The gamecock. (Columbia, S.C.) 1908-2006, April 13, 1995, Page 3, Image 3
nBai
Serving U
Lee Gontz, Editor in Chief (
Editor]
Erin Galloway, Wendy Hudson,
Jimmy DeButts, Ryan Wilson, C
M A A
Electronic
question (
Many students on USC's can
counts with commercial computi
One of the main uses for thes
mail, computer-generated and i
electronic mail box to another.
Messages sent across the elect
to risque love letters to criticism
Are these flashes of informat
as conventional mail has been in
tronic systems, the government a
an increasing question of privac;
Without extensive secunty pi
are relatively easily accessed by
ever wants to access them.
Even more tricky is the quest
censorship and libel over the elei
ic lines. At what point can somec
held accountable for things writt(
line?
The freedoms and privacy en
by typical publications should bi
tinued over electronic publication
ods.
Just because the media is dif!
does not mean different rules ap
publication of information.
People's mail needs to be pri
protected from government inte
evaluated for electronic publicat
Men 'cleai
because o
DREW
f m * STEWART
Columnist
The other day, while aimless
ly walking through the Russel
House, I heard a woman talkin
about how women are totally un
appreciated by men. She wa
even daring enough to say, "I
you talk to most men, we don'
even exist."
That is about as true as bar
becue cooked on a gas grill in
stead of a pit. Ladies, believe i
or not, are the entire motivatioi
for men to act respectably in an;
sort of way outside of their homes
Sit down in your hammock
open up a can of Co-Cola and whi
your brain about it a while. Hav
you ever seen how men act whei
we aren't around women?
If it weren't for women....
Men wouldn't bathe. Th
only time I bathe or shower i
when I know I am going to bum
into a certain lady (or if I'm gc
ing hunting, but that's a whol
other column). Shoot, if I kno>
I'm not gonna see a lady, I don
even change socks.
Men wouldn't, wear olnt.hp
(well, shirts anyway). The res
son we wear things outside c
"Buck Lure" tee-shirts, camoi
flage pants and Atlanta Brave
baseball hats is because of yo
lovely ladies. A suit and tie woul
be about as unheard of as th
Rush Limbaugh Fan Division <
the National Organization fc
Women.
Men wouldn't watch the:
language. Ever overhear a grou
of men talking? We say thing
that would make the devil blus
with shame while we're alom
but when there is a lady presen
even in the same building, me
undergo a conversion that riva
that of St. Paul on the road 1
Damascus. You won't hear th
slightest mention of even the lea
objectionable word.
Men would do nothing bi
hunt and fish. Hey, that wouldr
be that bad, but who would v
have to help us decide where 1
Lee Clontz Jimmy DeButts
Editor in Chief Ryan Wilson
Chris Muldrow Sports Editors
Viewpoints Editor Kim Truett
Carson Henderson Photo Editor
Radhlka Talwanl Ethan Myerson
Copy Desk Chiefs Ryan Sims
Erin Calloway Graphics Editors
Wendy Hudson Gregory Perez
News Editors Design Editor
Susan Goodwin All Ansaar
Allison Williams Jason Jeffers
Features Editors Cartoonists
The Gamecock is the student newspaper of It
University of South Carolina and is published Tuesd;
through Friday during the fall and spring semesters, wi
the exception of university holidays and exam periods.
Opinions expressed in The Gamecock are those of ll
editors or author and not those of the University i
South Carolina.
