• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

US Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control: WTF are they up to?

BigTrancer

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Mar 12, 2000
Messages
7,339
http://drugcaucus.senate.gov/hearings/ecstasy01/index.html
There's the link... a bunch of what on the surface appears to be very thoroughly researched accounts of statistics and medical/science literature (albeit with a prohibition/"Just Say No" bias).
Statements from panels of experts and senators, DEA officers, Customs Officers, police and physicians... and also:
"2 Teenagers who have used Ecstacsy"
I would like to know how the fuck these two teenagers got put in front of a microphone in the US Senate?
March 21, 2001
America at Risk: The Ecstasy Threat
Vinnie
Client of Daytop Suffolk Outreach
Michelle
Client of Daytop Village
Vinnie
I experimented with Ecstasy three times when I was living in Florida. I was involved with other drugs at the time but Ecstasy was the one that brought out the worst in me and my friends. All drugs made me careless and I did things I wouldn't normally do. Ecstasy made me just want to go to a party and get into some trouble. I wanted to be with a large group of people and I didn't care who it was with. Those friends led me to get arrested and I almost lost my family because of it. I watched some of my friends overdose on Ecstasy because of the multiple substances that are contained within this drug.
I feel that Ecstasy needs the same amount of attention as Heroin and Cocaine get. I feel there should be penalties for using and especially selling the drug. I feel that security at clubs should be escalated because that is the main spot where the drug is used and sold. If people saw that the penalty was worse and more busts were being made I feel that the Ecstasies quantity would lessen drastically. I feel Ecstasy is overlooked and needs to be dealt with, with more force.
Michelle
My name is Michelle C. I am 17 years old and have been in recovery for over a year and a half. I tried many drugs when I was active but the one that I liked the most was ecstasy.
Ecstasy was introduced to me from a former boyfriend. He told me that it was amazing and that I would really feel better. Ecstasy made me feel as though I did not have a problem in the world. Everything was wonderful and I had no inhibitions while I was under the influence.
What my boyfriend did not tell me was that I would want to take Ecstasy all the time. After a while, I felt as though I would not be able to live without it. I began to steal things from my parents and cut classes so that I could get high. The good feelings I was getting from Ecstasy were making me act out in ways that were damaging to myself and the people that cared about me. Feeling wonderful meant that I had to lie, cheat, and steal.
Since I have been in recovery, I have made many changes in my life. I have worked on my self-esteem, self-respect, and have developed positive ways of coping with my day to day problems. Although I am sober, I still miss using Ecstasy. I miss the peaceful feelings and the illusion that everything is okay. I need to remember that I am capable of dealing with problems as they come up and that I do not need to live my life in the cloud of Ecstasy.
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they just give the overall impression that both of them were poly-drug users who had issues to begin with? Vincent tried "ecstasy" 3 times, and it made him "just want to go to a party and get into some trouble", and Michelle (by her own words) has been in "recovery" since before she was 15 and a half.
Perhaps I'm missing the point? What, exactly, does publishing a bunch of reports filled with emotive language (such as "MDMA Dealers: Merchants of DEATH") and selective research accomplish?
BigTrancer
smile.gif

------------------
Load universe into cannon. Aim at brain. Shoot.
 
Tha's the ole' U S of A for ya. The Senate comittee picked two people who where going to say exactly what they wanted to hear. From a statistical point of view you would need to find a random sample of bikkie takers and would need liek about 162 (Some asuumptions used to get this figure) for it to have any statistical relevance.
 
i didnt go to the link but from that post it looks like they'e got it wrong. I mean, its interesting and all to see that extacy made the boy wanna cause havoc, i dunno, most ppl i know when thay take pillz they just wanna chat and be friends, not a violent drug at all. As for the girl, i have never heard anyone referred to being "sober" from extacy. Hmmm, looks like they've have failed in finding a proper cross section of the party go-ing community to talk about drugs.
 
