Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 19:01:48 -0700

Subject:Canada: Would Softer Pot Law Stir Wrath Of US? Up TOC?

Newshawk: Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy (http://www.cfdp.ca/)
Pubdate: Sat, 13 Jul 2002
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Copyright: 2002, The Globe and Mail Company
Contact: letters@globeandmail.ca
Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168
Author: Erin Anderssen

WOULD SOFTER POT LAW STIR WRATH OF U.S.?

THe Neighbours Are Likely To Yell, But Not Everybody Thinks That's The End
Of The World

OTTAWA -- In the pot-perfumed haze of an Amsterdam coffee house, MP Randy
White, crime critic for the Canadian Alliance, hauled out his business card
and sat down to chat with two toking patrons.

Chat, it should be pointed out, is all he did. Mr. White says he's never
touched the stuff, and there, in the city famous for putting the finest
varieties on government-sanctioned menus, he claims he wasn't even tempted.
This was business; last month, Mr. White and the other members of the House
of Commons committee studying Canada's drug policy -- whose report is due
this winter -- took to the road, and naturally stopped off in Amsterdam.
The first evening, Mr. White went exploring.

Committee members like Mr. White have been taking a close look at the
issue, talking to people who would be most affected by any change in
legislation.

The two customers in the Amsterdam cafe -- a local and his British friend
who'd crossed the channel to "smoke himself silly" -- were more than
willing to explore their pot habits, while hauling away on their joints.
"We're going to smoke it forever," they told Mr. White. "It's no worse than
someone on booze."

Mr. White later recalled: "We had a great discussion, a few laughs. It was
a nice place. It didn't even smell as much as I thought."

Two weeks earlier, on Washington's Capitol Hill and in far less mellow
conversation, the committee had heard a different view. The man sitting
across the table on that June day was Republican Congressman Mark Souder,
chairman of the U.S. equivalent of the Commons committee on drug policy,
and the originator of a law that bans student loans for Americans convicted
of pot possession. He knew all about Canada pondering the decriminalization
of marijuana, and he wasn't happy about it.

Sources told Canadian Press yesterday that Justice Minister Martin Cauchon
may be considering relaxing Canada's marijuana laws to make possession
punishable by a fine instead of a prison sentence, without going as far as
legalizing the drug.

Mr. Souder's message was clear, committee members say: Proceed and we'll
crack down even more on your borders. B.C. bud, he pronounced, is as
dangerous as cocaine.

"I thought, 'My God, what is this man talking about?'" said Vancouver MP
Libby Davies, a New Democrat. "We can't be subservient to the ridiculous
rhetoric coming out of the United States."

In the debate over Canada's marijuana laws, however, the United States
looms large, the consequence of an open border with the most rabid drug
warrior in the world. Politicians can discuss the bad science of marijuana
laws, and the poor cost-benefit ratio of busting people for simple pot
possession. But they always manage to come back to our overbearing
neighbours and how huffy they'd get if Canada even followed Britain's
decision this week to make warnings the standard penalty for getting caught
with a joint. It works, some observers suggest, as a convenient excuse for
doing nothing. The question is: What would the ensuing temper tantrum cost us?

Not all that much, suggests Ethan Nadelmann, executive director at the Drug
Policy Alliance, a U.S. organization which favours decriminalization of
drugs. He argues that trade with Canada is too important and a relatively
minor move like decriminalization will generate little bluster from the
White House.

"Not that some people in the United States won't yell," he said. "But
there's going to be a lot of people who don't want to see the drug war
screw about with multi-billion-dollar business interests."

Other drug-policy observers are less certain. "This would be another nail
in the coffin," predicts Clayton Mosher, a Canadian teaching at Washington
State University, who sees decriminalization tightening the border beyond
the level prompted by Sept. 11. "I don't see it as an idle threat. There
would be quite a reaction. There's already a perception that B.C. is one
big marijuana farm."

The view of Canada as a pot-smoking, pot-supplying nation is pervasive in
the U.S. news media. When Ottawa started handing out permission slips for
medical marijuana, the newspapers reported it as a sign of a soft-drug
stance. Great fuss is generated over the high quality of the renowned B.C.
bud. Although the numbers aren't supported, the U.S. has suggested that as
much as half of the pot grown in Canada goes south.

