From: Christopher B Reeve <[cr 39] at [andrew.cmu.edu]>
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon,
Pittsburgh, PA

"One sheriff in Anderson, South Carolina, for example, set up a
program encouraging individuals to make money by buying drugs
and turning in drug dealers.  The program includes billboards
that read: 'Need Cash?  Turn in a dope dealer,' and it promises
to reward informants with up to 25 percent of the money or
assets seized.  Federal authorites have a similar informant
program with a 25 percent split [Montgomery Advertiser.
(1/27/90).  Sheriff Encourages Illegal Drug Deals: 2A.].
  This bounty hunting has predictably led to targeting particular
drug dealers for the usefulness of their assets to the
department.  At a police conference in Michigan, evne law
enforcement officials admitted that police agencies become so
dependent on funds generated from asset seizures that seizures
become more important than fighting drug abuse [USA Today.
(4/11/90).  Spoils of Drug War: 3A.].  One spokeswoman for the
U.S. Marshall's Service in Texas admitted that the service
discouraged the seizure of run-down property or property that
carried a large bank loan [New York Times.  (3/11/90).  Look
Who's Hooked on Drug Dollars: 20E.].  In addition, a General
Accounting Office (GAO) report completed in 1991 revealed that
the Marshall's Service was mismanaging the more than $1.4
billion in property it had seized from drug dealers, and that at
least in one case it had seized property from an innocent third
party.  The Marshall's Service has in fact seized so much
property that in 1991 it waaas proposing to create a commercial
real estate management unit within the service [Margasak, Larry.
 (4/20/91).  GAO: Mismanagement of Seized Property Costly.
Montgomery Advertiser: 6A.].
  The money from such seizures is supposed to be earmarked to
fight the War on Drugs, but it is expended on law enforcement,
not treatment [New York Times.  (3/11/90).  Look Who's Hooked on
Drug Dollars: 20E.].  In fiscal 1989, for example, the
Marshall's Service program generated $311 million for new prison
construction and the hiring of new prosecutors [Margasak, Larry.
 (4/20/91).  GAO: Mismanagement of Seized Property Costly.
Montgomery Advertiser: 6A.].
  As Jack Katz, a professor of sociology at UCLA, wrote in the
Washington Post, 'While attacking foreign dictators for raking
off huge profits from international drug dealers, the new
administration seems eager to perfect the criminal justice
system's financial exploitation of the drug market.' [Katz,
Jack.  (6/5 - /11/89).  No Way to Fight Street Crime.
Washington Post National Weekly Edition: 29.]" (Christina
Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing
Succeeds Like Failure, 118 - 119)

[note: by concentrating on seizure, the government is joining in
the profits of the illegal drug market - but as an all-powerful
thief instead of an entrepreneur.]

Drugs in the Workplace

"As Alan Alder of the ACLU has noted, the administration is
increasingly getting private industry to do what it cannot, that
is, conduct surveillance of workers.  General Motors, for
example, has hired private investigators to pose as workers in
order to find drug dealers in its plants [Wall Street Journal.
(2/5/90).  GM Hires an Investigator to Fight Drugs at Plant:
B3.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War
on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 117)

"The Anti-Drug Abuse Bill of 1988 contained a provision putting
companies and institutions that receive federal contracts and
grants at risk of losing their federal funding if they did not
make 'good-faith efforts' to implement programs to ensure a
drug-free workplace.  As Stephen Sandherr, director of
congressional relations for the Associated Genreal Contractors
of America, noted in an interview, this measure makes the
employer into 'a cop at the workplace' [Berke, Richard L.
(3/18/89).  Anti-Drug Steps Imposed on U.S. Contractors.  New
York Times: 1.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy,
and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 117)

"Peter B. Bensinger, former U.S. drug enforcement administrator
and now (interestingly enough) a private consultant on substance
abuse in the workplace, advoctes the use of 'professional,
undercover, investigative services' as 'an appropriate technique
that ... should be considered and utilized.'  Bensinger also
argues that employees 'applaud' such actions [Bensinger, Peter
B.  (4/19/90).  Fighting Drugs Won't Abuse Workers.  USA Today:
12A.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the
War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 117)

Legalization

"Legalization of drugs would decrease many of the problems we
now see in the inner cities - the violence of competition for
turf, uncontrolled dosages of drugs, uncontrolled prices,
organized crime involvement - but it would not eliminate the
problems of poverty, unemployment, underemployment, and despair,
all of which are associated with crime." (Christina Jacqueline
Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds
Like Failure, 176)