^ y
The Game
ffemck
SC Since 1908
Chris Muldrow, Viewpoints Editor
lal Board
Susan Goodwin, Allison Williams,
'arson Henderson, Radhika Talwani
age brings
>f privacy
lpus have Internet accounts or acer
bulletin board services.
se accounts at present is electronic
delivered mail that goes from one
ronic lines vary from business deals
is of government.
inn fViniirrli oc oQAvnt' onrl nnuofo
<iuiij i/iiuugii, cio ocuct aim pnvaic
the past? Companies that run elecind
users of electronic mail will face
y and freedom of information,
mgrams, many electronic accounts
who- ______________
ionof Correction
:tron?ne
be ?na Grant, the Massachum
on- se^ts s^dent rejected from
Harvard after the school
j found she was convicted of
3 c^n manslaughter, lived in Lex,
ington, S.C., not Lexington,
me Ky., as reported in Wednesday's
Gamecock.
erent
ply to
[Vate, people's privacy needs to be
irvention, and libel laws should be
:ion.
a
n up well'
if women
mount them?
Men would not clean up the
slightest thing. The world would J
be a junk pile if it weren't for
women. Do you think we clean
up on our own? There would be S
i- no need for landfills if there ^
1 weren't ladies because men are 1
g inherently pack rats. We would t
i- save everything, even stuff we i
s know is broken and ain't no good. i.
f We don't know why we do it, but t
a T rln lfnnw tVio nnlu ronsnn wp (
t a. v.v, v...;
throw away anything is because r
women make us. t
Cars would not exist. Every t
t man, be him city or country, has c
n at one time wanted a pickup c
y truck. The only reason we get F
, cars are for women. If we didn't
have women to impress with our f
p cars, we would just drive around i,
e in old rusted pickup trucks with c
n no hubcaps or and rusted out tail- 1
gates. c
There would only be three s
e ch an n e 1 s on TV: E S PN, I
SportsSouth and The Nashville F
Network. The soap opera lineup
^ would be replaced with afternoon f
showings of Roland Martin, Jim- t
8 my Houston and World Cham- ?
f pionship Wrestling. Sally Jessy 1
would be replaced with "Bass- i
masters," and Oprah would be i
;S replaced with my show, "Sum- ]
merton 29148." 1
We wouldn't have to put up :
l" with Hillary Clinton, Ricki Lake 1
!S or that stupid girl off of "Bios- ]
u som." Wait a minute, that's a good l
d thing! Nix that.
e There would be no songs. ]
^ How many songs do you think !
>r we write about each other? About '
the only one we would have to 1
lr listen to is "All My Rowdy Friends
P are Coming Over Tonight."
>s So, ladies, as you can see, we i
h really do appreciate you. Could 1
e> you imagine a world without <
t> women? i
n It would look worse than the
Is rear end of a baboon. So the next
'O time you and your female friends <
ie decide that men don't appreciate
st you, just run up to the first man
you see and tell him how nice the |
it shirt he's wearing looks.
1't Drew Stewart is
re a journalism sophomore.
to
___ 777, Chris Carroll
'WS'. . ~ _ ??, Director of Student Media
ivertising: 777-4249 Laura Dav
k inn s a o _
aw: / / /-utoz Creative Director
Jim Green
_ Art Director
Tieffa Harper Elizabeth Thomas
Tina Morgan . . ?
Assl News Adv' Graduate Asst.
James Ponce Renee Gibson
Assi. Photo Marketing Director
Ben Pillow Christopher Wood
Stephanie Sonnenfeld Asst. Advertising
Asst.Features Manager
Larry Williams Erik Collins
Sf*"ls Faculty Advisor
Keith Boudreaux '
Circulation Editor
Letters Policy
le The Gamecock will try to print all letters received.
jv Letters should be 200-250 words and must include full
J, name, professional title or year and major if a student.
Letters must be personally delivered by the author to
ye The Gamecock newsroom in Russell House room 333.
of The Gamecock reserves the right to edit all letters for
style, possible libel or space limitations. Names will not
be withheld under any circumstances.