At the same time, though, experts insist, our national drug policy
continues to imitate the U.S. approach. Despite claims of a de facto
decriminalization, in 1999 -- the most recent year for which statistics are
available -- more than 21,000 people were arrested for marijuana possession
in Canada. That number amounts to nearly half of all the drug charges laid
in the country. A costly exercise, critics say, which ends up discharging
25 per cent and saddling the rest with criminal records.

Canada was ahead of the United States in making pot illegal. Emily Murphy
led the charge in 1923 with declarations that referred to marijuana users
as "raving maniacs" liable to kill with "savage cruelty." In 1937, the year
Canada recorded its first arrest, the United States passed its own law.

The war on drugs, nonetheless, is a U.S. fight, and government officials
have not been shy about applying pressure to keep Canada and other nations
on track, says Ottawa lawyer Eugene Oscapella, one of the founders of the
Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. In 1999, the United States considered
(and then retreated from) the idea of adding Canada to its illicit-drug
blacklist for being too soft. In its drug literature, the U.S. State
Department has criticized the Supreme Court of Canada for restricting
undercover operations.

Australian officials reported that in l996 the United States had suggested
to Australia that if the country went ahead with plans to provide heroin as
a last resort to addicts, it might put at risk UN permission for its opium
poppy industry in Tasmania, where a healthy business is carried on
supplying pharmaceutical companies. Australia eventually abandoned its
heroin plans.

The current U.S. drug czar, John Walters, says officially that Canada is a
"sovereign" country, free to make its own laws. On a visit last month to
Quebec city, he cited the U.S. government position that pot is addictive
and leads to harder drugs -- a position many researchers say cannot be
supported -- and made a forceful statement that this is the time to target
pot, not decriminalize it.

"Ultimately, the big dilemma is not knowing what goes on behind closed
doors," Mr. Oscapella said.

If Canada moves toward decriminalization, Mr. Oscapella said, the main
problem for the U.S. government may be stemming the support for a similar
initiative from its own citizens.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 19:02:26 -0700

Subject:UK: Cannabis Move Is Welcome By MS Sufferers Up TOC

Newshawk: ccguide.org.uk
Pubdate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002
Source: Yorkshire Evening Press (UK)
Website: http://www.thisisyork.co.uk
Address: Po Box 29, 76-86 Walmgate, York, North Yorkshire YO1 9YN, Great
Britain
Contact: newsdesk@ycp.co.uk
Copyright: 2002 Newsquest Media Group
Fax: 01904 612853
Cited: Carl Wagner: Legalise Cannabis Alliance,

CANNABIS MOVE IS WELCOME BY MS SUFFERERS

MOVES to "downgrade" cannabis have been welcomed by York MS sufferers, but
attacked for "fudging the issue" by a legalisation campaigner.

Home Secretary David Blunkett announced that cannabis will from next year
be a class C rather than a class B drug, meaning possession of small
amounts will no longer be an arrestable offence.

The move has been welcomed by the York branch of the Multiple Sclerosis
Society, which said it opened the door for sufferers who want to use the
drug to alleviate their symptoms without fear of prosecution.

The society is awaiting the results of two national clinical trials to see
if drugs based on derivatives of cannabis are both effective and safe in
the treatment of this long-term condition.

A spokesman for the York branch said: "At the moment some people are using
cannabis and a lot have found it helpful. A lot of people have also found
that it does not help them.

"We don't think it's right that people should get a criminal record for
using something which may be the only thing that helps their symptoms. And
these changes mean that people won't be arrested.

"There may be people who have not used cannabis in the past who may now use
it without fear of prosecution.

"But the society's principal concern with any potential treatment is that
it is both effective and safe in the long term."

Campaigner Carl Wagner, who is looking at the possibility of opening a
cannabis cafe in York, said Mr Blunkett had fudged the issue, adding the
reclassification of cannabis was "a progression in attitudes" but did not
go far enough.