"some segments of the legalization movement feed the charge of
class-based advocacy by working for the legalization of some
drugs off the backs of other types of drugs; they argue that the
drug they want to legalize is safe, unlike all the rest of the
'dangerous' drugs that should remain illegal.  This leaves the
impression (perhaps not false) that the middle class essentially
is seeking to decriminalize its drugs of choice while abandoning
the users and sellers of other drugs.  The Wall Street Journal
expressed this argument forecefully in an article about
decriminalization [Wall Street Journal.  (12/29/89).  The Devil
You Know: A6.]: 'The unspoken thought behind many of the calls
for surrender is that the middle classes can take care of
themselves and the ghettos are hopeless.'" (Christina Jacqueline
Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds
Like Failure, 176)

Health Concerns

"Of an estimated 25,495 Australian deaths caused by drug use in
1987, 71% were attributable to tobacco and 26% to alcohol only
323 deaths (1%) were attributable to opiates, the remainder
arising from other drugs.
  What is even more striking is that not a single death was
attributable to Cannabis use alone" (H.E.M.P - Dept. of
community services and health 1989. Statistics on drug use in
Australia 1989, table 49 p. 36)

"What is so striking about the pharmacology of cannabis is that
it has such limited and mild effects on human nonpsychic
function.  This is consistent with the equally striking
observation that there has never in its long history been
reported an adequately documented case of lethal overdose.  Nor
is there any evidence of cellular damage to any organ.  This is
not to say that future studies will not reveal other effects of
cannabis on the body; but, inasmuch as the above represent the
major findings reported to date, it seems unlikely that any
major deleterious effects will be discovered." (Lester
Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 53 - 54)

"Thus it can be seen that secobarbital (Seconal), whose
effective dose as a hypnotic is usually 100 mg but may be as
much as 300 mg, has a lethal does of 1,000 to 5,000 mg.  Thus a
dose which is only three to fifty times the effective dose may
prove fatal.  With alcohol, the blood level required for
intoxication is between 0.05% and 0.1%.  Since the fatal dose is
0.4% to 0.5%, the safety factor is 4 to 10.  The effective
intoxicating dose of [THC] is estimated to be between 25 and 50
micrograms per kilogram weight.  Because there is no data on
human fatalities, the lethal does had to be extrapolated from
data on mice, and from this the safety factor can be estimated
to be something on the order of 40,000.  Thus, to the extent
that the most extreme, acute toxic effect of death may be
considered a measure of a drug's toxicity, cannabis, contrary to
the Americna Medical Association's position, is an extremely
safe drug compared with secobarbitol and alcohol." (T.H.
Mikuriya, "Historical Aspectsof Cannabis Sativa in Western
Medicine," New Physician (1969), p. 905, extracted from Lester
Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 227 - 228)

"I think it is safe to conclude that death from cannabis must be
extremely rare and will only occur under conditions of
extraordinary dose and unusual circumstances." (Lester
Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 228)

"In the La Guardia study, 17 of the 77 subjects were chronic
cannabis users.  One can calculate from the data given ... that
the duration of usage ranged in these men from 2 1/2 to 16
years, with a mean of 8 years, and the number of cigarettes
smoked per day varied from 2 to 18, with a mean of 7.2.  Despite
the fact that this dosage would be considered to be ratheron the
high side of marihuana use in the United States, the
investigators were able to establish that the marihuana users
were not inferior in intelligence to the gneral population and
that they had suffered no mental or physical deteriorattion as a
result of their use of the drug.  Nor could Freedman adn
Rockmore, whose 310 users had a history of an average of 7.1
years of cannabis use, find any evidence of mental or physical
decline that could be attributed to drug use.  Furthermore,
Bromberg's 67 criminal offenders who were users of marihuana
revvealed no peculiarities of psychopathology which would
distinguish them from a non-marihuana-using group of criminal
offenders.  Although in the study of Siler et al. the subjects
were young (an average age of 23) and their experience in using
the drug averaged only two years, it was also not possible to
demonstrate any evidence of mental or physical deterioration."
(Siler et al., "Marihuana Smoking in Panama," The Military
Surgeon, 73 (1933), 269 - 280, extracted from Lester Grinspoon,
Marihuana Reconsidered, 277)

"Of the demographic variables taken into account there were no
significant differences between drug and control groups except
for total WAIS IQ scores.  Extreme drug-use patients had
significantly higher scores (113.08) than either the moderate
marihuana group (102.15) or the control group (103.26).  The
mean WAIS score for the moderate mixed-drug group (110.86) was
close to that for the extreme group.  Thus the authors found
that the patient groups most involved with drugs were also the
most intelligent.  They also found that there were significantly
more character disorders (85 percent) and fewer schizophrenic
patients (5 percent) among the extreme drug-use patients than
among any of the other three groups." (M. Cohen and D. F. Klein,
"Drug Abuse in a Young Psychiatric Population," American Journal
of Orthopsychiatry, 40 (1970), 449, extracted from Lester
Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 279)

