DRCNet
Potentially
Threatened
by
Meth
Bill
6/9/00
As currently written, Section 5 (1) of the bill would "prohibit and set penalties for teaching or demonstrating the manufacture of a controlled substance, or distributing information pertaining to such manufacture or use, with intent that it be used for or to further activity that constitutes a Federal Crime, or knowing that the recipient intends to use it for or to further such activity." This language is so broad that DRCNet did not have to go far back in our archives to find articles that would have subjected us to up to ten years in prison! The most recent example, from last week, is "Ecstasy Panic Looms: 1985 All Over Again?" In that article (http://www.drcnet.org/wol/139.html#panic), we quoted psychedelics researcher Rick Doblin on how to avoid "overheating" injury or death while using Ecstasy: "In the short term, the greatest danger (and the cause of most Ecstasy-related deaths) is 'overheating,' caused by the drug's effects on the body's ability to regulate body temperature. According to Rick Doblin of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (http://www.maps.org), overheating deaths represent a tiny minority of Ecstasy users, and the best available numbers back him up. The national medical emergency room survey, DAWN, reports a total of 27 deaths from 1994 through 1998. And, Doblin notes, simple harm reduction measures (drink lots of fluids, move to cool or air conditioned areas) can virtually eliminate that threat." What DRCNet and Doblin have done in the above paragraph -- telling people who might use Ecstasy how to avoid possible harm or death -- would certainly appear to violate the language of the bill, i.e. "...distributing information pertaining to... use..., with intent that it be used for or to further activity that constitutes a Federal crime." Clearly, Doblin was not speaking in the abstract; he was providing practical information for users of Ecstasy, a controlled substance. Thus, he would be in violation of the law if this bill passed, and DRCNet would be for having disseminated his statement. At the least, a federal prosecutor could easily make that argument. A judge or jury might not agree, but not before Doblin and DRCNet would have spent thousands of dollars to avoid prison for writing about drugs. That doesn't even address
the fact that, in this particular case, as well as, for example, instructions
for using clean needles, this legislation appears to value suppressing
speech over saving lives. Please speak out against this unconstitutional
bill!
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