Mr Wagner, who runs a market stall in Hull, said the problems of people
being exposed to hard drugs when buying cannabis had not been dealt with.

And he said the decision to increase the penalty for dealing class C drugs
from five to 14 years shows he "hasn't thought out the policy at all"
because the current 14-year maximum for dealing class B drugs had deterred
nobody.

He said: "The only way to reduce harm from bad cannabis and hard drugs is
to bring cannabis within the law, allow quality controls and taxation of
profits of suppliers, and to allow people to grow a few plants in their own
homes."

A spokesman for the National Association of Headteachers said the
downgrading should not make "a blind bit of difference" to school drugs
policies.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:18:57 -0700

Subject:Canada: The Plan To Reform Corporate America Up TOC

Newshawk: Ariel
Pubdate: Tue, 09 Jul 2002
Source: National Post (Canada)
Webpage: http://www.mapinc.org/cancom/6FCC4C6F-C972-44E2-9066-B336A172862B
Copyright: 2002 Southam Inc.
Contact: letters@nationalpost.com
Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286
Author: Terence Corcoran
Note: Drug policy related references in first two paragraphs.

THE PLAN TO REFORM CORPORATE AMERICA

According to The Wall Street Journal, the following exchange took
place between U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and President Bush.
Commenting on U.S. corporate scandals, Mr. O'Neill is reported to have
said: "A kid who gets caught with a half a gram of marijuana can serve
more time than an executive who loses tens of thousands of jobs." To
which the President is alleged to have responded: "You're right."

That should do it. When Mr. Bush addresses the subject in his speech
today, he will likely declare that it's time to get rid of those awful
marijuana laws that are just filling U.S. jails with innocent kids.
Either that or he's going to create a new corporate crime: Any
executive whose company loses thousands of jobs will now get sent to
jail along with the kid caught with marijuana.

snip- read the rest of this article on corporate responsibility at the 
website above


 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:25:53 -0700

Subject:UK: Any Dope Can Buy Cannabis Up TOC

Newshawk: JimmyG
Pubdate: Sun, 14 Jul 2002
Source: Scotland On Sunday (UK)
Webpage: http://www.news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=758872002
Copyright: 2002 The Scotsman Publications Ltd
Contact: letters_sos@scotlandonsunday.com
Website: http://www.scotlandonsunday.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/405
Author: Claire Gardner

ANY DOPE CAN BUY CANNABIS...

My mission, if I chose to accept it: how long would it take for a
convent-educated, clean(ish)-living young woman to score some cannabis in
Edinburgh. With cash in my wallet and David Blunkett in my heart, I set
out. It was 9pm.

I walked into The Basement, Broughton Street, and sat in the corner with a
glass of wine.

It's what might be termed a "young person's" watering hole, with loud,
funky music and white, leather seats.

A group of casually-dressed 20-somethings caught my eye so I sidled up to
them, trying to work out how to ask a group of complete strangers for drugs.

"Hi, I'm new to the city and I was wondering if you guys knew where I could
get some cannabis," I said, affecting a cool and casual manner.

The tallest of the men turned round.

"Cannabis? You'd be lucky love - but are you interested in something a
little harder, perhaps some Es? I can probably sort you out," he said.

Knowing when I'm outclassed - Class A, specifically - I made my excuses,
downed my wine, and left.

Next stop was The Dome, George Street, which was packed with smart office
workers celebrating the end of the week. I imagined neatly-wrapped grams of
cocaine sharing wallets with 'diamond' credit cards. A bit of waccy-baccy
couldn't be far away.

Another glass of wine was downed as I steeled myself to approach a group of
rather important-looking men and women.

I popped the question and stood back. There were blank smiles before a
rather embarrassed women in a stiff cream suit said: "I think you're asking
the wrong people - we're past all that."

I fled. At this rate, alcohol poisoning seemed more likely than a drugs high.

It was on to pub number three, and this time I had chosen a rather
seedy-looking watering hole with dingy lights and faded brown sofas.
Changing tack, I decided the bar staff might be better placed to help.

