encourage pregnant women and mothers to get drug abuse
treatment by establishing Federal standards promoting (or if
necessary, requiring) day care for the children of addicts in
treatment; by denying any Federally-aided program funds from being
distributed to drug treatment programs which discriminate against
pregnant women; and by requiring states to guarantee the
accessibility to prenatal care by drug addicted women.
(7) Protect innocent citizens from wrongful confiscation of
property when no crime is charged by directing the Attorney
General to drop all forfeiture proceedings that are not based on a
criminal conviction; and redirect all forfeiture proceeds to the
general treasury instead of being treated as a bounty by law
enforcement.
(8) Appoint a Presidential Commission to investigate and report
recommendations to you and to the Congress to eliminate racial
discrimination in the criminal justice system.
(9) Promote public safety and workplace productivity by
substituting impairment testing for substance-based testing.
(10) Improve drug treatment success, and save money, by
completing research on Ibogaine to permit its use to interrupt
heroin, cocaine and nicotine addiction.
(11) Improve the rate of prenatal care by pregnant drug addicts
by preventing prosecution of women for "delivery" of drugs to
their baby in utero by denying Federal aid to states which
undertake such prosecutions, and by increasing the funding of
prenatal care for drug addicts.
(12) Improve the security of the American people, reduce the
number of secret agents, and eliminate the use of informants in
American society by eliminating the use of "paid testimony"
witnesses by the U.S. Justice Department.
(13) Dramatically reduce mortality and morbidity by redirecting
America's drug strategy to reduce the
use of the big drug killers in America -- tobacco and alcohol.
(14) Support the Administration's pro-environment clean air/clean
water programs by studying the benefits of hemp oil, hemp paper,
and hemp biomass for fuel.
*(15) Relieve the suffering of drug addicts by substantially
increasing publicly funded drug treatment facilities to truly
provide drug treatment upon request.
*(16) Increase support for drug abuse prevention programs that
are consistent with American values and which are effective.
(17) Improve birth control options by approving RU-486 for
distribution in the United States.
*These issues are critical. They are low on this list because they
are in every drug strategy.
Pick your two or three key issues to emphasize the need for
action. Make a number of calls soon!
CLINTON TRANSITION OFFICES:
105 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Ark. 72201 Tel.
501-399-7000. Fax. 501-399-7096
Office of the President-Elect 1120 Vermont Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel. 202-973-2600
Governor Clinton's Arkansas Office (501-682-2345) Senator Gore's
Senatorial Office (202-224-4944)
First, contact your favorite local columnists and syndicated
columnists. Second, contact other national columnists.
SOME LEADING COLUMNISTS, Telephone (202), FAX (202)
*Jack Anderson,483-1442
*Doug Bandow, 703-690-2451 F 546-0728
*David S. Broder, 334-7444, F 334-5451
*Patrick J. Buchanan 703-790-1551
*Art Buchwald, 393-6680
*Richard Cohen, 334-7205, 334-4480
*M. Stanton Evans, 546-6561
*Rowland Evans, Jr., 393-4340, F 393-5588
*Jack Germond, 452-8250, F 872-9327
*Ellen Goodman (Boston Globe), 617-929-3228
*Georgie Anne Geyer, 333-9176
*Andrew J. Glass, 331-0900, 331-1055
*Brit Hume, 887-7286
*Michael Kinsley, 331-7494
*Charles Krauthammer, 872-8109, F 872-8137
*Robert Kuttner, 331-7494
*Diane MacEachern, (Environment), 334-6000
*Colman McCarthy, 334-7728
*Sarah McClendon, 483-3791, 483-7918
*Mary McGrory, 334-7583
*Michael J. McManus, 301-469-5870
*Marianne Means, 298-6920, F 333-1184
*Ralph Nader, 703-764-0496
*Michael Novak, 862-5838, F 862-7177
*Robert D. Novak, 393-4340, F 393-5588
*Neal R. Peirce, 857-1417
*William Raspberry, 334-7462
*Barbara Reynolds, 703-276-3455, F 703-247-3134
*Carl T. Rowan, 966-8668
*Mark Russell, 362-5045
*William Safire, 862-0330, F 862-0340
*Mark Shields, 662-1255
*R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., 703-243-3733, F 703-243-6814
*Ben J. Wattenberg, 862-5908, F 862-7177
*George F. Will, 334-6375
*Juan Williams, 334-6000
*Jules Witcover, 298-8359
*Edwin M. Yoder, Jr., 334-6375
DON'T FORGET TO CALL YOUR LOCAL NEWSPAPER COLUMNISTS!
* * * * *
The National Drug Strategy Network is composed of individuals and
organizations who are united in their opposition to the punitive
and militaristic aspects of the "War on Drugs." The Network is
nonpartisan and encourages open discussion of various policy
approaches to reducing the nation's drug problem. The Network is
supported by The Criminal Justice Policy Foundation.
Office: 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 702, Washington, DC 20036,
(202) 835-9075. Fax: (202) 223-1288. internet email address:
esterling@igc.apc.org
Your small tax deductible contribution will be extremely valuable
in supporting the Networks work in educating the American public
about appropriate drug strategy options. It also helps the
Network to comply with IRS public charity regulations requiring
evidence of broad public support.
** End of text from cdp:justice.usa **
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Path: taco!rock!stanford.edu!agate!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!ucivax!news.claremont.edu!jarthur.claremont.edu!cklausme
From: cklausme@jarthur.claremont.edu (Chris Klausmeier)
Subject: Sex and Drugs
Message-ID: <1993Jan14.200351.2536@muddcs.claremont.edu>
Sender: news@muddcs.claremont.edu (The News System)
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:03:51 GMT
Lines: 663
I found this article in the Cult of the Dead Cow archive at
ftp.eff.org:/pub/cud/cdc. I thought it may be of interest.
-- Chris
_
| \
| \
| | \
__ | |\ \ __
_____________ _/_/ | | \ \ _/_/ _____________
| ___________ _/_/ | | \ \ _/_/ ___________ |
| | _/_/_____ | | > > _/_/_____ | |
| | /________/ | | / / /________/ | |
| | | | / / | |
| | | |/ / | |
| | | | / | |
| | | / | |
| | |_/ | |
| | | |
| | c o m m u n i c a t i o n s | |
| |________________________________________________________________| |
|____________________________________________________________________|
...presents... Sex, Ecstasy and the Psychedelic Drugs
by R.E.L. Masters
>>> a cDc publication.......1991 <<<
-cDc- CULT OF THE DEAD COW -cDc-
______________________________________________________________________________
Kindly donated to cDc by:
*=-- --=*
{ the }
-=/*> Buzzz Bros <*\=-
text entry by Major Havoc
{ }
*=-- --=*
("Hey, thanks," says S. Ratte')
*=-- ---=*
{ This file is a copy of an article that was first published in Playboy }
November, 1967. Although over 20 years old, it is a perfect
{ example of the budding use, evaluation and enjoyment }
*=-- of psychedelic drugs in the late '60s. --=*
______________________________________________________________________________
History records few human quests as unremitting or as widespread as the
search for a harmless, effective sex stimulant. Recent claims - such as those
made by Timothy Leary - that LSD is the greatest aphrodisiac known to man, have
excited much interest in the sexual potential of psychedelic drugs. Sober
discussion of psychedelic substances was difficult enough before sex entered
the picture; now it is close to impossible. But bearing in mind that there is
a great deal more to psychedelics than sex, it might clear the air to examine
the effects of lysergic acid diethylamide - and several other psychedelic drugs
- on human sexual behavior.
Along with the comparatively new synthetic psychedelics, including LSD and
psilocybin, there are similar mind-altering substances present in many forms of
plant life. Some of these have been used for hundreds and even thousands of
years. Examples are the peyote cactus, the Cannibis hemp plant, the opium
poppy and several varieties of mushrooms and morning-glory plants. Most have
been linked in one way or another with sex.
Whether opium - probably Homer's nepenthe - should be considered a psyche-
delic drug is largely a matter of semantics. Some would-be authorities exclude
all addictive drugs, including opium, from the class of psychedelics. However
opium does produce effects similar to those produced by nonaddictive psyche-
delics, and among these are sexual effects that merit consideration.
Prolonged use of opium results in mental and physical deterioration,
including impotence. However, before it takes its toll, the drug can
powerfully and pleasurably enhance sexual experience. No one has described the
specific sexual effects of opium as well as the 19th century French Army
surgeon and anthropologist Jacobus Sutor, who authored numerous sexological
studies under the pseudonym Jacobus X. "According to my person experience,"
wrote Jacobus, "and from avowals made to me by women, both Europeans and
Asiatics, the effects produced by opium in moderate doses, say from 10 to 20
pipes, are as follows: Under the influence of erotic excitement, either direct
or merely mental, an erection is quickly produced, if you want to copulate.
But - and this has never been remarked by any other author - although the penis
is in a stiff erection, its nerves, and more particularly, those of the glans,
are anesthetized by the effects of the opium, and though the erection is
strong, the emission, on the contrary, is much retarded and takes place only
after prolonged copulation. This anesthetic effect is also produced in the
nerves of the vulva, the vagina and the rectum of the woman, and the
'psychological moment' arrives slowly. The constrictor muscles of the vagina,
and especially those of the rectum, undergo a kind of relaxation." He goes on
to say that, with larger doses, more than 15 or 20 pipes, erection becomes
incomplete; and with 30 or 40 pipes, it is absent altogether.