"It is a curious fact that the only socially accepted and used
drugs known to cause tissue damage (alcohol and tobacco) are the
ones whose use Western society sanctions.  It is reasonably well
established that cannabis causes no tissue damage.  There is no
evidence that it leads to any cellular damage to any organ."
(Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 371)

"The minute doses that cause death in animal experiments may
give the impression that LSD is a very toxic substance. However,
if one compares the lethal dose in animals with the effective
dose in human beings, which is 0.0003-0.001 mg/kg (0.0003 to
0.001 thousandths of a gram per kilogram of body weight), this
shows an extraordinarily low toxicity for LSD. Only a 300- to
600-fold overdose of LSD, compared to the lethal dose in
rabbits, or fully a 50,000- to 100,000fold overdose, in
comparison to the toxicity in the mouse, would have fatal
results in human beings. These comparisons of relative toxicity
are, to be sure, only understandable as estimates of orders of
magnitude, for the determination of the therapeutic index (that
is, the ratio between the effective and the lethal dose) is only
meaningful within a given species. Such a procedure is not
possible in this case because the lethal doge of LSD for humans
is not known. To my knowledge, there have not as yet occurred
any casualties that are a direct consequence of LSD poisoning.
Numerous episodes of fatal consequences attributed to LSD
ingestion have indeed been recorded, but these were accidents,
even suicides, that may be attributed to the mentally
disoriented condition of LSD intoxication. The danger of LSD
lies not in its toxicity, but rather in the unpredictability of
its psychic effects." (Albert Hofmann, LSD - My Problem Child)

"Subsequent comprehensive investigations of a large,
statistically significant number of cases, however, showed that
there was no connection between chromosome anomalies and LSD
medication. The same applies to reports about fetal deformities
that had allegedly been produced by LSD. In animal experiments,
it is indeed possible to induce fetal deformities through
extremely high doses of LSD, which lie well above the doses used
in human beings. But under these conditions, even harmless
substances produce such damage. Examination of reported
individual cases of human fetal deformities reveals, again, no
connection between LSD use and such injury." (Albert Hofmann,
LSD - My Problem Child)

"The advocates of uncontrolled, free use of LSD and other
hallucinogens base their attitude on two claims: (l) this type
of drug produces no addiction, and (2) until now no danger to
health from moderate use of hallucinogens has been demonstrated.
Both are true. Genuine addiction, characterized by the fact that
psychic and often severe physical disturbances appear on
withdrawal of the drug, has not been observed, even in cases in
which LSD was taken often and over a long period of time. No
organic injury or death as a direct consequence of an LSD
intoxication has yet been reported. As discussed in greater
detail in the chapter "LSD in Animal Experiments and Biological
Research," LSD is actually a relatively nontoxic substance in
proportion to its extraordinarily high psychic activity."
(Albert Hofmann, LSD - My Problem Child)

"While the psychic and physical dangers of the addicting
narcotics, the opiates, amphetamines, and so forth, appear only
with chronic use, the possible danger of LSD exists in every
single experiment. This is because severe disoriented states can
appear during any LSD inebriation. It is true that through
careful preparation of the experiment and the experimenter such
episodes can largely be avoided, but they cannot be excluded
with certainty." (Albert Hofmann, LSD - My Problem Child)

"The following case, which took place in 1970, is cited as an
example of the possible dangers of black market LSD. We received
for investigation from the police a drug powder distributed as
LSD. It came from a young man who was admitted to the hospital
in critical condition and whose friend had alsoingested this
preparation and died as a result. Analysis showed that the
powder contained no LSD, but rather the very poisonous alkaloid
strychnine." (Albert Hofmann, LSD - My Problem Child)

"At the end of 1989, the DEA rejected the recommendation of its
own chief administrative judge to reclassify marijuana as a
Schedule II drug, which would have made marijuana available on a
prescription basis.  The judge, Francis L. Young, called
marijuana 'one of the safest therapeutically active substances
known to man.'  Marijuana has been used to treat patients with
cancer for nausea and to suppress muscle spasms in patients with
multiple sclerosis.  Young argued: 'It would be unreasonable,
arbitrary and capricious for DEA to continue to stand between
those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of
the evidence in this record.' [New York Times.  (12/31/89).
U.S. Resists Easing Curb on Marijuana: 14.].
  The DEA administrator, Frank Lawn, explained DEA's refusal to
accept the recommendation by saying that Young had 'failed to
act as an impartial judge in this matter' [New York Times.
(12/31/89).  U.S. Resists Easing Curb on Marijuana: 14.]."
(Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on
Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 27)