"A glass of white wine and do you know where I can get some cannabis," I
said - all smiles - to a middle aged man with a beer gut.

"Medium or dry?" he asked, presumably referring to the wine. "I'm not sure
if he knows much about cannabis, but the man over there might have an idea
about other drugs."

The gentleman in question was a young-looking dropout wearing a
bright-coloured tracksuit and sporting a pony tail. Fingering the cash in
my pocket I put on what I considered my toughest-looking face and popped
the question.

"Not on me, dear, but I've got a mate who might be able to help you out,"
he replied. Then he pulled his mobile phone out of his pocket. "How much
are you wanting?"

Desperately trying to mask my ignorance about the different quantities
cannabis was sold in - small? regular? Howard Marks? - I told him it was
"just for me".

He told me an 'eighth' would do. I reflected with pride on how the British
cannabis industry was doggedly sticking to imperial measures in the face of
Brussels' metric fascism.

Pony tail called his pal. The deal was done: an eighth of 'Skunk' - a
particularly strong strain of cannabis - would be mine for ?20 the next
morning.

So yesterday, at a time when most law-abiding folk are praying for an extra
half-hour's sleep, I found myself in the city's Broughton Street looking
out for a man in jeans and a grey jogging top.

At the appointed time he turned up and introduced himself - somewhat
unimaginatively - as Kevin. I couldn't help looking for the telltale bulge
of his 'nine-mill' and then realised I'd been watching too many Ali G videos.

Out of his pocket, 'Kevin' pulled a plastic bag a third full of what looked
like small green flower buds which he told me to sniff. "It's some of the
best skunk around - it'll blow your head off," he said.

It had taken 12 hours to find a dealer and get my hands on the stuff.
Spliff anyone?
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:27:21 -0700

Subject:UK: Tories Pledge Cannabis Rethink Up TOC

Newshawk: JimmyG
Pubdate: Sun, 14 Jul 2002
Source: BBC News (UK Web)
Copyright: 2002 BBC
Contact: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/talking_point/forum/
Website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/558
Webpage:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_2127000/2127845.stm

TORIES PLEDGE CANNABIS RETHINK

Plans for a softer line on cannabis could be reversed by a future Tory
government, shadow chancellor Michael Howard has said.

Mr Howard, a former home secretary, said he believed the proposal to
downgrade cannabis from class B to class C was "misguided".

The plan means possession of small amounts of the drug will no longer be an
arrestable offence.

Mr Howard told the BBC One's Breakfast with Frost: "I think David Blunkett
has made a mistake.

"I would be astonished if when we return to government we stick to the
policy that the introduced this last week."

'Confusing'

Home Secretary Mr Blunkett wants to free up police resources to tackle hard
drugs such as heroin and cocaine.

But critics say it will send out a confusing message to young people and
encourage drug use.

The home secretary is believed to have been influenced by the softer line
on cannabis taken by police in London's Brixton, as part of a controversial
pilot scheme.

Mr Blunkett said the experiment, which has seen an increase in arrests of
hard drug dealers, will now be extended across London.

Problems

The plan to downgrade cannabis to a Class C drug was attacked as "muddled
and dangerous" by shadow home secretary Oliver Letwin.

The decision was in response to a report by MPs arguing that drugs policy
should focus on tackling the problems caused by heroin addicts.

The change will put cannabis on a par with anti-depressants and steroids.

Police will retain the power to arrest marijuana users in certain
"aggravated" cases, such as when the drug is smoked near children.

Mr Blunkett will also raise the maximum sentence for dealers of class B and
C drugs from five years to 14 years.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 13:01:29 -0700

Subject:DEA boss says Nevada's pot measure will attract wrong element Up TOC

from Dale Gieringer  CA NORML

DEA boss says Nevada's pot measure will attract wrong element

  Friday, July 12, 2002
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

(07-12) 08:29 PDT RENO, Nev. (AP) --

The head of the federal Drug Enforcement Administration warns a ballot
measure that would legalize small amounts of marijuana in Nevada would
attract the wrong element to the state heavily dependent on tourism.

