Cosmoline
Member
My ex used to go through sudafed like a speed freak due to her seriously messed up sinus problems. So I ended up having to get the big 96 count generic boxes over and over again at the store. I'm sure they though I was a cook 
Restricting Cold Medicine Won't Curb Meth Use
- Thread starter Vernal45
- Start date
- Status
pcf
Member
80% fewer meth labs, 80% less effort finding them, 80% of LEO staff moved from drugs to immigration, etc, etc.
Interesting thing happens up here in Maryland from time to time. Felony crime rate goes way down. Murders and rapes are up, felony convictions for aggravated assault, theft, robbery, etc, are down. Real change in the crime rate is negative, just folks playing with the numbers to look good in time for elections.
So are there fewer meth labs in OK? Or have the criminals gatten smarter, or the Police have other things to do?
JohnBT
Member
"Police have other things to do?"
Yes, they can start by busting the fool who buys five cans of Redi-Whip at the 7-11 every Saturday night when the bars close and leaves them in front of my house after sucking the laughing gas out of them.
"Let the fun out" is on the label. Those Redi-Whip boys know what they're selling - nitrous oxide.
John
Yes, they can start by busting the fool who buys five cans of Redi-Whip at the 7-11 every Saturday night when the bars close and leaves them in front of my house after sucking the laughing gas out of them.
"Let the fun out" is on the label. Those Redi-Whip boys know what they're selling - nitrous oxide.
John
feedthehogs
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 1,801
Didn't anybody learn anything from prohibition?
Making something illegal won't make it go away.
Our politicians I swear get more stupid as the years go on.
No I take that back.
The citizens of this country every year get more stupid.
If we were smart, anytime one of our reps produced useless legislation, we would remove them from office and tell them why they were thrown out.
This nonsense would stop real quick.
Making something illegal won't make it go away.
Our politicians I swear get more stupid as the years go on.
No I take that back.
The citizens of this country every year get more stupid.
If we were smart, anytime one of our reps produced useless legislation, we would remove them from office and tell them why they were thrown out.
This nonsense would stop real quick.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
I find it interesting that Dianne Quixote, er, Feinstein is once again among those leading the charge to "do something" about a social ill by attacking those who (1) have nothing to do with it and (2) are a convenient target.
My wife and I are both heavy consumers of Sudafed, her with very bad allergies and me with recurrent sinus headaches (there is a remarkable synergistic effect between NSAID's and Sudafed against headaches--BC or ibuprofen + 2 sudafed work wonders and I'd have to spend a lot of days on sick leave without that combo).
The professional nannies are already trying to get Sudafed reformulated to a non-pseudoephedrine-containing formulation (in other words, halt production entirely and switch the brand name to some completely different product). I hope that never happens...
My wife and I are both heavy consumers of Sudafed, her with very bad allergies and me with recurrent sinus headaches (there is a remarkable synergistic effect between NSAID's and Sudafed against headaches--BC or ibuprofen + 2 sudafed work wonders and I'd have to spend a lot of days on sick leave without that combo).
The professional nannies are already trying to get Sudafed reformulated to a non-pseudoephedrine-containing formulation (in other words, halt production entirely and switch the brand name to some completely different product). I hope that never happens...
2nd Amendment
member
Indiana now requires(effective in a week or two) that all such cold/sinus meds be not only kept behind the counter and ID be shown but that a log book of purchasers be kept, reviewable at any time by the popo... Nice, eh?
It's not about drug use, anymoreso than any of the rest of the Wo(some)D. It's about monitoring and control. If you think this is a laugh just wait. Dietary supplements and vitamins are next on the hit-list. Public safety, dontcha know.
It's not about drug use, anymoreso than any of the rest of the Wo(some)D. It's about monitoring and control. If you think this is a laugh just wait. Dietary supplements and vitamins are next on the hit-list. Public safety, dontcha know.
El Tejon
Member
Hmmm, better start stockpiling fish oil and garlic pills now!