"The real concern of the administration is not the negative
health effects, misuse, or addictive qualities of drugs in the
society.  If that concern was real, the dangers of legal drugs
would receive just as much attention as those of illegal drugs,
and stronger measures would be taken to control or stamp out the
use of dangerous legal drugs." (Christina Jacqueline Johns,
Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like
Failure, 61)

History of Drug Use

"Junger's writings from the 1930's, which glorified discipline
and warfare, influenced Adolph Hitler.  After taking LSD Junger
renounced Nazism and published mystical essays about human
brotherhood and peace." (Timothy Leary, Flashbacks, 385)

Politics and Propaganda

"Nowadays, with the concepts of 'world law' and 'mankind'
emerging from a shrunken globe, the legal destiny of
psychedelics will further depend on how they are assessed in
foreign lands.  The major part of law vital to the people grows,
except under a dictatorship, from the bottom up, not from the
top down.  It roots in public opinion and collapses if no longer
supported by it; the repeal of the Prohibition Amendment is a
striking example.  Public opinion denotes a cross-sectional mass
judment based on private attitudes.  Therefore, in the last
analysis, the private attitudes twoard psychedelics abroad,
which create public opinion, which in turn creates foreign law,
are likely to radiate into American attitudes, American public
opinion, and American law." (Sir Julian Huxley,
"Psychometabolism," The Psychedelic Reader, 229)

"In 1964, the first commercial book summarizing LSD
experimentation was edited by David Solomon, an early pioneer in
psychedelic drug research who, at the moment of this writing
(1980) is in an English prison, serving a cruelly long sentence
for manufacture of LSD.  The British judge who sentenced Solomon
justified the Turkish barabarism on the grounds that Solomon had
influenced millions of minds through his writings about drugs.
This 20th-century scholar is in jail for his ideas!" (Timothy
Leary, Changing My Mind, Among Others, 61)

"The challenge of the psychedelic chemicals is not just how to
control them, but how to use them.  Restrictive legislation
which creates a new class of college-educated white-collar
criminals is obviously not the answer.
  Research, training, knowledge, are the only solutions to this
problem.  But here we reach the center of the communication
breakdown, because to the older generation, 'drug' means
medicine, disease, doctor, or dope fiends, addicts, crime.  But
to the vast majority of young people experimenting with these
new psychedelic chemicals, the word 'drug' obviously means
positive things - possible growth, opening up the mind, beauty,
sensual awareness, and in some cases, a religious revelation.
The word 'drug' covers a very wide range of psychoactive
chemicals.  On the one hand, the narcotic escape drugs -
opiates, heroin, barbituates, and alcohol - muffle consciousness
and contract awareness.  The psychedelic drugs, very different
pharmacologically, seem to open up consciousness and accelerate
awareness.  The theories and laws necessary to control narcotics
may not have any application to these other substances."
(Timothy Leary, Changing My Mind, Among Others, 144)

  "The prevailing opinion in this country is that there are drugs
that have legal status and are either relatively safe or at
least have acceptable risks, and there are other drugs that are
illegal and have no legitimate place at all in our society.
Although this opinion is widely held and vigorously promoted, I
sincerely believe that it is wrong.  It is an effort to paint
things either black or white, when, in this area, as in most of
real life, truth is colored grey.
  Let me give the reasons for my belief.
  Every drug, legal or illegal, provides some reward.  Every drug
presents some risk.  And every drug can be abused.  Ultimately,
in my opinion, it is up to each of us to measure the reward
against the risk and decide which outweighs the other.  The
rewards cover a wide spectrum.  They include such things as the
curing of disease, the softening of physical and emotional pain,
intoxication, and relaxation.  Certain drugs - those known as
the psychedelics - allow for increased personal insight anda
expansion of one's mental and emotional horizons.
  The risks are equally varied, ranging from physical damage to
psychological disruption, dependency, and violation of the law.
Just as there are different rewards with different people, there
are also different risks.  An adult must make his own decision
as to whether or not he should expose himself to a specific
drug, be it available by prescription or proscribed by law, by
measuring the potential good and bad with his own personal
yardstick.  And it is here that being well informed plays an
indispensable role.  My philosophy can be distilled into four
words: be informed, then choose." (Alexander and Ann Shulgin,
PiHKAL: A Chemical Love Story, xiv - xv)