"What kind of tourism will Nevada attract?" DEA Director Asa Hutchinson
asked after a speech in Reno Thursday urging a crack down on
methamphetamine labs.

Legalizing possession of up to 3 ounces of pot would encourage teens to
experiment with the drug and "encourage Nevadans to engage in behavior that=

would violate federal law," he said.

"That would leave Nevada with one of the most liberal policies on drugs,"
he told the Reno Gazette-Journal.

Backers of the Nevada measure, organized as Nevadans for Responsible Law
Enforcement, collected well over the 60,000 signatures necessary to get it=

on the ballot in November. They argue it is a waste of taxpayer dollars to=

prosecute minor pot offenders.

Hutchinson said the initiative is the work of a national group that wants
to see marijuana completely legalized not a grassroots effort of Nevadans.

Until last year, Nevada had the strictest marijuana law in the nation.
Puffing on a single marijuana cigarette was a felony offense punishable by=

a prison term of a year or more.

Under the new proposal, marijuana would be taxed like cigarettes and other=

tobacco products, and sold only in state-licensed shops.

It still would be illegal to use marijuana in public. It also would be
illegal to drive under the influence of the drug, for minors to possess it=

and for private individuals to sell it.

Hutchinson said although he opposes Nevadas marijuana initiative, his
office won't campaign against it. But if opposition forms against the
ballot measure, Hutchinson said his office would be willing to help by
providing information.

Hutchinson said some mistakenly believe that marijuana is not harmful. But=

more teen-agers seek treatment for marijuana abuse than for any other drug,=

including alcohol, he said.

He called for more drug testing in the workplace, and employee assistance
programs for workers found to be using drugs. About 75 percent of drug
users are employed, he said.
   =A92002 Associated Press



- --
- ----
Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858  // canorml@igc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114



=



**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 09:31:22 -0700

Subject:NY Times:  Boomers Hiding MJ From Kids Up TOC

from Dale Gieringer  CA NORML

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/14/fashion/14POT.html

  (An interesting report from the NY Times on Boomers who are still hiding 
marijuana use from their kids.  Ironically, this was published the same day 
that the SF Chronicle's "Two Cents" man-on -the- street poll found 5 out of 
7 interviewees affirming the pleasures of experimental drug use.  It's time 
for American parents to come out of the closet about smoking marijuana. - DG)

Boomers' Little Secret Still Smokes Up the Closet
By JOHN LELAND - NY Times "Sunday Styles", July 14, 2002

FOR Justin, a history teacher and the father of two teenagers, the moment 
of drug anxiety came when his children were in elementary school. They had 
just been to a DARE drug education class and informed him "that it's a 
totally bad thing to take drugs," he said.

Though he approved of the overall message, their zeal put him in a fix. 
Justin, 50, who declined to use his last name, smokes marijuana two or 
three times a week. What could he tell his children without appearing to 
condone drug use? "I said, 'But not all drugs are bad, are they?' "

For Daniel, a freelance writer in North Carolina, the moment came when his 
son, then 4, smelled marijuana on his clothing. Daniel, 42, did what he 
felt most people would under the circumstances: he lied, saying it was just 
smoke from candles. Though his son accepted his lie, the incident nagged at 
Daniel, who said he smokes marijuana about once a month. "It occurred to 
me, how much longer can I get away with this?" he said. "Am I going to be 
open and upfront about it, and is that going to cause some sort of conflict?"

As anyone who came of age around the smell of marijuana knows, drug use was 
supposed to follow a passing narrative arc: you had your youthful 
experimentation, you learned your lesson, you grew up and out of it. But 
for many, like Justin and Daniel, things have not worked out that way. 
Years after the battles about drugs with their parents, they are facing 
another generational hurdle - how to reconcile their marijuana use with the 
demands of raising their children. "The questions are, how much do you want 
to continue that lifestyle, and how much do you tell your kid?" said a 
mother in Westchester County, N.Y. "You don't want to be a hypocrite."