Jacobus' remarks also apply to peyote, to the LSD-type synthetics and, to
a lesser degree, marijuana. Those under the influence of these drugs describe
the mild surface anesthesia, if that is what it is, as a feeling of
'rubberiness' that effects the penis, the female genitals and also sometimes
the mouth, the breasts, the fingers and other body areas. It is by no means
an unpleasant sensation; often it is described as heightened feelings of
voluptuousness. Along with the rubbery sensation, the genitals, if excited,
are felt to be engorged to an unusual degree.
At least as ancient as opium is the hemp plant (Cannibis sativa, or
Cannibis indica). When used as a drug, it is called marijuana, hashish and a
great deal of other names. Scientific reports on the sexual effects of
marijuana are conflicting. For example, the French toxicologist Erich Hesse
(Narcotics and Drug Addiction) tells us that marijuana and hashish provide no
sexual stimulation whatever; but another physician-author Bernard Finch
(Passport to Paradise), declares that "After several inhalations, a feeling of
sexual excitement develops and the smoker is able to improve his sexual
performance, in that erection is stronger and more persistent, but orgasm is
depressed and usually does not take place."
I could provide a great many more conflicting 'authoritative' statements
on this matter, although Finch is the only writer I know who suggests that
marijuana by itself produces a condition of sexual excitation. He also is the
only one to say that orgasm "usually" does not take place.
From many other times and places, we also have claims that hemp is an
aphrodisiac - and other claims that it is an anaphrodisiac, an inhibitor of
sexual desire or of potency. But whichever way they lean, the authors of these
claims are relying on personal predilection, on very limited interview data or
on the verdict of some favorite 'authority' who has already made similar
errors. We find the same conflicting evidence from "experts" writing about the
sexual effect of peyote or LSD.
Anyone who has carefully studied psychoactive drugs should know that many
different effects are possible, depending on personal, cultural or immediate
situational factors - which are often crucial in determining drug-state
behavior. With marijuana and other psychedelics, people who are sexually
stimulated may find that their stimulation is greater than usual and that their
capacity to respond has been heightened. Others may find themselves totally
indifferent such as the writer Theophile Gautier, who took some hashish and
generalized that "a hashish user would not lift a finger for the most beautiful
woman in Verona." The same individual may find that he is greatly aroused on
one occasion and unexcited on the next. Or his mind may experience desire
while is body is unable to act in concert with it.
Some cultures place great faith in the aphrodisiacal effects of hemp; and
in those cultures the drug often does function as an aphrodisiac - producing
sexual excitation, enhancing potency and pleasure, and prolonging sexual
intercourse. Among Arabs, there is a vast lore of the effectiveness of hemp in
maintaining an erection - the prolongation of the sex act being almost an
obsession with some Moslems. A famous poem on this subject begins:
The member of Abu'l-Haylukh remained
In erection for 30 days, sustained
By smoking hashish
Abu'l-Haylukh deflowered in one night
Eighty virgins in a rigid rite
After smoking hashish
The poem goes on to describe still more feats of sexual athleticism; but
underlying its characteristic Arab hyperbole is some solid fact - hemp can,
indeed, prolong an erection. Besides the mild anesthesia described by Jacobus,
the male, with marijuana, may feel that his erect organ is bigger and more
rigid than ordinarily. Sometimes, as happens with LSD and peyote, too, orgasm
does not occur at all, which causes him no great distress, since he feels that
this is a small price to pay for the pleasure he has enjoyed, and the
impression he has made on his partner. When copulation does not lead to
orgasm, both partners still may achieve it by vigorous masturbation.
My own data regarding the contemporary use of marijuana use in this
country - in terms of its sexual effects - reflect the conflict in this
literature. Individual testimonials describe both sexual successes and sexual
failures. Overall, it appears that up to now, marijuana has been about as
likely to impair as to improve sexual performance. However, growing acceptance
of the drug may be making the latter effect the more common. Much can depend
on the users intention. Some prostitutes smoke marijuana to eliminate genital
sensation - while at the same time they give the weed to their customer to help
him become more stimulated. In this case, it probably works for the male
because it makes him more responsive to the suggestion that he will be more
potent - and simultaneously it may reduce his inhibitions and anxieties.
It should be noted, however, that sexual effects may relate to the potency
of the drug. The strength of hemp products can depend on many things - where
the hemp is grown, how it is harvested and prepared and how it is consumed.
From one country to the next, or among regions of a country, there are great
differences in the potency of the plants. As to consumption, it is believed
that smoking gives the strongest effect, by altering the chemical composition
of the drug. Research in these areas are now under way, but results are still
inconclusive. The eventual findings may explain to some extent the different
responses among marijuana smokers. But individual psychology will still be a
major factor.
At its best, most marijuana consumed in the U.S. is a mild psychedelic
drug, affording what is rarely more than a pallid approximation of the
experiences possible with LSD and peyote. The effects of these two on sexual
intercourse are virtually identical, and a statement about LSD may well be
understood to apply just as well to peyote - and probably to their LSD-type
psychochemicals, such as mescaline and psilocybin.
I compiled my data on the sexual effects of psychedelic drugs in a series
of interviews, mostly "in depth" beginning in 1954 and continuing today. My
information is based on more than 300 drug-state sexual experiences on the part
of 94 persons, about two thirds of them males. Nineteen homosexual experiences
are included. The interview subjects were almost college graduates from
middle-class white Protestant backgrounds. Most of them took the psychedelic
drugs outside any formal research or therapeutic context and then reported
their experiences to me.
In other words, I did not study the effects of psychedelics on sex in the
laboratory, as sexual intercourse has been so fruitfully studied by William
Masters and Virginia Johnson in St. Louis. My firsthand research with
psychedelic drugs - which was largely concerned with matters other than sex -
has now been abruptly ended by laws prohibiting almost all research in this
area. But I did obtain, in the sessions I guided personally, some material
significant in understanding psychosexual disorders. It was surprising how
often these disorders seemed grounded in problem of values or, specifically, in
low self-esteem. Nowhere can values be so quickly and so drastically changed
as in LSD sessions. In several instances, discussed below, persons with sexual
problems showed noticeable improvement after their LSD sessions - quite a
remarkable occurrence, inasmuch as the sessions were intended as research and
therapeutic results were not expected.
To determine whether psychedelics drugs are, indeed, aphrodisiacs, we must
first determine what we mean by an aphrodisiac. If we mean that the drugs
specifically excite the sexual organs, then psychedelics are not aphrodisiacs.
If we mean that they produce or encourage sexual desire, again they are not
aphrodisiacs. But if we mean that the drugs can profoundly enhance the quality
of sexual acts that occur between people who would, in any case, have had
intercourse, then the drugs are aphrodisiacs, and my only objection to the term
in this context is that it will continue to be misused by psychedelic or sexual
extremists.
Drug-state phenomena that occur during a sex act occur in other drug-state
contexts, too. The most common are changes in sensory perception, in awareness
of time, in the state of the ego, in one's relations to others and in the
emotions generally. In fact, these changes effect whatever one does, whether
it be listening to music, walking through a forest - or making love.
The positive effects of LSD in lovemaking can best be appreciated by
describing a hypothetical sexual act between husband-and-wife lovers - or
between single lovers, should that seem more adventurous. I will not, however,
hypothesize a casual erotic encounter between two near strangers, because such
an encounter would be less likely to produce so favorable an experience. A
strong emotional bond, or at least very positive feelings for the partner, is
much more likely to yield the richest, most intense and most ecstatic
experience.
People rarely have sexual intercourse at the very start of a psychedelic
trip. First, as the perceptual changes occur and as consciousness is altered
in other ways, they need to orient themselves in this new world. In my sample,
this was true no matter how many previous LSD experiences they might have
shared. Typically, when there is sexual intercourse, it occurs at least one
hour and usually several hours after the onset of the psychedelic effects.
When the two people are longtime lovers, they may feel, in the drug state,
an emotional closeness as intense as they felt in the early, most emotion-
charged stages of being in love. Since visual perception is highly responsive
to the emotions, each partner may take on an appearance of extraordinary
radiance and beauty. Communication may seem multileveled, with a greatly
heightened sensitivity to nuances of meaning - in gestures, caresses and words
as well. If this couple decides to make love, they will bring this heightened
sensitivity to their union, and their desire and the act itself may be
suffocated with the same positive emotion - and with the same beauty - that has
been present in their perceptions.
As foreplay and intercourse increase their excitement, the couple
will become aware of the genital sensations described by Jacobus. The man may
feel that his erection is larger and more firm and his potency greater than it
has ever been before, heightening his confidence, producing a greater sense of
total genital arousal and increasing his capacity to respond. Anxiety about
the duration of the act will very quickly disappear. The couple will feel that
their lovemaking will last just as long as they want it to last, so that time
no longer matters. In the more profound experiences, there may be a sense of
timelessness - of the eternal.