Vernal45
member
HMM, what is next in this War on Drugs, a Log Book for Coffee Purchases?
mons meg
Member
Look, I don't like the long term implications of restricting/registering certain substances or objects that have many legitimate beneficial uses, and one bad use. Pseudoephedrine, or a 9mm pistol, the concept is the same.
That being said...
Before OK passed this law, the local news here in Oklahoma City might as well have had a nightly segment on meth-lab-of-the-day. It wan't just in rural trailer parks, it was in the middle of town, next to schools/daycares/churches, etc etc.
The busts have dropped off, probably because 90% of the cookers don't know how to deal with the sudden removal of one of their prime ingredients. My guess is it's shifting to an underground trade model as many have suggested. Meth labs, we are all told, are SUPER DANGEROUS and are an explosive and/or fire hazard. So, the one concrete benefit is less active cooking labs, less public safety issues arising from said labs. Are less people doing meth? Likely not.
Do I care if my next door neighbor does meth in the privacy of his own home, and never runs out the front door naked and screaming? Ok, sure...whatever floats your boat, my libertarian sensibilities aren't offended by your (stupid) decision to do meth. Now, if you're cooking it next door, you are most certainly putting my safety in danger, and my property should your shoddy lab go up in flames.
Now, I realize I just started rambling. I don't know what the good answer is here, people, just realize that there has been *A* benefit to restricting pseudoephedrine in the state of Oklahoma. Whether that benefit will cost us more than we can afford....I can't say.
That being said...
Before OK passed this law, the local news here in Oklahoma City might as well have had a nightly segment on meth-lab-of-the-day. It wan't just in rural trailer parks, it was in the middle of town, next to schools/daycares/churches, etc etc.
The busts have dropped off, probably because 90% of the cookers don't know how to deal with the sudden removal of one of their prime ingredients. My guess is it's shifting to an underground trade model as many have suggested. Meth labs, we are all told, are SUPER DANGEROUS and are an explosive and/or fire hazard. So, the one concrete benefit is less active cooking labs, less public safety issues arising from said labs. Are less people doing meth? Likely not.
Do I care if my next door neighbor does meth in the privacy of his own home, and never runs out the front door naked and screaming? Ok, sure...whatever floats your boat, my libertarian sensibilities aren't offended by your (stupid) decision to do meth. Now, if you're cooking it next door, you are most certainly putting my safety in danger, and my property should your shoddy lab go up in flames.
Now, I realize I just started rambling. I don't know what the good answer is here, people, just realize that there has been *A* benefit to restricting pseudoephedrine in the state of Oklahoma. Whether that benefit will cost us more than we can afford....I can't say.
mons meg
Member
What I'm saying is that it has had an effect on home-based kitchen sink style labs. There do seem to be many less of them....it's not like all the county drug task forces just stopped looking for them once the law went into effect.
Now, whether this is a small security gain at the expense of liberty, time will tell.
Now, whether this is a small security gain at the expense of liberty, time will tell.
mons meg
Member
Re-read my post, Riley...
I don't like where this is going.
However, it is inaccurate to say there hasn't been *some* benefit to the OK law. My point is people will point to the success the law has had, even if in a limited scope WRT home based labs, and say "We need a national law!"
What do I really think? Meth-heads will still "ride the snake", but they will end up paying more for it since it will have to come from some out of state source. We'll probably see more organized crime efforts and consolidation of the meth market. If/when that happens, the question is: will more people be in danger from the new distributors than were in danger from next-door meth lab "nukular" explosions.
Truth be told, we are conditioned to beleive that the "lab-next-door" would TOTALLY EXPLODE and BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN, but I can't remember how many times that actually happened, versus the number of labs they dismantled.
I don't like where this is going.
However, it is inaccurate to say there hasn't been *some* benefit to the OK law. My point is people will point to the success the law has had, even if in a limited scope WRT home based labs, and say "We need a national law!"
