from yahoo news:
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court refused Monday to review Florida’s lifetime ban on voting rights for convicted felons, a case that would have had national implications for millions of would-be voters.
i worked for several years, took a lengthy deposition, and wrote an expert report on this case (johnson v. bush), so the news is disappointing.
from yahoo news:
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court refused Monday to review Florida’s lifetime ban on voting rights for convicted felons, a case that would have had national implications for millions of would-be voters.
i worked for several years, took a lengthy deposition, and wrote an expert report on this case (johnson v. bush), so the news is disappointing.
who says the war on drugs hasn’t been effective? the daily mirror reports another celebrity chagrined at the quality of cocaine these days. current crooner and former sexy person rod stewart reports:
I don’t know why anyone would want to take coke now … It was different in my day, because it was all so much purer. Now these dealers mix it with salt, washing powders, anything they can get their hands on. Kids just don’t know what they’re taking.
this reminded me of other recent complaints by noted cocaine experts, such as current velvet revolver vocalist scott weiland. in an esquire interview this april, weiland described the good old days:
it was not that nasty, gasoline-tasting, cat-piss-smelling sh*t that they have nowadays. It was f*ckin’ shale, you know? It was mother-of-pearl stuff that they used to have in the old days. It was so hard, you had to slice it real thin with a razor blade, like little slices of garlic. They don’t even make that sh*t anymore.
weiland’s imagery is evocative, isn’t it? i can see (mother of pearl), smell (cat-piss), feel (hard, like garlic slices), and taste (gasoline) the differences he’s describing. weiland’s imagery is richer than rod stewart’s, i think, because stewart was only a “casual” user.
weiland was anything but casual about cocaine and heroin. his first-person account of his love affair with these drugs is riveting. i was planning to require it for my deviance class this week, but chickened out. although it is an honest, candid warts-n’-all portrayal, in my view it simply makes cocaine sound too attractive. based on my student surveys over the years, i know that coke remains a deviant taste among my undergrad students (in contrast, lifetime marijuana use is roughly 75 percent). would weiland’s words have led anyone to try cocaine or heroin for the first time? would a professor’s apparent endorsement make a difference? here are a few excerpts from weiland’s piece, highlighting the exotic attractions, the rituals, and the subjective experience:
MY FIRST EXPERIENCES WITH COCAINE were just completely…it was, like, sexual. It was unbelievable. I didn’t think that there could be anything that good…
The guy cut us out a couple lines each, like, six inches long and about an eighth of an inch wide. I had two of them. And that was all we needed. We were high for five hours. And there was no grinding teeth. There was no big comedown. I think the devil gives you the first time for free…
He tied me off and shot me up. And then he said, “Now you got your wings.” I remember just lying back on his mattress … Complete warmth went all the way through my body. I was consumed. It’s like what they talk about in Buddhism, that feeling of reaching enlightenment. Like in Siddhartha … there’s this feeling in Buddhism where they say there’s a golden glow that goes from your fingers all the way through every appendage and into the pit of your stomach. And that’s what it felt like to me, slamming dope for the first time. Like I’d reached enlightenment…
I was home. All my life, I had never felt right in my own skin. I always felt that wherever I went…I don’t know, I always felt very uncomfortable. Like I didn’t belong. Like I could never belong. Like every room I walked into was an unwelcome room. After doing dope for the first time, I knew that no matter what happened, from that day forward, I could be okay in every situation. Heroin made me feel safe. It was like the womb. I felt completely sure of myself. It took away all the fears. It did that socially; it distanced me from other people, made me feel less vulnerable…
Once I started shooting, I realized I’d made a career decision…
WHEN I STARTED DOING HEROIN, I felt almost immediately like I had become part of something bigger than myself, that I’d entered into a new social realm…
I never wanted to quit. Never. I saw narcotics as something I needed in order to function. I believed at the time that I was born with a chemical deficiency. Which I was. I was totally correct. But at the time, I believed I was born with this particular chemical deficiency that only opiates could fulfill. My basic thought was: How the hell can all you people want to keep me away from the one particular medicine that could keep me from blowing my head off?