Several elements combine to produce these novel and extremely pleasurable
awarenesses of time. For one thing, intercourse always does last much longer
in terms of the clock. This is probably because of the mildly anesthetized
state of the sexual organs - although the term 'anesthesia' seems strikingly
inappropriate in describing these very intense sensations. Moreover,
diminished inhibitions soon produce self-confidence and spontaneity that help
reduce concern about the duration of the act. Finally, there is the distortion
- or 'slowing down' - of time that is a usual and important aspect of the
psychedelic state. This distortion (a term that is technically correct but
fails to convey its positive qualities) of subjective time is experienced
because the mental processes have been enormously accelerated. So much may be
experienced in a few minutes of clock-measured time that the person typically
declares that 'hours' or sometimes 'eons' seem to have passed. A sexual union
that in fact lasts 30 minutes or an hour may seem 'endless' or to have 'the
flavor of eternity.' Lovemaking that lasts for several hours is not too
infrequent.
The sexual union gathers ever more meaning and beauty as it progresses.
It may even take on symbolic and archetypal overtones. The couple may feel
that they are mythic, legendary, or more-than-human figures as they act out in
a timeless and beneficent space of eternally recurring drama of love and
creation. The feeling of being more than human does not indicate grandiosity
but, rather, that one has transcended the ordinary boundaries of self, the
limits of time and space, so that something more, some infusion of the divine
or supernatural, must have occurred. This awareness is accompanied by profound
feelings of security, tenderness, humility and gratitude. Sometimes only one
partner will enjoy this transcendental experience, but with surprising
frequency the feelings are shared.
When sexual union includes altered states of consciousness such as these,
it is properly described as ecstatic. It may progress to include one or even
several instances of apparent physical and psychic melting into and becoming
one with the partner. Whether this occurs in a sexual union or in a mystical
context, or in a combination of the two, it is almost always regarded as one of
the most profound and fulfilling experiences human life has to offer. The one
that the two become is a unity much greater than its components. Religiously
devout or mystically inclined people may have the sense of a unity that is also
a trinity, with God present in the oneness. In any case, an experience of this
order can hardly be dismissed as 'sexual mysticism' - a term sneeringly used by
some of the more rabid opponents of psychedelic experimentation. Nor can it be
tossed away with some labels from psychopathology, such as 'ego dissolution'
and 'depersonalization.' It can be one of the most beautiful and important
experiences in life.
In view of all that has gone before, the orgasm - when it arrives - may
seem something of an anticlimactic climax. Some people, in this orgasm-happy
society, learn for the first time how much more than can be to sex than the
brief intensity of the climax - and how much their past sexual experience has
been impoverished by the urgent and infantile drive toward orgasm that is so
prevalent in Western societies.
However, the orgasm, too, is 'psychedelic' - that is, magnified or
intensified. Time distortion can greatly prolong it, and there is an awareness
of the whole process from beginning to end, in far greater detail. Men very
often report sensations of gathering tension, concentration of energy and then
an extremely acute awareness of the spasmodic propulsion of the ejaculate,
which is plainly and pleasurably felt as it travels along the urethra and is
ejected into the vagina of the partner. At the same time, there is a greatly
intensified awareness of the genital organs of the partner: their texture,
temperature and movement. Some women for the first time become keenly aware of
the pulsations of the male organ as climax begins - and of the ejaculate as
they receive it.
Orgasm is often experienced upon two levels. It is the most intensely
erotic aspect of the act, as consciousness seems totally absorbed in the
orgasmic sensations. And yet there seems also to be another consciousness,
which does not dilute but rather reinforces the genital consciousness. This is
the sense of attaining the beautiful climax of a beautiful experience.
Remarkably, in view of the richness of the experience, throughout these
unions there is an undiminished and sometimes greatly intensified awareness of
the partner. One does not lapse into a selfish and exclusive preoccupation
with the components of ecstasy.
In almost 25 percent of the sexual acts I recorded, one or both partners
did not reach orgasm. This was nothing new for most of the women; but for some
of the men, it was a novel experience. Typically, however, the absence of
orgasm was not a disappointment. The act itself was so fulfilling that the
attitude was: Who cares whether there was an orgasm? This, too, can be a
valuable experience for those women who seldom climax in their ordinary
lovemaking. It teaches them that even without orgasm, sex can provide
remarkable fulfillment.
Under the influence of psychedelics, the anorgasmic woman can experience
great joy in intercourse and derive gratification from conferring just as much
joy on her partner. If this lesson were learned and applied to all
intercourse, many people - both male and female - would be better off for it.
It is worth noting that at least some have learned it through psychedelic
experimentation.
The foregoing description was of a maximal drug-state sexual experience.
Slightly more than half of my heterosexual subjects reported extraordinary
unions resembling or approaching this at least once. The frequency probably
would have been lower with younger or with less intelligent individuals,
because richness of personality is a key factor in determining the richness
of the psychedelic experience. An earned capacity for appreciating the complex
and profound must already exist.
My intention here is not to promote the haphazard and now illegal use of
psychedelic drugs - with or without sexual intercourse. But it is only
realistic to admit that many thousands of people are taking psychochemicals
without screening or adequate guidance. Of these, a good many are also
experimenting with sex. It seems best that they be informed about
possibilities beyond 'kicks' and trivia, so that they can explore the many
valuable aspects of an experience that might otherwise be wasted.
My research indicates that homosexuals in psychedelic states enjoy
profound, ecstatic sexual experiences with less frequency - and less intensity
- than their heterosexual counterparts. Female homosexuals seem more likely to
have profound sexual experiences than male homosexuals. The very practical
matter of the positioning of the bodies appears to provide a partial
explanation. The ecstatic experience seems more likely to occur when one faces
the partner while the act is being performed. Social attitude toward
homosexuality, as well as the homosexual's typical guilt and low self-esteem,
may also be deterrents. In the drug state, homosexual acts are usually
specifically erotic and less invested with other positive meaning. However,
the physical pleasure of genital, oral and anal sensations is enhanced, just as
with heterosexuals.
Claims that LSD-state sexual intercourse can 'cure' homosexuality and
frigidity may lead to enormous disappointment - and possibly serious harm - to
psychosexually disturbed people, who have enough problems already. Under the
influence of psychedelics, a failure to function as promised might cause a
powerful reinforcement of existing disorders, making any cure more difficult.
Nor is it invariably, or even frequently, true that, in the words of
Timothy Leary, a "neurological and cellular fidelity" develops between two
person who have had sexual relations during an LSD experience. The notion is
poetic but inaccurate. Even the most beautiful drug-state sexual unions do not
always guarantee change in a previous relationship. Leary's devotees sometimes
tell me, with what sometimes seems more hope than conviction, that Leary speaks
a 'private language,' the better to convey the ineffable truths. However, the
fact is that he is taken literally by a great many people. He has said, for
instance, that "in a carefully prepared, loving LSD session, a woman will
inevitably have several hundred orgasms." I have yet to hear from anyone else
a single instance remotely approximating this; and I feel rather confident that
if it had been happening with any frequency, the world would not have had to
wait for Leary to announce it.
While LSD can hardly be considered a panacea for sexual disorders, it does
hold promise for becoming an extremely valuable tool in treating those and many
other promises. And it will become even more valuable when therapists stop
regarding it as adjunct to their old procedures and develop psychedelic
therapies permitting them to make full use of the great wealth of phenomena
available.
Scientific literature on psychedelics includes hundreds of reports of
successful treatment, even with the old procedures, for such disorders as
homosexuality, frigidity, impotence, fetishism and even transvestism, one of
the most difficult to treat of all sexual deviations. Good progress in these
areas has been made in England, and it is certainly unfortunate that psycho-
therapists in this country are legally unable to work extensively with
psychedelics.
Some homosexuals, for instance, as part of their low self-esteem, have a
distorted body image. They think they are ugly or deformed when they are not,
and may believe that they have an abnormally small penis - when they actually
have a normal one. In LSD sessions I recorded, the body image of homosexuals
sometimes became normalized, heightening self-esteem and producing definite
trends toward heterosexualization. Here, homosexuality seemed based mainly on
values - not on some long past traumatic experience. In any case, hetero-
sexualization could occur without any trauma being dealt with. However, when
there was no subsequent therapy, the subjects' homosexuality returned within a
few months after their LSD sessions were over.
Some men with potency problems decided in their LSD sessions that their
sexual organs were not too small and afterward their potency improved,
sometimes permanently. A frigid woman discovered that an 'inner voice' had
been calling her a 'fake' and an 'unworthy person.' The voiced ordinarily
talked to her 'on some below level consciousness'; but in her LSD session, she
heard it clearly and she was able to refute it just as clearly. After freeing
herself from this voice, she felt she no longer had to punish herself by
denying herself sexual pleasure. Her frigidity soon was overcome - and had not
reappeared almost four years later.
The therapeutic value of LSD is by no means limited to sexual disorders.
Alcoholics intractable to all previous therapies have quit drinking or become
much improved after treatment with psychedelics. Cure and improvement rates
range anywhere from 25 to 75 percent, and some of the studies have been very
well controlled. In other cases previously withdrawn, schizophrenic children
improved when psychedelics were administered. Given the questionable value
of some approved psychotherappies, it is a wonder that public outcry has not
demanded increased use of psychedelics in the areas where there promise seems
so great.