-VIEWPOIN
V*
UOTEUNQUOTE
"Something's inherently wrong when >
Legalizing man
A 1991 Department of Health and Human
Services survey indicated that almost 10 million
Americans smoked marijuana regularly, 20 milion
were occasional users and more than onehird
of the entire over-12 population had tried
t. Despite this widespread use, government marjuana
policy continues to exhibit the kind of hyseria
formerly retained for the Red menace from
Ihina and Russia. Thirteen years after the most
ecent drug war against marijuana began, it is
ime that this country reevaluated the prohibiion
and legalized pot so that millions of Amerians
can legally enjoy a simple pleasure and the
ountry can save billions of dollars fighting a stu>id
and petty battle that it will never win.
This makes social, economic and rational sense
or three essential reasons. Having outlawed marjuana
in 1937, the United States has done with
>ut the well-documented benefits of commercial
lemp cultivation; the costs and inequity of the
Irug war and the imprisonment of tens of thou;ands
of Americans are absurdly expensive; and
potential tax revenue from legal and regulated
)ot sales is enormous.
The word marijuana is used to refer to the
lowers, leaves and stalk of the cannabis plant of
he hemp family. Hemp is one of the most versatile
and valuable plants known to man. It can
)e processed into a remarkable number of prodlcts.
Charcoal, methanol, ethanol, paper, oil, bionass
fuel? animal and human foods, clothing,
orotein and fiberboard are just some of the uses.
Environmentally, it is also significantly preferable
than other crops. For example, unlike cot:on
production, which uses 50 percent of all the
pesticides in the United States, hemp can be
jrown with hardly any chemical help.
Before the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, hemp
provided a wide variety of benefits. For example,
the first Levis were made from hemp because of
the plant's lasting durability. Marijuana prohibition
has ended this. If you want to know the
'what might have been," read the February 1938
Popular Mechanics issue. Contrary to its own legislation,
however, during World War II the ...
federal government commercially harvest- .
ed the plant, a fact detailed in the government
film "Hemp for Victory."
TV-io rrnvornmont orir) anti-rlnicr Roafor ?
Madness hysteria has lamentably clouded
the issue of commercial cultivation. J.
Hemp produces a myriad of valuable 1
products beyond the twisted, hand-rolled
cigarettes that remain in the spotlight of
the drug controversy. Sadly these great advantages
are overshadowed by a desire to cleanse
society of those unsavory marijuana elements
who either sell it or smoke it.
Being arrested for drugs has become a ver^
hit-or-miss affair. The root of this is the 1986 An
ti-Drug Act that arose from a legislative desire
for tougher, although not necessarily saner,
penalties. If you are convicted under federal
law, this act obliges judges to hand out the
strictest punishment available, so-called
mandatory-minimums. During the preceding
200 years of American legal his- | ,
tory a judge could exercise his discretion
in reducing sentences based on extenuating
circumstances and convincing appeals for mer
cyThe
1986 Act suddenly took this power awa]
from the bench and handed it to the U.S. attor
ney, who now decides where and when and if i
mandatory-maximum will apply. Should the at
torney choose to "enhance" the case by framinj
the charge under the federal statute and you lose
you're toast. In a guilty verdict the judge is forcei
A
ITS Thursday, April 13, 1995
V
115 ao Mouse
'ou don't have a professor teaching, for whateve
Sen. David Thomas, R-Fountain Inn
[juana would ma
NIGEL RAVENHILL
^ Columnist
to sentence you to the maximum term, and visions
of parole will just dance in your head until
your sentence has been served. The only avoidance
of this hardship is to testify against someone
else and hope that you can provide enough
names, dates and information. Caveat emptor,
these plea bargains are not guaranteed.
Now why should people admittedly involved
somehow in drugs be coddled? Here are three Anti-Drug
Act examples from the real world. First
offender Michael Irish helped unload a boatload
of hashish and received 12 years, and fellow first
offender Charles Dunlap rented a truck used by
a friend to import pot and received eight years.
In 1991 Mark Young introduced two growers
to a representative of a New York drug dealer.