again, weiland does not endorse use of these drugs — he just tells us honestly about how he experienced their seductions. drug educators face a real paradox in describing such psychoactive effects to non-users. any realistic presentation must note that cocaine and heroin are experienced as pleasurable by users (recognizing, as howard becker, that such definitions are social constructions). yet, such descriptions have at least some potential to encourage use. and, of course, such use can bring harm to users.
of course, cocaine and heroin have long histories as licit as well as illicit drugs. freud himself endorsed parke-davis cocaine, which it alleged could “supply the place of food, make the coward brave, the silent eloquent and … render the sufferer insensitive to pain.”
i would have used weiland to lecture on stigma and the arc of his career as a singer and as a drug user. yet his descriptions were too rich for the task — i would have needed a few more first-person accounts describing the banality of the experience (“did coke in the club, got really anxious, couldn’t sleep, didn’t want to do it anymore”) for balance. in any case, the students will get plenty of sociological analysis of drugs in america: craig reinarman and reefer madness on moral panics and a little becker on learning to use marijuana. still, i’d like to find a way to responsibly add some sort of first-person account to cover the individual-level processes described by weiland.
who says the war on drugs hasn’t been effective? the daily mirror reports another celebrity chagrined at the quality of cocaine these days. current crooner and former sexy person rod stewart reports:
I don’t know why anyone would want to take coke now … It was different in my day, because it was all so much purer. Now these dealers mix it with salt, washing powders, anything they can get their hands on. Kids just don’t know what they’re taking.
this reminded me of other recent complaints by noted cocaine experts, such as current velvet revolver vocalist scott weiland. in an esquire interview this april, weiland described the good old days:
it was not that nasty, gasoline-tasting, cat-piss-smelling sh*t that they have nowadays. It was f*ckin’ shale, you know? It was mother-of-pearl stuff that they used to have in the old days. It was so hard, you had to slice it real thin with a razor blade, like little slices of garlic. They don’t even make that sh*t anymore.
weiland’s imagery is evocative, isn’t it? i can see (mother of pearl), smell (cat-piss), feel (hard, like garlic slices), and taste (gasoline) the differences he’s describing. weiland’s imagery is richer than rod stewart’s, i think, because stewart was only a “casual” user.
weiland was anything but casual about cocaine and heroin. his first-person account of his love affair with these drugs is riveting. i was planning to require it for my deviance class this week, but chickened out. although it is an honest, candid warts-n’-all portrayal, in my view it simply makes cocaine sound too attractive. based on my student surveys over the years, i know that coke remains a deviant taste among my undergrad students (in contrast, lifetime marijuana use is roughly 75 percent). would weiland’s words have led anyone to try cocaine or heroin for the first time? would a professor’s apparent endorsement make a difference? here are a few excerpts from weiland’s piece, highlighting the exotic attractions, the rituals, and the subjective experience:
MY FIRST EXPERIENCES WITH COCAINE were just completely…it was, like, sexual. It was unbelievable. I didn’t think that there could be anything that good…
The guy cut us out a couple lines each, like, six inches long and about an eighth of an inch wide. I had two of them. And that was all we needed. We were high for five hours. And there was no grinding teeth. There was no big comedown. I think the devil gives you the first time for free…
He tied me off and shot me up. And then he said, “Now you got your wings.” I remember just lying back on his mattress … Complete warmth went all the way through my body. I was consumed. It’s like what they talk about in Buddhism, that feeling of reaching enlightenment. Like in Siddhartha … there’s this feeling in Buddhism where they say there’s a golden glow that goes from your fingers all the way through every appendage and into the pit of your stomach. And that’s what it felt like to me, slamming dope for the first time. Like I’d reached enlightenment…
I was home. All my life, I had never felt right in my own skin. I always felt that wherever I went…I don’t know, I always felt very uncomfortable. Like I didn’t belong. Like I could never belong. Like every room I walked into was an unwelcome room. After doing dope for the first time, I knew that no matter what happened, from that day forward, I could be okay in every situation. Heroin made me feel safe. It was like the womb. I felt completely sure of myself. It took away all the fears. It did that socially; it distanced me from other people, made me feel less vulnerable…
Once I started shooting, I realized I’d made a career decision…
WHEN I STARTED DOING HEROIN, I felt almost immediately like I had become part of something bigger than myself, that I’d entered into a new social realm…
I never wanted to quit. Never. I saw narcotics as something I needed in order to function. I believed at the time that I was born with a chemical deficiency. Which I was. I was totally correct. But at the time, I believed I was born with this particular chemical deficiency that only opiates could fulfill. My basic thought was: How the hell can all you people want to keep me away from the one particular medicine that could keep me from blowing my head off?