Possibly such a great demand is now discouraged by recent evidence linking
LSD to chromosomal abnormalities. This charge must be considered in proper
perspective. The fact is that no one, at the present time, can say how
important LSD-caused chromosomal damage may be. We do know that rather similar
chromosomal changes are produced by many products widely used - caffeine (in
coffee and cola drinks), alcohol, antibiotics and a wide range of drugs about
which no such furor has been raised. Live measles vaccine, in particular,
quickly produces chromosomal breaks. We know, too, that LSD has been in use
for a quarter of a century, apparently without causing cancer or deformed
infants - the two main specters with which chromosomal damage of this kind
seems to confront us. Moreover, the U.S. Government continues to sponsor a few
LSD therapy projects, so Government scientists must not feel the risks are too
great. The sensible position must be to weigh LSD's value against possible,
but not demonstrated, dangers. The evidence is sufficient to warrant
withholding LSD from pregnant females.
This may also be the place to mention briefly a new psychedelic substance,
STP. STP is yet more potent than LSD, producing effects that may continue for
days. It also produces far more bad trips and frequent aftereffects. The
chemical analysis of STP indicates similarities to mescaline and the
amphetamines, but more refined analysis is needed.
Cases brought to my attention include aftereffects such as partial
amnesia, frightening perceptual changes and recurring states of panic. One
man, for example, weeks later, felt his head alternately growing to the size of
a watermelon and shrinking to the dimensions of a pea. It is too soon to say
whether these sensations will be permanent. No one I have talked to appears to
have had sexual intercourse under STP. For those persons, at least, the
experience was much too overwhelming. Neither does it seem likely at this
point that STP will have much value for research or therapy. Pending further
information, the best advice is to leave the drug alone.
With STP, we may be witnessing the unhappy result of too many unscientific
medical pronouncements combined with too many scare stories about psychedelic
drugs. A number of physicians have greatly exaggerated the dangers of the old
psychedelics - and even of marijuana. Now, with a drug that seems to be much
more dangerous, these 'scientists' have forged a credibility gap that prevents
many people - especially those in the psychedelic underground - from taking
their claims seriously. Warnings about STP from physicians have been much less
effective than those voiced by the underground press. The medical profession
should consider this lesson and perhaps profit by it. More psychedelics will
be created and some will almost certainly be very dangerous. Disaster could
ensue unless scientists manage to regain the confidence in the public.
In the case of LSD and the 'milder' psychedelics, the chances of
unfortunate results can be reduced by following a few basic precautions. Since
psychedelic experience can magnify tendencies in oneself, in others and in the
surroundings, psychedelics should not be taken in an environment that will
threaten or displease. When this precaution is ignored, there can be bad trips
- whether or not intercourse is a part of the experience.
Sexologists always urge a pleasant setting for intercourse - as well as a
partner one respects and relates to positively. This becomes even more
important when the couple has taken psychedelics. With LSD, a drab, dirty room
that might ordinarily be ignored can become a filthy, sordid pesthole, and this
perception of the room can saturate the total experience. Similarly, sex with
a person about whom one has negative feelings can become, with LSD, an
experience of extreme repulsion - with guilt, depression or anxiety as a
result. In two cases I know of, males took LSD, picked up prostitutes and had
very bad trips. Both men, of course, had basically negative feeling about
prostitutes and these emerged in a much heightened form during the sexual act.
Both men were initially aroused, but soon began to feel degraded and then
powerfully repelled by the situation. One felt that the woman's body was
coated with "a dirty, poisonous substance" that rubbed off on his own body and
infected him. He managed to get her out of the room, was near panic for a long
while and, after the effects of the LSD had worn off, he went into a depression
that lasted for some days. In fact, his perception might not have been
completely imaginative, since he contracted gonorrhea as a result of this
contact. In the other case, the male found the girl becoming more and more
ugly as he looked at her. Then the room became similarly ugly. He became
nauseous, then was overwhelmed by feelings of guilt about his 'prejudice.'
That the man was white and Jewish and the woman Negro made the situation
especially complicated and charged with emotion.
With LSD, some people may become aware of what they feel are opposite-sex
components of their personality. This they interpret as evidence that they are
homosexual. Some males with effeminate tendencies, who strongly suppress their
effeminacy, have felt they were undergoing a physical sex change. Their bodies
seemed to have female breasts and genitalia. Understandably, this kind of
experience, too, can lead to anxiety and depression. And afterward, the person
may believe that his 'true personality' was revealed.
One should never regard drug-state as necessarily more revealing than
other types of experience. With LSD-type drugs, what might be a passing and
easily dismissed idea can become a prolonged a vivid mental event. But this
doesn't mean that it necessarily has greater validity than the passing idea
would have ordinarily. Such phenomena are best regarded as drug-state
curiosities that will not effect the normal personality and behavior.
When negative perceptions or emotions occur, and if they last long enough
to be distressing, it is best not to analyze them. Try to get interested in
something else. Psychedelic veterans have learned to do this. Similarly, it's
often easy to divert the partner, should his or her distress become obvious.
This might be done with an especially interesting or amusing remark or by
telling the other person how much pleasure he or she is giving. If, as ought
to be the case, the two people are lovers or good friends, then it is likely
that they will know how to help each other, should the need arise. For this
reason, too, psychedelic experience is not a desirable arena for casual sex
between two strangers.
Spontaneous changes in visual perception may also provide very pleasant
experiences. One man, for example, related that his girlfriend changed as he
held her in his arms, first to Helen of Troy, then to Cleopatra, then in
successive metamorphoses to yet other women, so that he quickly "made love to
all the famous beauties in history." After a while, the girl resumed he own
appearance, although her beauty was greatly heightened, and he "thought he no
less lovely than any of the others and appreciated very much her part in
providing such a great experience."
There are a host of similar erotic phenomena that sometimes occur in the
psychedelic state. These might seem trivial and self-indulgent compared with
the transcendence of the ecstatic union, but they are interesting, nonetheless.
For many people, for instance, it is possible to 'genitalize' almost any part
of the body, by consciously transferring the response capacity from the sexual
organs to some other part, such as a finer. Rubbing one's finger against a
fabric can provide sensations akin to those experienced in masturbation. A
couple might even genitalize the lips and the mouth, so that kissing affords
sensations very much like those usually experienced in mouth-genital contacts
or in sexual intercourse.
One man, who had taken a large dose of LSD (about 500 micrograms), found
himself unable to obtain an erection, despite much assistance from his partner.
Abandoning the effort, they lay side by side. Suddenly, he became aware of his
entire body as "one great, erect penis. The World," he said, "was my vagina
and I had a sense of moving in and out of it, with intense sexual sensations."
A few research subjects have reported similar erotic sensations from
listening to music. One man reported "the sexualization of my entire body as
I listened to Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony. The music washed over every inch
of my body, giving sexual sensations like those of a very intense orgasm. The
pleasure became so intense as to be unendurable. I had to shut off the
phonograph. I wondered at every instant if I would not have a real
ejaculation." In a subsequent LSD experience, he responded to the same
recording in the same way. No other music produced the phenomenon, and he
never learned why the Pastoral should have such an effect. With another
subject, any symphonic music produced strong sexual sensations.
When males see vivid images or visions, they almost always include
beautiful nudes, with Balinese dancing girls and other Orientals appearing
frequently. Drug-state visions in America are shot through with this
predilection for the East - in architectural and religious imagery as well as
in nudes. But just as women are less interested in erotic art, so do they have
less erotic imagery.
The aftereffects of drug-state sex can be of very great value, though
often the results don't last. As an immediate aftermath of a good sexual
experience under LSD, some couples report an over-all improvement in their
relationship - and a specific improvement in their sex life. Frequently, a
portion of the drug-state perception of the woman's greatly heightened beauty
carries over, so that she continues to appear more attractive. Sometimes, with
psychedelics, inhibitions fall away, allowing people to engage in sexual
practices that are normal and that had been desired, but which inhibition
prevented. Extensive caressing of the genitals and mouth-genital stimulation
are frequent examples. Breaking through such blocks can be permanent.
Especially among married couples, who had largely ceased to attract each other
sexually, there can be a reactivation of old desires and emotions. Most of
these beneficial aftereffects are lost in days, weeks or months, but they can
be retained - or possibly reactivated by another LSD session - if they are
regarded as important enough to be worth preserving.
Because ecstatic union is so rich an experience and may have very positive
effects on a relationship, it is obviously desirable that it occur and be
repeated. This is possible without psychedelics, but the necessary changes in
consciousness occur more readily when they have first been experienced in
LSD-type states. After LSD, memories and pathways in the nervous system have
been strongly established and can be explored again more easily.
To take some terminology from the theologians, we have been busy for a
long while 'demythologizing' sexual intercourse - divesting it of a sense of
sin and a necessary connection with procreation. But a totally demythologized
sex can be mechanical, vapid and banal if it remains without larger
significance. Ecstatic sexual experience may be the new and valuable
'remythologizing' agent. With and without psychedelic drugs, we may be able to
invest the sexual union with new beauty and meaning.
*=-- --=*
{ -=*/> Buzzz Bros. <\*=- }
{ MCMXC }
*=-- --=*
"You have the right to free speech -
As long as you're not dumb enough to actually try it."