What do I really think? Meth-heads will still "ride the snake", but they will end up paying more for it since it will have to come from some out of state source. We'll probably see more organized crime efforts and consolidation of the meth market. If/when that happens, the question is: will more people be in danger from the new distributors than were in danger from next-door meth lab "nukular" explosions.
Truth be told, we are conditioned to beleive that the "lab-next-door" would TOTALLY EXPLODE and BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN, but I can't remember how many times that actually happened, versus the number of labs they dismantled.
I have a problem with the whole concept of outsourcing responsibility for crime to the general populace. It's lazy law enforcement based on 'spreading the misery'. It's not effective and it's a bad precedent as it spreads.
Restriction of liberties is always done in the name of 'public safety' or 'for the children'. That's not good enough IMO.
Restriction of liberties is always done in the name of 'public safety' or 'for the children'. That's not good enough IMO.
mons meg
Member
Hear here, Riley.
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
Yep. People who don't know history are condemned to repeat it.
Gordon Fink
Member
If allergy medicines are outlawed, only outlaws will have allergies.
~G. Fink, since nobody else said it
~G. Fink, since nobody else said it
atek3
Member
This whole notion that "the exploding meth lab next door burns your house down, so we need to crack down on allergy medicine", makes as much sense as saying, "your gun nut neighbors might fire a gun and shoot you through the wall so we should restrict the sale of bullets."
Statistically how many neighbors have lost their home in the last 10 years due to exploding meth labs? five, ten maybe? Compare that to the number of neighbors who've lost their homes to an idiot falling a sleep with a lit cigarette. We really should ban smokes, "for the children".
atek3
neoncowboy
Member
Well, yeah...because it comes from the same worldview.
In that worldview, there is no such thing as morality or right/wrong. People are not moral agents, free to choose between right/wrong. Men are not able or allowed to judge right from wrong. All that believers in that worldview have are policies that may or may not deliver a desired result.
So basically, since the representatives/leaders/people anymore are so gutless that they can't just proclaim that making meth is wrong and worthy of punishment...they fish around with these idiotic policy experiments trying to come up with an effective combination of policies that will curb meth manufacture/traffic/use.
They've been at it for years. That's why there's such a cumbersome amount of law on books in America.
Disgusting, isn't it.
Last edited:
Crosshair
Member
It's now easier for me to buy a gun than to get a pack of Sudafed. This is one FUBARed world we live in. It took me about 10 minutes to pick up an Astra .357 Magnum handgun today that I had on layaway. That INCLUDED me filling out the 4473 form and the employee calling in the backround check. It took me over 15 minutes to get a few packs of Sudafed for the summer allergy season a week ago. Mostly because they had everything thrown in one big box behind the desk and it took them forever to find the 12 Hour Sudafed in that mess. Then they took forever looking at my ID cause apparently guy's with long hair MUST be making meth. Not to mention my photo was me with short hair. Not like that makes a difference.
/Stop the planet, I want off.
//Just got off work. The idiots are comming and they want me to help them. :banghead:
/Stop the planet, I want off.
//Just got off work. The idiots are comming and they want me to help them. :banghead:
another okie
Member
I don't want meth labs next door to me. I'm with Mons Meg on the effect of the law. It's working. There really are fewer meth labs around here. Are there fewer meth users? I don't know. I'm sure they'll move on to some other drug. It's fine to say this law is abhorrent to you because it restricts freedom, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work. It is working. That doesn't mean it's a good law, but it is having some effect.
Separate utility from principle. Prohibition did in fact reduce alcohol consumption in this country, and there is no doubt in my mind that marijuana consumption would skyrocket if it were legal. If you have a libertarian philosophy, you should be willing to say those are the consequences of freedom and accept them.
Separate utility from principle. Prohibition did in fact reduce alcohol consumption in this country, and there is no doubt in my mind that marijuana consumption would skyrocket if it were legal. If you have a libertarian philosophy, you should be willing to say those are the consequences of freedom and accept them.
- Status