jeepers creepers!
thats bizarre... ok why are the USA SENATORS deciding upon a GLOBAL NARCOTICS thing??
I mention this only because after reading a newspaper article attacking Dr Alexander Shulgin (http://pub88.ezboard.com/fbrisvegasgottaloveitfrm4.showMessage?topicID=64.topic) effectively blaming him solely for all E-related deaths since 1935.
But in this article was mention of how Dr Shulgin had presented so much evidence to the contrary that the Manila (i think) is movoing to get E removed from its list of Class A (I) drugs.
Mind you, i think its high time that USA DID make all our decisions for us... either them or the UN.. oh wait they are both as freakin dodgy as the other.
HC
 
hang on. let me have another go at these stupid pricks.
"e needs the same attention that H and coke have. i feel that stiffer penalties will reduce the usage of E significantly.
more penalties - if its harsher then fuck.. it hasn't worked before, but maybe, just maybe, it might work this time."
fuckmedrunk.
GODDAMN THIS CONTINUAL SECRETIVE COVER-UP LIEING BULLSHIT BY GOVERNMENTS IS PISSING ME OFF!!!!!!
"And the paper today, shows of war and of waste
"But you turn right over to the TV page..."
 
FUCK! can you BELIEVE THIS SHIT!!!
"Through my personal experience with the investigation of these crimes, I have learned that a sub culture exists within these young people. Specific colors, brands of clothing, jewelry, and clothing styles all represent the person as one looking to get high or one looking to sell drugs. For example, the color yellow at a specific rave may indicate a person who is selling ecstasy. The color purple may represent one selling marijuana, and so on. A person wearing a different color exemplifies one looking for a specific substance. The colors change from RAVE to RAVE, and much of the information is communicated by an underground society on the internet. Messages in code are commonly applied to book bags with colorful vinyl paint. While the message has little meaning to a parent or law enforcement officer, it identifies the person as a seller, user, or buyer, as well as the type of drug involved. As you can see, it is increasingly difficult to investigate and penetrate these organizations. Many of the officers investigating drug crime are well into their twenties, and are unable to associate in this society of young adults." - Steven Rust
Sergeant
Milford, Delaware Police Department
Well fuck me officer...
------------------
the guy who was once
E-u4ria...
 
Well that does it apparently I have to give up raving because I'm well into my twenties.
 
so THATS why all these kids came up and asked me for ketamine last time i wore my red fleece!! and before that, they were all coming up and offering me meth!! its cuz i'm 27 and i just didnt understand the codes!!
really tho, i've seen similar type testimonials before, and to be honest i dont think they're legit. probably kids getting out of a drug sentence by taking a deal to get up there and say this shit.. or something. i mean really, does that sound like *anyone* you ever met?!? it sounds like it was scripted by someone who was never part of the scene.
i find the UN involvement w/ international drug policy pretty interesting.. funnily enough, their stance on drugs seems to mimic the USA's exactly! (never seen *that* from the UN before.... hehe)
=)
 
It's interesting how these secret code colours change from rave to rave - almost as if the dealers were just wearing whatever clothes they want and there is no code! Man these ravers are cunning...
This better not be a double-post, or there'll be hell toupe
smile.gif

------------------
"Go peddle your kippers elsewhere clown" - Ren Hoek
 
Hahaha... I love that code shit. How often do legislators and law enforcemet just make complete tools of themselves? Man, we have NOTHING to worry about if these hilarious individuals are in charge...
[This message has been edited by -Thoth (edited 07 August 2001).]
 
I agree BT, I don't know how they appeared before that hearing....I'm amazed they remembered there coaching..*SORRY* I mean lifes pains..
Desperate times lead to desperate measures and because of the "war on drugs" there is going to be a sharp increase in enforcement agencts and funding,...Not that I'm cynical
See http://www.senate.gov/~biden/
Also reference to newspaper article quoted Alan.L.Leshner Ph.D his official report is at http://www.nida.nih.gov/Testimony/7-30-01Testimony.html
His priority is the phsycological abuse of 'Abusers' and children.
Anyhow, senators full of hot air, trying to justify there positions,cops thinking they know what they don't & quotes from people who are "seriously fucked up" really grates my nerves...what's left of them.
 