__________________
Special Thanks to:
__________________
The old man at Maxwell St. that sold me the magazine for $1
93.1 FM WXRT (Chicago)
The return of RIPCO (312) 528-5020 - after the Operation SunDevil bust
Anyone who actually took the time to read the whole file
3rd BASS
The Hyatt Regency Chicago
(c) MCMXC -=*/> Buzzz Bros. <\*=-
_ _ ____________________________________________________________________
/((___))\|Demon Roach Undrgrnd.806/794-4362|Grassroots..............new # soon|
[ x x ] |NIHILISM.............513/767-7892|The People Farm.......916/673-8412|
\ / |Tequila Willy's GSC..209/526-3194|The Works.............617/861-8976|
(' ') |Lunatic Labs.........213/655-0691|Ripco.................312/528-5020|
(U) |====================================================================|
.ooM |1991 cDc communications by R.E.L.
***************************************************************************
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: WAR-ON-DRUGS-PROBLEMS.
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 1993 01:19:45 GMT
Permission is granted to reproduce this paper as long as you're cool about
it: i.e. don't change it, don't take my name off of it, and don't make any
money off of it, or if you do, share with me! :-)
--germuska@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Drug Policy: What's the Real Problem?
by Joe Germuska (germuska@casbah.acns.nwu.edu)
[copyright 1989]
"There were 2000 drug arrests in Cleveland in 1987, 3700 in 1988, and
[former mayor George] Voinovich predicted 6000 in 1989. Arrests are
growing at 70% a year. Juveniles arrested for drug abuse in Cleveland
increased from 23 in 1985 to 142 in 1988 with a prediction of more than 520
arrests in 1989"
-Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2 April 1989
"U.S. Stops Some Airborne Drugs but Admits the Smugglers Are Winning"
-Headline in The New York Times, 30 July 1989
"On Thursday, March 17, 1988, at 10:45 p.m, in the Bronx, Vernia Brown was
killed by stray bullets fired in a dispute over illegal drugs. The
19-year-old mother of one was not involved in the dispute, yet her death
was a direct consequence of the "war on drugs."
-from "Thinking About Drug Legalization" by James Ostrowski (1989)
(In Colombia:) "Since 1980, assassins have gunned down 178 judges; eleven
of the 24 members of the Supreme Court died in a 1986 shootout between the
army and leftist guerillas thought to have been paid by the drug barons.
Also hit were two successive Justice Ministers (one survived), an Attorney
General, the police chief of the nation's second largest city, Medellin,
and the editor of the newspaper, El Espectador in the capital city of
Bogota. The drug lords also kidnaped the 33-year-old son of a former
President."
-Time, 4 September 1989
"The operation of New York's famous Rockefeller Drug Law, which provided
high mandatory minimum sentences for heroin sellers and restricted plea
bargaining . . . caused essentially no decrease in heroin activity, but did
lead to a drop in the number of heroin offenders arrested and convicted, a
considerable increase in the court and correctional resources necessary to
process those apprehended, and a significant increase in the overcrowding
of the state's prison system."
-from The Hardest Drug by John Kaplan (1983)
It was recently noted that the Eighties are the first decade since the
depression in which the U.S. was not involved in any wars. In a
traditional sense, this may be true, but, especially in the latter half,
the war of the 80's has been the American government's "war on drugs".
Suggested solutions have ranged from Nancy Reagan's glib "Just Say No!" to
George Bush's extravagant "I'm requesting--altogether--an almost billion
and a half increase in drug-related federal spending on law enforcement...."
(from President Bush's televised address, 5 September 1989) However, all
efforts of law enforcement officials to crush the drug traffic seem to have
little end effect on traffic. For example, in 1984, Colombian authorities
seized and destroyed thirteen and a half tons of cocaine, more than the
total amount seized in the history of law enforcement, and yet "it did not
nudge the price of coke on the street in the United States." (Latimer,
1985) In fact, the effects of law enforcement may sometimes actually be
detrimental. Columnist Doug Bandow reports, "A government study in Detroit
found that as the drug laws were more strictly enforced, drug prices rose
and the number of other crimes committed increased." (1984) Obviously,
with respect to drugs, the state of the American nation is absolutely
intolerable. In an August Gallup poll, Americans named drugs as the biggest
problem facing their country. "Drugs," however, is but a very vague
simplification of the problem in America. Before American policy can win
the war, the enemy must be defined. Analysts and policy makers debate with
little progress. Drugs are blamed for crime, loss of productivity, and the
decay of social institutions. Now, though, many experts are suggesting
that the problem may actually lie in the actual laws prohibiting drug use.
Whichever argument is more convincing will direct the future of policy. If
the drugs themselves are the culprits, then enforcement efforts must be
stepped up so as to minimize illicit drug sales and abuse. However, if the
scenario created by prohibition of drugs is judged to be the true problem,
then legalization methods must be developed.
Current American policy is based on the premise that the use of illicit
drugs is, by nature, wrong. The laws, some say, were enacted to protect
Americans from the harm drug abuse can cause. However, socialization has
created several "drugs of choice" which are, despite possibly being more
dangerous, considered acceptable to use and even abuse. For too long,
American society has accepted caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol as "O.K."
drugs, despite possible negative side effects. The government tried to
protect its citizens with the eighteenth amendment, but tenacious drinkers
who wanted ways around the law motivated criminals to industrialize
bootlegging, which became the foundation of organized crime in America.
Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop released a study declaring nicotine
a drug at least as addictive as heroin, yet President Bush's appointed
"Drug Czar," William Bennett, is still hooked on cigarettes. In fact,
technically speaking, if nicotine were discovered today, it would be listed
as a "Class C narcotic," putting it in a league with heroin and cocaine,
neither of which has been a part of our culture long enough to be accepted
like tobacco. Because of the nature of illegal drugs, few studies have
been conducted. However, it seems that neither heroin nor cocaine have
long term health effects anywhere near as severe as the chronic effects of
America's drugs of choice. Lawyer James Ostrowski writes:
It is well known that tobacco causes cancer, heart disease, and
emphysema. While the effects of heavy alcohol consumption are not as well
known, they include anemia, fatty liver, hepatitis, cirrhosis,
pancreatitis, gastritis, ulcer, hypoglycemia, congestive heart failure,
ataxia, brain damage, blurred vision, dementia, cranial nerve palsy,
circulatory collapse, and hemorrhages. (1989)
The government is trying more to protect its citizens from the acute, or
immediate effects of these drugs. However, many scholars argue that the
acute dangers of cocaine and heroin are predominantly because of their
illegality. It has been "reasonably estimated that at least 80 percent of
deaths from illegal drugs today are attributable to the effects of drug
prohibition." (Ostrowski, 1989) Obviously, legalization would prevent all
of these deaths. First, street drugs are not monitored, so the user has no
idea what he is actually putting into his body. Many drugs are cut with
other substances to increase their bulk at no cost to the dealer. The fact
that some of these additives may be harmful or fatal need not bother
dealers, as their customers have no legal recourse. This is comparable to
the sale of denatured alcohol during prohibition. Criminals often sold
blindness-inducing wood alcohol to unknowing customers. Obviously, since
the repeal of Prohibition, brewers and distillers have been obeying
government safety measures. It has been quite a while since anyone was
sold methyl alcohol as an intoxicant! Also, because street drugs are not
labeled, the user has no idea of the potency of the drug he may be using.
A drug user may shoot up with a dose of the same quantity as the last time,
and therefore be apparently safe. If the second dose is more pure,
however, the user may overdose. Since distribution of alcohol includes
legislation requiring consistent percentages of alcohol by volume, drinkers
can know how much they've been drinking. If currently illegal drugs were
instead monitored by the government in essentially the same way as legal
"drugs of choice," those who so desired would be able to monitor their use
much more carefully and responsibly, as may today's drinkers and smokers.
Also, the illegality of drugs may be the motivation for users to turn to
more dangerous methods of administration. Randy Barnett, a law professor,
writes, "Intravenous injection, for example, is more popular in countries
where the high drug prices caused by prohibition give rise to the most
'efficient' means of ingesting the drug. In countries where opiates are
legal, the principal methods of consumption are [smoking] or snorting. . .
[N]either is as likely as intravenous injections to result in an
overdose." (1987) Also, addicts often share needles, which helps spread
AIDS and hepatitis. It seems that, from a strict health standpoint, the
laws outlawing drugs are causing users more harm than use through
government approved channels might.
The one health aspect that would be constant regardless of the legality
of drugs is the prospect of addiction. The laws in place today are there
primarily to prevent Americans from becoming enslaved to a chemical.
However, there are serious problems with these motivations. First,
Americans can and do become addicted to alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, and
numerous legal over-the-counter and prescription drugs. The government
does not, however, forbid the use of these addictive chemicals. And
marijuana has been determined not to be physically addicting. That is, a
marijuana user will suffer no health problems if deprived of THC for an
extended period of time. If the government will outlaw psychologically
addictive substances such as this, then it may as well include gambling,
eating, and even dieting, all of to which people can become psychologically
addicted, or more accurately, all of with which people can become obsessed.