again, weiland does not endorse use of these drugs — he just tells us honestly about how he experienced their seductions. drug educators face a real paradox in describing such psychoactive effects to non-users. any realistic presentation must note that cocaine and heroin are experienced as pleasurable by users (recognizing, as howard becker, that such definitions are social constructions). yet, such descriptions have at least some potential to encourage use. and, of course, such use can bring harm to users.
of course, cocaine and heroin have long histories as licit as well as illicit drugs. freud himself endorsed parke-davis cocaine, which it alleged could “supply the place of food, make the coward brave, the silent eloquent and … render the sufferer insensitive to pain.”
i would have used weiland to lecture on stigma and the arc of his career as a singer and as a drug user. yet his descriptions were too rich for the task — i would have needed a few more first-person accounts describing the banality of the experience (“did coke in the club, got really anxious, couldn’t sleep, didn’t want to do it anymore”) for balance. in any case, the students will get plenty of sociological analysis of drugs in america: craig reinarman and reefer madness on moral panics and a little becker on learning to use marijuana. still, i’d like to find a way to responsibly add some sort of first-person account to cover the individual-level processes described by weiland.
i noted a couple weeks ago that shelly schaefer and i were speaking on voting and the civic reintegration of former prisoners on november 29th. alas, we’ve been bumped for another fine talk by a visiting job candidate. postponement offers a bit of relief for shelly (currently serving a tough four-month sentence as my sociology of deviance teaching assistant), but we’re still readying the paper for asa submission by january 18th. despite this bumping, elaine hernandez, an nimh-nrsa predoctoral fellow, will present some of our coauthored work that week.
Wednesday, November 30 12:30 – 2:00 pm in 915 Social Sciences Building
Elaine Hernandez and Christopher Uggen, “Sources of Variation in State Mental Health Parity Laws.”
i won’t give away the punchline, but mandating mental health coverage appears to be a partisan political issue.
i noted a couple weeks ago that shelly schaefer and i were speaking on voting and the civic reintegration of former prisoners on november 29th. alas, we’ve been bumped for another fine talk by a visiting job candidate. postponement offers a bit of relief for shelly (currently serving a tough four-month sentence as my sociology of deviance teaching assistant), but we’re still readying the paper for asa submission by january 18th. despite this bumping, elaine hernandez, an nimh-nrsa predoctoral fellow, will present some of our coauthored work that week.
Wednesday, November 30 12:30 – 2:00 pm in 915 Social Sciences Building
Elaine Hernandez and Christopher Uggen, “Sources of Variation in State Mental Health Parity Laws.”
i won’t give away the punchline, but mandating mental health coverage appears to be a partisan political issue.
from the sentencing project:
alec ewald, a political scientist at union college, has written some excellent law review articles on felon disenfranchisement. he just completed a new sentencing project report on how such laws are administered. in a mail and phone survey he finds much confusion and error in interpreting and administering these ballot restrictions. in a ‘crazy-quilt’ of tiny pieces: state and local administration of american criminal disenfranchisement laws, he reports that 37 percent of local elections officials interviewed misunderstand state eligibility law. moreover, in at least five states a misdemeanor conviction also results in the loss of voting rights (hmmm. maybe i should stop calling it “felon” disenfranchisement).
from the sentencing project:
alec ewald, a political scientist at union college, has written some excellent law review articles on felon disenfranchisement. he just completed a new sentencing project report on how such laws are administered. in a mail and phone survey he finds much confusion and error in interpreting and administering these ballot restrictions. in a ‘crazy-quilt’ of tiny pieces: state and local administration of american criminal disenfranchisement laws, he reports that 37 percent of local elections officials interviewed misunderstand state eligibility law. moreover, in at least five states a misdemeanor conviction also results in the loss of voting rights (hmmm. maybe i should stop calling it “felon” disenfranchisement).