This is not a ballad of chronic drug abuse and family dysfunction, but in 
many cases one of moderate users who have managed careers, families and 
social lives while sneaking an occasional joint. Most say they smoke for 
the same reasons they always did: to relax, listen to music or socialize. 
After two or more decades, they see little harm. "We never study those 
people," said Dr. Roger Roffman, a professor of social work at the 
University of Washington, where since 1983 he has studied marijuana use. 
Speaking hypothetically, he likened this group to the majority of drinkers, 
who do not progress to alcoholism.

Though statistics involving drug use are notoriously slippery, as many as 1 
in 10 American parents of children under 18, or about 6 million people, 
said they had smoked marijuana in the preceding 12 months, according to a 
poll conducted last year by RoperASW. One in 20 parents, or about 3 million 
people, said they had smoked in the preceding month. The poll, sponsored by 
the Partnership for a Drug-Free America, included interviews with 1,219 
parents. Many people will not tell a stranger about their illegal activity, 
so the marijuana estimate is probably low. Because the topic involves both 
illegal marijuana smoking and children, most people interviewed for this 
article were highly circumspect, often unwilling to use even their first 
names. One father responded by e-mail:

"Will call, but I can't let my daughter know. So I will have to find a 
private moment to talk. Will also have to make sure my parents don't find out.

"Oh, the irony.

"The angst."

With decidedly mixed feelings, many are now repeating the ruses of their 
adolescence, sneaking out on ledges as they did years ago, wondering what 
they'll say if they get caught.

"It was much easier to hide it from my parents," said a Brooklyn 
professional woman with two preteenage children, who described leaning out 
over an unsteady window grating to smoke. "I go to great lengths," she 
said. "I put towels under the door, I use baby powder to hide the smell. If 
I say I'm going to Costco, my baby sitter knows."

Another man said he stuck to the tried and true, hiding his weed in the 
same Rolling Stones album cover he used as a child. As he figures, his 
children are no more likely to stumble across it there than his parents were.

Parents, of course, have many secrets from their children, including their 
finances and the details of their sex lives. And some who smoke tobacco are 
reluctant to do it in front of the children these days, not wanting to pass 
on the habit.

But marijuana use comes with a unique set of conflicted feelings. For many, 
it still resonates as a triumphal rite of passage and stirs reminders of 
their own parents' cluelessness.

Yet even parents who pride themselves on being open with their children on 
many matters often hide their marijuana use, fearing that they will lose 
their parental authority or set the wrong example.

Most say they have no trouble - and see minimal risks - buying marijuana, a 
misdemeanor. Police officers and courts often look the other way or impose 
mild penalties, said Dr. Alfred Blumstein, professor of criminal justice at 
Carnegie Mellon University. "Even if they get arrested, not much is going 
to come of it," he said.

Joseph A. Califano, president of the National Center on Addiction and 
Substance Abuse at Columbia University, criticized what he sees as a 
generation refusing to grow up and take responsibility, inflicting its 
habits on its children.

"There's a big disconnect in values today," Mr. Califano said. "Parents of 
the 70's by and large think marijuana is less dangerous than teenagers of 
the 2000's. Parents of the 70's have mostly grown out of it, while kids see 
what happens to potheads in their classes."

In the short term, marijuana can impair memory and judgment, research has 
shown; the smoke is also carcinogenic.

Mr. Califano advised that parents be honest about their past use.

Sam, 49, a Vermont father of two, considers himself on the extreme end of 
hiding his drug use from his children. If they question him, he said, he 
doesn't lie, he just ducks the questions. "I talk to my friends all the 
time about disclosure and honesty," he said. "I have friends that are more 
forthcoming, but I don't get it: how does talking about their experiences 
have a positive bearing on what their children should do?"
- -- 
- ----
Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858  // canorml@igc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114


CRRH is working to regulate and tax the sale of cannabis to adults like 
alcohol, allow doctors to recommend cannabis through pharmacies and restore 
the unregulated production of industrial hemp.

*Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp*
mail:     CRRH ; P.O. Box 86741 ; Portland, OR 97286 USA
email:   crrh@crrh.org
phone:  (503) 235-4606
fax:       (503) 235-0120
web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
End of Restore-Digest V2002 #135
********************************