"There is an outright propaganda campaign being presented
through the informational media, and there is no challenge being
brought by those who know the facts and should be insisting on
adherence to the truth." (Alexander and Ann Shulgin, PiHKAL: A
Chemical Love Story, 442)

"Farber:  Well, I guess psychiatrists arer willing to get
involved in any venture that anyone invites them into.
Leifer: Oh, absolutely.  Now they're doing it in the drug war.
I saw Rangel on TV the other night.  He's the top Eichmann in
the drug war - the top executor or henchman or leader of the
movement.  Just as Eichmann was moving the Jews into the
concentration camps, Rangel is moving the druggies into the
prisons and mental hospitals.  He says that this guy from
Stanford who tells students that he used MDMA, and it was to his
benefit, ought to be fired from Stanford, and Stanford will be
deprived of one hundred million dollars of federal funds because
this guy at Stanford is leading impressionable young people to
believe there's something valuable in drugs.  One of the
panelists asks Rangel well, what are the reasons that marijuana
is illegal?  Rangel says, I don't know, I'm not a doctor.  I
just believe what the doctors say.  He is as impressionable as
he accuses this professor from Stanford of being.
Farber: So people get persecuted in many cases for selling or
using drugs that are far less dangerous than the drugs that
psychiatrists persecute people for not using.
Leifer: You know how many people die from marijuana?
Farber: I presume hardly any.
Leifer: None.  You know how many people die from dog bites?
Twenty-five per year.  Twenty-five people a year are killed by
dogs, not by marijuana.  And last week you could see on TV cops
coming in with guns on people smoking marijuana." (Seth Farber
and Ron Leifer, excerpted from Madness, Heresy, and the Rumor of
Angels, 146)

"I would predict that there are as many psychiatrists in New
York willing to help people  get off drugs as there are DEA
agents who use drugs.  The propaganda for psychiatry is: 'These
drugs are good and should be used; nobody should be off them'.
And the propaganda of the DEA is: 'These drugs are bad and
should not be used by anybody'.  And in each group you have a
small minority who violate the rule." (Ron Leifer, excerpted
from Madness, Heresy, and the Rumor of Angels, 167 - 168)

"There is no such thing as a harmless drug,but marijuana is far
less harmful than either alcohol or tobacco. I believed rather
naively that once people understood that, it would be legalized
within 10 years. Marijuana doesn't make its users behave
irrationally, but it certrainly makes non-users behavior
irrationally." (Lester Grinspoon)

"Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more
damaging to an individual than the drug itself" (Jimmy Carter,
1977)

"Sociologists have speculated that pressure from the liquor
lobby figured among the more subtle factors in this sudden legal
onslaught.  Following repeal of the 1919 Volstead Act in 1933,
liquor manufacturers looked forward to a golden era of
prosperity which the sudden emergence of a cheap popular
intoxicant such as marihuana would endanger." ("Editor's
Foreword: The Marihuana Myths," in The Marihuana Papers, ed. D.
Solomon (Indianapolis, 1966), p. xv. extracted from Lester
Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 16)

"What has apparently not been effective with respect to drug
use, any more than it was with respect to alcohol during
prohibition, is the threat of severe punishment.  It may make
the determined drug user ore clandestine in his activities and
may make him pay more for the drugs he wishes to use.  It may
make the quality and the exact quantity of the drugs he uses
less certain.  The threat of incarceration may make him more
anxious and distrustful, but for the most part it has not and
will not deter him from drug use." (Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana
Reconsidered, 184)

"In both 1925 and 1931 the Army conducted investigations
concerning soldiers' use of cannabis in the Panama Canal Zone,
largely on account of pressure from antimarihuana advocates.
The two reports reached practically identical conclusions:
marihunaa was found to be not habit-forming, and it was reported
as the cause of no deleterious influence on those soldiers using
it.  But the Army findings created much concern in nonmilitary
newspapers and magazines, which 'attacked them viciously for
they saw one of their most lurid toics of reportage snatched
away from the.'  The Army in turn responded with an article
entitled: 'The Marihuana Bugaboo' which stated in part that 'the
smoking of the leaves, flowers and seeds of Cannabis sativa is
no more harmful than the smoking of tobacco or mullen or sumac
leavves ... It is hoped that no witch hunt will be instituted in
the military service over a problem that does not exist." (J.M.
Phalen, "The Marijuana Bugaboo," The Military Surgeon, 93
(1943), 94-95, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana
Reconsidered, 195 - 196)


--
"Freud was convinced that 'the voice of the intellect will be heard.'
But no one understood better than he that if reason is to triumph,
it has to sound above the clamor of conflicting emotion and the roar
of primitive desires." (Zinberg and Robertson, _Drugs & The Public_, 242)