Thanks for the links RaveDust. The senator pictured in your first link is the worst of the lot! He, along with Hatch in 1999 put up the Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act, which attempted to make even publishing INFORMATION about methamphetamines and ecstasy illegal. One of their other colleagues also pushed through the Date Rape Drug Control Act.
Methamphetamine is made from an array of hazardous substances -- battery acid, lye, ammonia gas, hydrochloric acid, just to name a few -- that produce toxic fumes and often lead to fires or explosions when mixed. I am revealing nothing by naming some of these chemical ingredients. Anyone with access to the Internet can download a detailed meth recipe with a few simple keystrokes. Our legislation would make such postings illegal.
http://www.senate.gov/~biden/press/statmts/111999r2.htm
(BLs: read *that* and weep...)
Now, to be fair, I'm positive that these senators have the best interests of their communities at heart. I understand that these acts were pushed through in order to make it more difficult for people to harm others with their own drug use. I believe that the responsible drug users are not the target of these Acts, however they are tarred with the same brush. It seems to me that in the states, if you possess ketamine then you're a rapist. If you have a couple of extra pills on your person for a friend, then you're going to jail for the same amount of time as a heroin dealer selling foils in a high school.
Am I looking at the world too simplistically, or being too sympathetic to the users and abusers of drugs? Drug dealing is treated as an extremely serious crime; would it make sense to have levels of punishment that fit the motive? It's easy enough for a court to establish varying penalties for murder (ie. 1st/2nd/3rd degree charges) where the motives vary... would it make sense to apportion a 3rd degree trafficking/distribution charge to someone who has a small quantity for distribution, as compared to 1st degree trafficking for someone busted with tens of thousands of pills, or large masses of chemicals?
Umm... Fuck. I've gone off on a tangent again. Oh well, at least it's not realllly off topic
smile.gif

BigTrancer
smile.gif

------------------
Load universe into cannon. Aim at brain. Shoot.
 
Plazma, that cop’s description reminds me of the narcotics convention scene from 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas' ha..ha.. Now where is the guy in the multi-coloured shirt?
BT’s find is more than typical of conservative politicians resorting to emotional blackmail of those that appose law de-form. But for all these US senators pushing for harder laws, there is a very strong academic pro-reform movement, more so than ever before, and they do have political influence. The 2 young speakers as you imply were probably pretty fucked up before E came into the picture.
With the new US president, I'm afraid we're probably looking at another 31/2 years of strong arm tactics. History demonstrates that the US has always had enormous influences on western nations' drug policies. And to support their argument, the recently presented Australian IDRS report #114 (Qld) states that almost all of the interviewed E users had problems from use which impacted on every day life. This report has been used by US anti-drug activists to support reimplementation of tougher laws.
The approach of relevant punishment for the crime is usually met with the same ignorance from law makers that it always has, resulting in policies based upon uninformed reports and biased decisions. The war is, in an indirect way on the user. By restricting more and more chemicals used to make drugs, it only results in the manufacturers becoming more resourceful, through producing the precursors from other chemicals. I am sure most of you would prefer to know any pill you might take has been produced via three or four steps of synthesis, rather than starting from something that requires 15 or more steps. Remember that every step introduces variables that can ultimately affect the purity of the end product. Some of these impurity products have been identified as being possible carcinogens and one from HBr production, as a neurotoxin.
Of course some chemicals have to be restricted completely, but others should be restricted by amounts purchasable. This would also have more of a positive impact on environmental production of wastes. Consider this. An E chemist would prefer to use a particular reducing agent for the final step of production, but it is restricted or watched. He is also aware that it is relatively safe to release this chemical into the environment, as his waste has to be disposed of via tipping it down the drain – no evidence etc. This chemical is unavailable so he chooses an OTC substitute involving mercury. As he would not be able to dispose of the Hg containing waste products without attracting attention, this is also tipped down the drain, where as I’m sure everyone knows, the environmental consequences are considerable.
I don’t wish to suggest I support illicit drug making in any way, but these points are examples of issues that rarely receive attention outside chem. discussion boards
As for the attack on Shulgin, I can only say that the Courier Mail in Brisbane presented one of the most contradictory and ridiculous portrayals of anyone I have ever seen. In one breath he was the most dangerous man in the world, a deceiver that conned his way to fame. Further in the article he was described as a brilliant, rather conservative scientist, highly respected among much of the scientific world. In fact a great number of advances in neuroscience have been attributed to discoveries by Shulgin and colleagues. His mission statement supports this, stressing his work is not designed to promote social chaos through drug use. Rather he sees these psychoactive substances as keys to unlocking the secrets of the brain. Pure Science
The Test Kit issue is the current focal point for us. If this practice is banned, effectively stopping future improvements in testing, then I think it will indicate what we can expect to come from dictating presidents and United Nations chiefs.
If it is decided that testing is to be allowed, social evolution will have survived this round and we'll get to play another day, in a safer more informed way.
phase_dancer
 