With no history of violent crime and two suspended
sentences for very minor felonies over a
decade earlier, he touched neither the money nor
the drugs. His simple introduction led to a charge
of "conspiracy to manufacture," and the attorney
chose to enhance the charge and shoot for life imprisonment.
Young had no information to plea bargain and
was sentenced to life at Leavenworth prison with
zero parole. Had he been tried differently, he
might have received a seven-year sentence. So
von thp taynavpr will snpnd almost 5k 1 million for
this nonviolent felon to spend the next 40 to 50
! years in jail. The big problem stemming from this
unnecessary influx of inmates is that judges have
recently begun ordering prisons to reduce overL
crowding. Convicts with no possibility of parole
such as Young will have to remain
|H in prison while more violent crim|inals
will be prematurely re1111leased
into your commuff;nities.
Personally I
would much rather
H HBdBi clear the prisons of the
/ benign elements of marijuana
trafficking in order to
provide long-term institution[
5 v iiW residence f?r the far more
^ B odious elements of mankind who
jpl^really warrant exclusion
t ||r|jl^w. from society.
In 1970 16.3
federal pris
ers. In 1994 it
y
>
j
S
3
'
^ ^ i
'V6U1 "
both users and revenue and factors that could reduce
tax revenue upon legalization.
Their conclusions are that "the marijuana industry
in 1991 was estimated to generate $5.09
to 9.09 billion of untaxed revenue." Additionally,
as production and processing costs are extremely
low, almost all of this revenue is profit
and thus subject to taxation.
Personally I don't really care whether others
choose to get stoned. I prefer a cold beer, and for
a high 111 take skiing and windsurfing any day.
But marijuana is not the dangerous evil of government
portrayals. The greater loss is that in
enacting a repressive prohibition against it (an
experiment that miserably failed when applied
to alcohol), the government curtails exploitation
of a valuable agricultural crop that can provide
en mnch
Let the Deadheads go in peace, and give me
a house of hemp.
B.r Nigel
B J Ravenhill is a
B - m graduate student
Y 1| m mass communica9
r reason, but continuing to be paid."
. ?? !
Jse U.S. money
was 62 percent, and by 1996 seven out of every
1 ?Mfin/\nAi>n unll V*/-* i v\ irrfi T^U AV*rt r?\?a tyi aVrt
?\J 1SU11CI O Will UC ill 1U1 UI Ug3. 111CIC aic lllUIC
people in jail simply for drugs today (over 200,000)
than the entire national prison population in
1970. Over half of the Justice Department's 1991
budget ($3.8 billion) was spent on anti-drug programs
including the federal Bureau of Prisons
and the Drug Enforcement Administration. Since
1982, about $30 billion has been spent to combat
marijuana, 4 million Americans have been arrested
and over 250,000 have spent at least one
year in jail. You get the picture. This is ridiculous.
All this money combats a drug that is measurably
safer than either tobacco or alcohol. If
the'400,000 who annually succumb from tobacco
smoking were to collectively die in one day, to
bacco would be outlawed the following morning.
There has never been a single death nor a case
of lung cancer exclusively linked to consumption
of any amount of pot. Unlike caffeine, alcohol or
nicotine, smoking joints is not physically addictive.
The marijuana prohibition has also sharply
curtailed its role in medicine, for which its retail
sale remained legal until 1937.
Some will endlessly preach that pot lowers
testosterone and sperm levels, causes psychosis
and makes you stupid. Wrong. Were the virility
argument true, I would question why Jamaica
has not been severely depopulated. I would also
argue that television renders the average person
incomparably more insipid and stupid than pot
could ever do, and for evidence I offer you Ricki
Lake and Sally Jesse Raphael.
Michael Caputo, Ph.D., and Brian Ostrom,
Ph.D., published their highly interesting study,
"Potential Tax Revenue from a Regulated Marijuana
Market," in the American Journal of Economics
and Sociology (October 1994). They consider
such angles as how government could tax
lorrol calo ootimatoo r\f mar-lref in torms nf