The only grounds upon which the government would be justified in
maintaining this inconsistency is if it were demonstrable that addiction to
currently illegal drugs would necessarily be more harmful or more
inevitable than addiction to currently accepted drugs. There is simply no
reason to believe that this would be so. Popular belief may hold that
these drugs are particularly worse than the ones we use today, but many
people are basing their beliefs on fear-motivated research such as that
which produced the film "Reefer Madness." In this film, marijuana smokers
were depicted as raving psychotics after one puff of smoke. While this
myth has been debunked, similar misbeliefs about other drugs persist. For
example, Henry Giordano, former head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics,
said that his agency's research showed that anyone who used heroin more
than six times would become an addict. Even at that time, several studies
showed that those who had tried heroin far outnumbered those who became
addicted. And today, "it is now clear that there exists a sizeable
population of nonaddicted but regular heroin users who seem well integrated
into society and in many ways indistinguishable from the rest of the
population." (Kaplan, 1983) It is likely that, as with alcohol, caffeine,
and tobacco, other drugs would after a short period of acculturation be
similarly compatible with daily life.
Also, there are considerable questions about the rights of the government
to prohibit what is often called a "victimless crime." The United States
government was founded on principles of limited government. Many
libertarians point out that it is not the government's business to regulate
commerce between consenting adults. To these people, drug use is a private
matter in which the government has no business. Obviously, neither the
buyer nor the seller of drugs objects to the transaction. One counter to
this viewpoint is the claim that drug abuse cannot truly be victimless:
the user's friends and family may suffer if he becomes an addict, and many
drug users commit crimes to support their habits. What about these
victims?
Well, a person's associates may suffer if that person were to become
obsessed with anything, not just illegal drugs. However, this in other
cases is considered a social problem and not a criminal problem. Or, in
the case of child abuse or neglect, the parent is punished for that crime,
not for the possible causes of his misdeeds.
As for crime, quite simply the laws against drugs cause many more crimes
than simply drug sales and possession. Because of the legal risk, sellers
can inflate prices. A dose of heroin that costs pennies to hospitals sells
for $10-20 on the streets. Also, because the market is illegal, ruthless
"businessmen" can resort to violence and terror to control business, since
their customers could certainly not turn to the police and risk detection
themselves. This danger inflates the prices still further. But, drug
conviction records keep many users from gaining useful employment and
money. Therefore, they must rob or steal to maintain their habit. Drugs
themselves do not tend to promote violent crimes against persons. As Duane
McBride reports, "Non-drug users were more likely to commit crimes against
person than were all types of drug users. . . . Heroin addicts concentrated
their activities on behaviors that would result in the most monetary gain,"
so that they could by drugs. (1981) Experts generally agree that very few
of the violent crimes committed that are connected to drugs are committed
because of the pharmacological effects of the drugs. As New York Police
Department Deputy Chief Raymond Kelly said, "When we say drug-related,
we're essentially talking about territorial disputes or disputes over
possession. . . . We're not talking about where somebody is deranged
because they're on a drug. It's very difficult to measure that." (quoted
in The New York Times, 1988) If the drug prices were not inflated, the
addicts would be buying their drugs over the counter with money earned at
legitimate jobs, and crime would be reduced tremendously. After all, few
alcoholics need to resort to muggings to buy their booze.
To summarize: prohibition of drugs is justified on the following
grounds: Americans must be protected from the ill effects of drugs, both
on their health, and addiction; also, Americans must be protected from
those who use drugs, particularly those who commit crimes because of their
drug use. But, though the long term side effects of illegal drugs are
unclear, they are unlikely to be worse than alcohol and tobacco. The
immediate dangers of drug use have been shown to be largely attributable to
illegalities which would be absent from a legally regulated production
industry. Addictiveness of illegal drugs has not been shown to be any
greater than addictiveness of alcohol or nicotine. And, the crime caused
by drugs is committed for two reasons: to meet high prices which would be
much less without the inflation caused by criminalization; and in the
course of criminal business, to settle disputes that legitimate industry
would take to court. It would seem, in fact, that much of the problem that
faces America today is truly a result of the laws prohibiting drugs rather
than the drug use itself. If this is the case, then legalization must be
considered. And, if the social cost of legalization would be less than the
current costs of criminalization, then the solution must be implemented.
Let us examine how legalization might go.
If drugs were legalized, use would increase. This is inevitable at
first. However, it is not necessarily true that the novelty would last any
longer than any other fads which strike our country periodically. When the
government of the Netherlands reformed its laws, their goal was to "make
marijuana boring." And, since decriminalization, marijuana use has
declined markedly in that country. As with alcohol after prohibition,
society's use would soon stabilize, and with America's growing concern over
health, drug use would probably soon follow the trend lines of decreased
use of tobacco and alcohol. Also, legalization would free up $4.7 billion
dollars that George Bush budgeted for 1990 for enforcement and corrections.
Much of this, in addition to tax revenue on drug sales, could be added to
the $2 billion already budgeted for education and treatment programs.
If drugs were legalized, the drugs themselves would become safer.
Brewers don't spike their beer with rubbing alcohol or any other dangerous
liquids, and pharmaceutical companies would be similarly bound by FDA
regulations. And, users would probably use safer and easier methods of
administration. More people drink beer and wine than hard liquor.
Similarly, relatively few Americans would resort to injection, given the
common fear of needles, especially when one is not concerned with
"maximizing" the high obtained per dollar. For those who would use
needles, some of the "windfall" dollars liberated from enforcement could be
diverted to an education campaign about the dangers of injection and
sharing needles.
Of course, the sudden legalization of drugs would open a new area of
danger, although lessened. Although at first it sounds unusual, a user
licensing system might be the most practical way to educate users. After
all, we require citizens to have licenses to drive cars and carry guns.
All adults who desire to use drugs could be required to pass some kind of
test about effects and dangers of drug use. Those who pass would be issued
a license which would be presented when drugs are bought. While this
system would certainly not be infallible (neither is driver or gun
licensing), it would help somewhat.
Most importantly, if drugs were legalized, crime would be radically
changed. Property crime would decrease. Users would no longer have to
resort to theft to purchase drugs. Users would not necessarily have
criminal records, allowing them to seek gainful legal employment. Violent
crime committed by dealers would vanish entirely. Those who sell drugs
would be behind drugstore counters rather than in back alleys. Few
pharmacists resort to violent crime to boost their sales or eliminate a
competitor.
Finally, drug legalization would effect great change in many of our
social institutions. Children in poverty would no longer have a shortcut
to riches. Although they might be reluctant at first, they would
eventually begin to strive for success along traditional pathways such as
education and hard work. Also, school children would be free of the
spectre of dealers hanging around the playground trying to find new
customers. With the profits available through legal sales, pharmacists
would be no more likely to break the law and hawk their wares to children
than are liquor store proprietors. As for families torn by drug abuse, if
the problem were accepted as a social, rather than criminal problem, social
policy solutions could be pursued. Once again, the billions of dollars
freed from the "Drug War Chest" could be put towards programs designed to
rehabilitate addicted parents, educate mothers-to-be about the dangers of
drug use to their unborn children, and warn children away from ever
starting to use drugs.
In conclusion, it seems that the cost of maintaining prohibition of drugs
is much greater than the cost of legal drug sales would be. In fact, in
1988 Ostrowski challenged nine major players in the drug war (George Bush,
William Bennett, Assistant Secretary of State for drug policy Ann
Wrobleski, White House drug policy adviser Dr. Donald Ian McDonald, and the
public information directors of the FBI, DEA, General Accounting Office,
National Institute of Justice, and National Institute on Drug Abuse)
challenging them to name any study "that demonstrated the beneficial
effects of drug prohibition when weighed against its costs." None of the
nine were able to cite such a study.
For more than a century, America has been threatened by horror stories
about the effect of drugs. It seems about time that our country took a
more objective look at the situation it has fallen into. The radical
changes that legalization would bring no doubt terrify many people.
However, ever-increasing enforcement efforts seem to be leading nowhere but
down. Every time criminals are convicted, the huge profit basically
ensures that someone will move in to take their place. While the demand
for drugs continues, someone will meet that demand, especially with the
profits available in a prohibition system. America must begin to study
legalization options. For the sake of consistency, for the sake of the
American tradition of limited government intrusion, and most of all, for
the sake of every American citizen who suffers from drug laws in place
today, America must open its eyes and learn a lesson from its own past. As
we saw in the 1920's, if a population wants something badly enough, someone
will oblige them, whether it be Chicago's Al Capone or Medellin's Jorge
Ochoa. As soon as America stops adding to the problems with drug laws, it
can spend its time, energy, and money on the underlying causes and effects
of drug use and abuse.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography
"America After Prohibition: The Next Debate Over Drug Legalization: How
Would It Work?" (Collection of essays) in Reason, October, 1988. p. 22-29
"Americans Are Placing Issue of Drugs At the Top of Their National Agenda,"
in The Washington Post, 18 August 1989. p. A1.
Baltic, Bernard. "Drug Laws are the problem, not the solution," in The
Plain Dealer, 2 April 1989. p. 1-C.
Bandow, Doug. "The U.S. Should End Its War on Drugs," in Chemical
Dependency, Claudia Debner (ed.) St. Paul, MN: Greenhaven Press, 1985
Barnett, Randy E. "Curing the Drug-law Addiction: The Harmful Side
Effects of Legal Prohibition," in Dealing With Drugs, Ronald
Hamowy (ed.) San Francisco: Pacific Research Inst., 1987.
"Bush Heats Up War on Drugs," Chicago Tribune, 6 September, 1989. p. 1.
Chaiken, Marcia R. and Bruce D. Johnson. Characteristics of Different
Types of Drug Involved Offenders. Washington, D.C.: National
Institute of Justice, Office of Communication and Research
Utilization. 1988.