the ny times reports that jim deupree, a florida prison inmate, was assigned a number for last weekend’s nyc marathon. mr. deupree would run “not through New York’s five boroughs with 37,000 other entrants, but in the razor-wire isolation of the prison yard of the Jackson Correctional Institute. He would circle a dirt track, one that measures about two and a quarter laps to the mile, until he completed the marathon in about 60 laps. He said he had trained 50 miles a week and hoped to complete the race in four hours.”
although florida prison officials were distrustful, i’m heartened by the story. i especially liked reading that new balance tried to send 80 pairs of running shoes to jackson prison. count me in for a half-dozen pairs if it will help prisoners get what i get out of running. in fact, i’ll mail off my size 10 nikes right now if inmates can put them to use. on the basis of countless pre-race conversations but no hard data, i’m convinced that many runners are in recovery from something. running seems to scratch some kind of itch for them that they’d heretofore only reached through self-destruction.
at 14, i only ran when chased (which was not infrequent). still, i remember being completely transfixed by the jericho mile, a made-for-tv movie about a running prisoner. the setting was a dusty folsom prison and the recurring theme song was the stones’ sympathy for the devil. the bassline is perfect for running — gathering steam and confidence at an intense pace that is almost out of control. the jagged guitar solo at song’s end somehow conveys the funky-good pain one feels at race’s end. the protagonist, a murderer named “rain” murphy, was played by peter strauss, who looked and ran like a gnarly thirtysomething miler. well, at least he looked a lot faster than the skinny-legged boys playing runners in most movies. the critics also praise the jericho mile for its use of inmates in many scenes and for dealing squarely with the racial tensions at folsom, despite this gem of dialogue:
“Without me coaching you, without Captain Midnight filling your hoochy soul with funky inspiration, how are you going to be champion?” ~Stiles to Murphy
looking at the movie’s stills, i’m starting to think it had a bigger influence on me than i had realized (studying prisons, running, bad 70s hair) . for some of us, running offers both the joy of wild freedom and the satisfaction of self-control. i can’t help but think that at least some inmates might be wired in a similar way. run on, jim deupree.
the ny times reports that jim deupree, a florida prison inmate, was assigned a number for last weekend’s nyc marathon. mr. deupree would run “not through New York’s five boroughs with 37,000 other entrants, but in the razor-wire isolation of the prison yard of the Jackson Correctional Institute. He would circle a dirt track, one that measures about two and a quarter laps to the mile, until he completed the marathon in about 60 laps. He said he had trained 50 miles a week and hoped to complete the race in four hours.”
although florida prison officials were distrustful, i’m heartened by the story. i especially liked reading that new balance tried to send 80 pairs of running shoes to jackson prison. count me in for a half-dozen pairs if it will help prisoners get what i get out of running. in fact, i’ll mail off my size 10 nikes right now if inmates can put them to use. on the basis of countless pre-race conversations but no hard data, i’m convinced that many runners are in recovery from something. running seems to scratch some kind of itch for them that they’d heretofore only reached through self-destruction.
at 14, i only ran when chased (which was not infrequent). still, i remember being completely transfixed by the jericho mile, a made-for-tv movie about a running prisoner. the setting was a dusty folsom prison and the recurring theme song was the stones’ sympathy for the devil. the bassline is perfect for running — gathering steam and confidence at an intense pace that is almost out of control. the jagged guitar solo at song’s end somehow conveys the funky-good pain one feels at race’s end. the protagonist, a murderer named “rain” murphy, was played by peter strauss, who looked and ran like a gnarly thirtysomething miler. well, at least he looked a lot faster than the skinny-legged boys playing runners in most movies. the critics also praise the jericho mile for its use of inmates in many scenes and for dealing squarely with the racial tensions at folsom, despite this gem of dialogue:
“Without me coaching you, without Captain Midnight filling your hoochy soul with funky inspiration, how are you going to be champion?” ~Stiles to Murphy
looking at the movie’s stills, i’m starting to think it had a bigger influence on me than i had realized (studying prisons, running, bad 70s hair) . for some of us, running offers both the joy of wild freedom and the satisfaction of self-control. i can’t help but think that at least some inmates might be wired in a similar way. run on, jim deupree.