That attack on ther good Dr Shulgin is fucking disgraceful.
it was the single most misinformed, contradictory piece of rubbish hyperbole I've ever had the misfortune to witness.
Claims that he is evil, that Phikal is 'sick' acronym and that teenagers could produce mdma in their bedrooms! OMFG!
Who is the clown who wrote that absurd piece of mindless propergander?
Never before have I seen such a blatantly ridiculous and biased spin placed upon anything in my life.
The article consists of nothing else but lie after lie. You wouldn't have seen something this transparent in pre-war Germany.
 
Hey BT, that senators picture is probably on a calendar somewhere!!!*shudder* Hit the nail on the head though, we are tarred with the same brush. Responsibility, information & community is the backbone of sites like this. I guess we can only show through our own behaviour that people, like michelle & vinnie are a minority.
 
I wouldn't worry too much. The US senate will be as out of touch in legislating against drug culture, as it is in researching it. Meaning, what those snotty nosed goofballs do in their out of touch courts and white houses really won't have much impact on our hobby/weekend activities.
Yes it might make precursors harder to obtain, the street price may rise, and it might be a little more risky to carry drugs on you when you're out but honestly, they can't stop this problem. Deep down inside I think most US senators realise the battle with "soft" narcotics (pills, speed, GHB etc) is almost lost. Especially when there's such a huge demand. That creates a supply in a more powerful way than lawmakers can restrict, or that's what I think anyway.
Examples of dud out-of-touch legislation or governance: - prohibition of liquor in the US, current attempts to censor the Internet, arms treaties to prevent 3rd world dictators stockpiling. And so forth. Don't stress!!
smile.gif
 
Digging deeper:
Examples of out of touch legislation - Drug Prohibition
This commentary was published on InTheMix, relating to 16-page report from The Economist which gave an in-depth treatment on why Drug Prohibition has failed.
Influential business journal The Economist called for all drugs to be fully legalised this week suggesting that the 'war on drugs' has failed. "When, 80 years ago, America prohibited the sale of alcohol, it imposed a milder policy than it currently applies to drugs, since people were allowed to possess alcohol for home use," the Economist pointed out.
"Yet the 13 year experiment showed how easily a ban could distort and corrupt law enforcement officials, encourage the emergence of gangs and the spread of crime, erode civil liberties and endanger public health by making it impossible to regulate the quality of a widely consumed product. The drugs war has achieved all these things but since the business is global, it has done so on an international scale."
The 16 page special report provided one of the first serious examinations of the consequences of legalisation and concluded that though drug use would almost certainly rise, other effects could include large tax revenues. "If cocaine were legal the price would be about a 20th of its current street level," LA drug policy expert Mark Keliman said. "As for legal cannabis, it would cost as much as tea." The massive drop in price would reflect the true costs of producing the drugs and would allow governments to dramatically undercut illicit suppliers while still raising significant new tax revenues. The greatest benefit though would be the reduction in harm including the 'collateral damage' caused by law enforcement, particularly in the States.
90% of US cities with populations over 50,000 now maintain local SWAT teams; heavily armed paramilitary police units behind many of the country's 1.5 million annual drug busts. "Many of those arrested receive mandatory minimum sentences of five to ten years for possession of a few grams of drugs, a dire punishment rushed through Congress in 1986 amid hysteria about crack cocaine," the Economist reported.
America's Gulag-style prison system also remains brutal, the Economist added, quoting a recent report by the Human Rights Watch which revealed that 20% of US prisoners are victims of 'forcible sex'. Levels of HIV infection amongst convicts are also extremely high, further escalating the consequences for men attacked in prison.
From: http://www.inthemix.com.au/p/np/viewnews.php?newsid=997196916,17920,
BigTrancer
smile.gif

------------------
Load universe into cannon. Aim at brain. Shoot.
 
Top