Daniels, Mitch. "Bennett Knows Best," in The Washington Post, 22 August
1989. p. A19.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. "Drug Frenzy: Why the war on drugs misses the real
target," in Utne Reader, March/April 1989. p. 76.
"Going Too Far: The drug thugs trigger a backlash in Colombia and
Kennebunkport," in Time, 4 September 1989. p. 12.
Kaplan, John. The Hardest Drug. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983.
Latimer, Dean. "Cocaine Use is Sensationalized," in Chemical Dependency,
Claudia Debner (ed.) St. Paul, MN: Greenhaven Press, 1985.
McBride, Duane C. "Drugs and Violence" in The Drugs-Crime Connection,
James Inciardi (ed.) Beverly Hills: SAGE Publications, 1981.
Moynihan, Daniel. "The U.S. Should Strengthen Its War on Drugs," in
Chemical Dependency, Claudia Debner (ed.) St. Paul, MN:
Greenhaven Press, 1985.
Ostrowski, James. "Policy Analysis: Thinking About Drug Legalization."
Washington, D.C.: The Cato Institute. 1989.
Rich, Robert M. Crimes Without Victims. Washington, D.C.: University
Press of America, 1978.
"Should drugs be legalized?" (opposing editorials) in Utne Reader,
March/April 1989. p. 80.
"U.S. Stops Some Airborne Drugs but Admits the Smugglers Are Winning," in
The New York Times, 30 July 1989. p. 1.
Zuckerman, Mortimer B. "The Enemy Within," in U.S. News and World Report,
11 September 1989. p. 91.
--
|----Joe Germuska | germuska@casbah.acns.nwu.edu | ---- (708) 864-5939 ---|
|-Join the Peter Gabriel Mailing List:gabriel-request@casbah.acns.nwu.edu-|
|"Old men sing about their dreams, women laugh and |"How can we be in when|
|children scream, and the band keeps playin' on..."|there is no outside?"-|
***************************************************************************
JUNE 93 UPDATE/JUNE 93 UPDATE/JUNE 93 UPDATE
ATOMIC BOOKS / 229 West Read Street / Baltimore, MD 21201
Voice: 410-728-5490 Fax: 410-686-0000
Internet: atomicbooks@pro-cynosure.cts.com
Please E-Mail for US and Int. Shipping Rates. Maryland residents
add 5% sales tax. Orders shipped within 48 hours if everything is
in stock. You will be notified by E-mail if items are out of stock
and we can make arrangements to either hold the order until all
items are in stock or to ship seperately. If you are looking for
a title that is not listed, please call or E-mail me.
PSYCHEDELICS Titles in Stock (E-Mail for Additional Topics Lists)
(NEW TITLES followed by ASTERISKS ***)
Acid Dreams:The Comp Social History of LSD.....11.95
America's Favorite Drug-Coffee And Your Health.....5.00
Archaic Revival (Terrence McKenna).....13.00
Cain's Book (1950-s Heroin).....9.95
Drug Testing at Work.....17.95
The Drug User:Documents 1840-1960.....10.95
Ecstasy: The MDMA Story (Eisner).....17.95
Emperor Wears No Clothes:Hemp & Marijuana Conspiracy.....14.95
Fire In The Brain: Clinical Tales of Hallucination.....10.00
Flashbacks (Leary Autobiography).....15.95
Food of the Gods (Terrence McKenna).....13.95
Free Rides: Get High w/o Drugs.....8.00
>From Chocolate to Morphine-Everything You Need to Know
About Mind-Altering Drugs ***.....13.95
Haight-Ashbury Flashbacks (Summer of Love).....9.95
Hallucinogens: Cross-Cultural Perspectives.....10.95
Hippie Papers (reprints classic Haight Ashbury fliers).....10.00
Laughing Gas: 70's classic on Nitrous Oxide.....12.95
LSD My Problem Child (Albert Hoffman) limited numbers left.....15.00
PIHKAL: A Chemical Love Story.....21.95
Plants of the Gods
19.95
Politics of Ecstasy (Timothy Leary).....12.95
Psychedelic Chemistry.....16.95
Psychedelic Monographs and Essays #6.....20.00
Psychedelics Encyclopedia.....24.95
Smart Drugs and Nutrients.....12.95
Steal This Urine Test (Abbie Hoffman).....11.00
Storming Heaven:LSD and the American Dream.....13.00
NEWSLETTERS: E-Mail for availability of Current Issue
Island Views (Albert Hoffman Foundation).....3.00
PlantWise (Psychoactive Plants).....5.00
Psychedelic Illuminations #3 ***.....5.00
Smart Drugs Update (Morgenthaler/Dean).....6.00
Urine Nation News (Drug Testing).....2.00
COMIX
Neurocomix (Timothy Leary).....2.25
Suburban Teens on Acid (D.Worden) RECOMMENDED!!!.....2.50
all replies to ATOMICBOOKS@PRO-CYNOSURE.CTS.COM
you can encrypt your e-mail orders if you like or even order
through e-mail using PGP 2.2. Just make sure that we have your
public key first!
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.2
mQBPAiv7e0sAAAEB/AigAUOxhkkceOsU1+nEPAiZOhAxplHUeUR2djVl42QU+sbb
8YTcFQGubvyqNT3yOE6uH5mAJGH4rYtbV8JsStEAEQEAAbQvQXRvbWljIEJvb2tz
IDxhdG9taWNib29rc0Bwcm8tY3lub3N1cmUuY3RzLmNvbT4=
=UlZx
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Internet: elrod@pro-cynosure.cts.com | PGP Public
ProLine: elrod@pro-cynosure | Key available
UUCP: crash!pro-cynosure!elrod | upon request
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
. "We intend to destroy all dogmatic verbal systems" .
. ---William S. Burroughs .
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
***************************************************************************
r w AM-DrugSeizures 06-15 0537
^AM-Drug Seizures,520<
^Conservative Hyde Teams With Liberal ACLU Seek Curb On Property Seizures<
^By LARRY MARGASAK=
^Associated Press Writer=
WASHINGTON (AP) _ U.S. Customs agents in Florida searched a
professor's new $24,000 sailboat for drugs. In seven hours, they
found nothing but damaged the boat so thoroughly, it had to be sold
for scrap.
A disabled Kentucky retiree was acquitted on state charges after
police found 500 marijuana plants on his farm, but he was forced to
pay the federal government $12,500 to get his confiscated property
back.
Conservative Rep. Henry J. Hyde cited these examples Tuesday, as
he proposed restrictions on government seizure of property in
suspected drug cases. In doing so, he teamed up with the liberal
American Civil Liberties Union.
The Illinois Republican told a news conference that money and
other property is being taken ``in terribly unjust ways'' under
civil law _ often from those never charged with drug crimes.
He introduced legislation to curtail this method of pursuing
drug profits and obtaining money for use by law enforcement
agencies.
Under current law, authorities only need to show ``probable
cause'' that property was used illegally in order to seize it. The
owner must then prove his or her innocence to get it back.
ACLU President Nadine Strossen joined Hyde at the news
conference to back his bill. But she also called civil forfeiture
unconstitutional and proposed its abolition, because the burden of
proof is on the defendant.
Hyde, who would not endorse abolition, said his bill would:
_Require the government to prove by clear and convincing
evidence that an asset was purchased with the profits of crime or
was used in committing a crime.
_Provide a lawyer for those who can't afford one but want to
challenge a civil forfeiture. Currently there is no right to
appointed counsel in these cases.
_Abolish the requirement that a property owner post bond to
contest a seizure.
_Clarify that lack of consent to illegal activity is a valid
defense to forfeiture.
``Nothing less than the sanctity of private property is at stake
here,'' Hyde said. ``This is unjust; this is abusive, and it must
be addressed.''
Hyde said he might have a tough time selling fellow
conservatives on the need for the legislation, since the money from
seizures goes into a fund used for law enforcement which had $531
million in deposits last year.
But Strossen said no one can accuse Hyde, a strong backer of
anti-drug measures, of being soft on crime.
Strossen said civil forfeiture, used since 1984, ``has become a
nightmare for thousands of ordinary, law-abiding citizens'' who are
subject to ``Draconian property deprivations.''
Also backing the legislation was Nancy Hollander, president of
the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
She said authorities have focused their forfeitures on ``minor
participants and innocent people, not big drug dealers.''
Hollander said that forfeiture revenues ``have assumed an
indispensable role in law enforcement budgets, creating a situation
in which seizure targets are sometimes selected by the bounty
available to the enforcement agency ....''
AP-DS-06-15-93 1526EDT<
---
Belts?Belts??? We don't need no stinkin' belts!
Dan Liebster Bellcore dl@silat.bellcore.com 201.829.4797
***************************************************************************
From: cyu@delfin.com (Cristina Ungstad Yu)
Subject: Re: "End The Drug War" stamps for snail mail envelopes now available!!!
The stamps are the stick-on kind. They are *not* postage stamps. I ordered
some and they arrived promptly. The prices were (I believe) $5 for a sheet
of 30 and $10 for three sheets of 30. They are professionally done, and look
rather attractive and distinctive.
I'm not affiliated with this group, but I think they've got a darned good
idea. I purchased a bunch of postage-paid postcards, then I stick a couple
stamps on a couple every month or so and mail them to Washington.
Here's the address again:
Save Our Liberties
187 Acalandes Dr. #14
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
-Cristina Yu
***************************************************************************
This sad message was posted to SCODAE, a "drug-abuse education" mailing list.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1993 13:50:52 -0600 (MDT)
From: "John J. Gibson"
To: Multiple recipients of list SCODAE
Subject: Poppy Seed Info Needed....
Hello Everyone,
I'm new to this LISTSERV, but I have an extremely urgent request that
perhaps only YOU in the Internet community can help with now....
My wife recently moved to Arizona to start her "Dream Job" (offered in
July) and was given the standard pre-employment physical at a local
hospital. She was given no warnings of what NOT to eat, and I believe was
not even asked what she had recently eaten. She ate two poppy seed muffins
that morning and registered a positive morphine level on their drug test
that afternoon. She was fired because she was a "drug abuser".
There are a few other circumstances that seem to have complicated this
situation. We've found out that the NIDA suggested limit is 300; she
scored about 1,000 and we are trying to figure out "why". The nurse said
she was extremely dehydrated (after working in 100-degree temperatures) and
that her keytones (?) were high (she had eaten very little the last few
days). She is also vegetarian. We've heard that these other factors may
have been the reason for her score, but we have no solid medical research
to back this up....
Does anyone out there know of any research or other cases that can help us
prove the truth? Is there another LISTSERV with someone who could provide
this information? Are there any experts out there we could talk to? Any
suggestions you have would be appreciated!
We are trying to get the actual lab results (and will ask for a re-test of
the same samples), but the hospital has been very slow in giving us a
copy. She also had a surprise test which proved clear, but they discounted
these results because a "drug-abuser would have expected a second test".
We are now trying to prove the truth so my wife can keep her Nursing
license and her livelihood. Previous to this test, we thought these drug
tests were a good idea; as you can imagine, this experience has shaken that
belief somewhat. In fact, it has almost devastated our lives. Not only
did we move all our belongings there (at our own expense), established a
residence, etc., but the hospital reported her to the State Nursing Board
and nobody will hire her now that she has this "record". After 20 years of
experience and higher education (with absolutely NO drug abuse), she gets
this for eating two supermarket muffins for breakfast. The scary thig is
that this could happen to anyone....
Thanks VERY MUCH in advance for all your help!
****************************************
John J. Gibson
Director of Computing
Dean's Office
College of Business Administration
University of Northern Colorado
Greeley, CO 80639
TEL: (303) 351-1227
FAX: (303) 351-2500
Internet: jgibson@Slinky.UnivNorthCo.edu
****************************************
***************************************************************************
Excerpts from _Our Right To Drugs: The Case For a Free Market_
by Thomas Szasz
(c) 1992
ISBN 0-275-94216-3
Casting a ballot is an important act, emblematic of our role as citizens. But
eating and drinking are much more important acts. If given a choice between
the freedom to choose what to ingest and what politician to vote for, few if
any would pick the latter.
...
The trick to enacting and enforcing crassly hypocritical prohibitions, with
the conniving of the victimized population, lies in not saying what you mean
and avoiding direct legal rule making. Thus, the Founders did not declare, in
so many words, "To justify slavery, in the slave states blacks shall be
counted as property; and to apportion more congressional seats to the slave
states than they would have on the basis of their white population only, black
slaves shall be counted as three-fifths persons."
...
...There are three distinct drug markets in the United States today: 1) the
legal (free) market; 2) the medical (prescription) market; and 3) the illegal
("black") market. Because the cost of virtually all of the services we call
"drug treatment" is borne by parties other than the so-called patient, and
because most people submit to such treatment under legal duress, there is
virtually no free market at all in drug treatment. Try as we might, we cannot
escape the fact that the conception of a demand for goods and services in the
free market is totally different from the conception we now employ in
reference to drug use and drug treatment. In the free market, a demand is what
the customer wants; or as merchandising magnate Marshall Field put it, "The
customer is always right." In the prescription drug market, we seem to say,
"The doctor is always right": The physician decides what drug the patient
should "demand", and that is all he can legally get. Finally, in the
psychiatric drug market, we as a society are saying, "The patient is always
wrong": The psychiatrist decides what drug the mental patient "needs" and
compels him to consume it, by force if necessary.
...
Naturally, drug companies defend the practice [of advertising]. "The ads,"
they say, "help educate patients and give consumers a chance to become more
involved in choosing the medication they want." But that laudable goal could
be better served by a free market in drugs. In my opinion, the practice of
advertising prescription drugs to the public fulfills a more odious function,
namely, to further infantalize the layman and, at the same time, undermine the
physician's medical authority. The policy puts physicians in an obvious bind.
Prescription laws give doctors monopolistic privilege to provide certain drugs
to certain persons, or withhold such drugs from them. However, the advertising
of prescription drugs encourages people to pressure their physicians to
prescribe the drugs they WANT, rather than the drugs the physicians believe
they need...Missing is any recognition of the way this practice reinforces the
role of the patient as helpless child, and of the doctor as providing or
withholding parent. After all, we know why certain breakfast food
advertisements are aimed at young children: Because while they cannot buy
these foods for themselves, they can pressure their parents to buy the
advertised cereals for them. Similarly, the American people cannot buy
prescription drugs, but they can pressure their doctors to prescribe the
advertised drugs for them.
...
If ever there were services that are fictitious or even worse, they are our
current publicly financed drug treatment services. The wisdom of our language
reveals the truth and supports the cogency of these reflections. We do not
call convicts "comsumers of prison services", or conscripts "consumers of
military services"; but we call committed mental patients "consumers of mental
health services" and paroled addicts "consumers of drug treatment services".
We might as well call drug traffickers -- conscripted by the former drug czar
William Bennett for beheading -- "consumers of guillotine services". After
all, Dr. Guillotin was a doctor, and Mr. Bennett used to teach ethics.
...
Although it is obvious that the American drug market is now completely state
controlled, most people seem at once unaware of this fact and pleased with it,
except when they want a drug they cannot get. Then they complain about the
unavailability of that particular drug. For example, cancer patients complain
that they cannot get Laetrile; AIDS patients that they cannot get unapproved
anti-AIDS drugs; women, that they cannot get unapproved chemical
abortifacients; terminally ill patients in pain, that they cannot get heroin;
and so on...Sadly, the very concept of a closure of the free market in drugs
is likely to ring vague and abstract to most people today. But the personal
and social consequences of a policy based on such a concept are anything but
abstract or vague...the voluntary coming together of honest and responsible
citizens, trading with one another in mutual trust and respect, has been
replaced by the deceitful and coercive manipulation of infantalized people by
corrupt and paternalistic authorities...helping politicians to impose their
will on the people by defining self-medication as a disease...
...
Ever since Colonial times, the American people have displayed two powerful
but contradictory existential dispositions. THey looked inward, seeking to
perfect the self through a struggle for self-discipline; and outward, seeking
to perfect the world through the conquest of nature and the moral reform of
others. [Any guess which of the two is morally reprehensible? You got it. If
you want to change the world, change yourself first.] The result has been an
unusually intense ambivalence about a host of pleasure-producing acts (drug
use being but one) and an equally intense reluctance to confront this
ambivalence, embracing simultaneously both a magical-religious and rational-
scientific outlook on life.
...
In 1914, Congress enacted another landmark piece of anti-drug legislation;
the Harrison Narcotic Act. Originally passed as a record-keeping law, it
quickly became a prohibition statute. In the course of the next seven years,
by a curious coincidence of history -- if, indeed, it is coincidence -- in
Rissua, the Soviet Union replaced the czarist empire, while in the United
States, the free market in drugs was replaced by federal drug prohibition
possessing unchallengeable authority. Excerpts from two key Supreme Court
decisions quickly tell the story.
In 1915, in a test of the Harrison Act, the Court upheld it, but expressed
doubts about its constitutionality. "While the Opium Registration Act of
December 17, 1914, may have a moral end, as well as revenue, in view, this
court, in view of the grave doubt as to its constitutionality except as a
revenue measure, construes it as such." Yet only six years later, the Court
considered objection to federal drug prohibition taboo...In 1914, trading in
and using drugs was a right. In 1915, limited federal drug controls were a
constitutionally questionable tax revenue measure. By 1921, the federal
government had gained not only complete control over so-called dangerous
drugs, but also a quasi-papal immunity to legal challenge of its authority.
...
Although we now shamefully neglect and obscure the differences between vice
and crime -- and hence the differences between peaceful persuasion and
government coercion -- these differences form the pillars on which a free
society rests. Conversely, denying these distinctions (by metaphorical
bombast, sloppy thinking or political propaganda making use of both) is the
decisive step in transforming self-restraint into the restraint of others,
temperance into prohibition, persuasion into persecution, the moral ideals of
individuals into the immoral madness of crowds. All this [Lysander] Spooner
saw clearly:
No one ever practices a vice with any...criminal intent. He
practices his vice for his own happiness solely, and not from
any malice toward others. Unless this clear distinction
between vices and crimes be made and recognized by the laws,
there can be on earth no such thing as individual right,
liberty or property; no such things as the right of one man
to the control of his own person and property, and the
corresponding and co-equal rights of another man to the
control of his own person and property.
***************************************************************************
