Restricting Cold Medicine Won't Curb Meth Use

[Beren]

It's fine to say this law is abhorrent to you because it restricts freedom, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.

You know what else would "work" and "have an effect?"

Decriminalize the use of meth. You want to screw yourself up, go for it. Once it's legal for companies to produce meth, with the proper permits and zoning in place, we'll have no risk from underground labs and we won't be funding organized criminal groups. They won't be able to compete.

 

[R.H. Lee]

By that logic, okie, every product or substance that has a potential for abuse should be regulated/restricted by the state. I don't think you want a massive bureaucracy overseeing/rationing the minutia of what can and cannot be sold freely on the open market.

IMO lazy law enforcement is the problem. First, meth labs stink. You can smell them outside the building. Second, hardcore speedfreak tweakers are not all that tough to recognize. I think it's unlawful to be under the influence of any mood altering/mind affecting substance in public in any state in the country. Why don't the local cops begin making some arrests and work their way up the food chain? The combination of a stinky house and an arrested tweaker rolling over should give pc for a warrant to look inside. AFAIK, it doesn't even take a warrant to look through the trash outside, either. If telltale signs of the chemicals used in the production of meth are found, that house could be staked out for further scrutiny.

Now I'm not a cop nor an investigator but it seems to be there are alternate and more effective ways of putting meth labs out of business than to simply regulate/ban the sale of pseudofed. Tell me where I'm wrong.

 

[benEzra]

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.

I am under the impression that Prohibition did not, in fact, reduce the consumption of alcohol after the initial adjustment period, and I seem to recall that it substantially increased the consumption of distilled beverages since they were a more concentrated product (hence easier to smuggle and serve on a per-dose basis). It also greatly increased the mortality and morbidity from contaminated alcohol (methanol contamination).

 

[Art Eatman]

Yeah, Prohibition gave us "Jake-leg whiskey". That's the stuff that was home-made, often using an old car radiator for the condenser. Folks who drank that swill wound up with a strange gait: As they'd lift a leg in taking a step, the leg would sorta "vibrate" or shake, giving their walk a really strange motion. As a kid, I saw old, "leftover" guys from the Prohibition era walk in that manner. Scary.

Art

 

[Sindawe]

I am under the impression that Prohibition did not, in fact, reduce the consumption of alcohol after the initial adjustment period, and I seem to recall that it substantially increased the consumption of distilled beverages since they were a more concentrated product (hence easier to smuggle and serve on a per-dose basis).

I've heard it put, that Prohibition turned America from a nation of beer drinkers into a nation of whisky drinkers.

RileyMC, I agree with Beren on how to put clandestine meth labs and meth smugglers out of buisness.

Decriminalize the use of meth. You want to screw yourself up, go for it. Once it's legal for companies to produce meth, with the proper permits and zoning in place, we'll have no risk from underground labs and we won't be funding organized criminal groups. They won't be able to compete

Treat the trade like we do EtOH. Tax it, regulate it, keep sale/use/possesion my minors a criminal offense.

 

[R.H. Lee]

RileyMC, I agree with Beren on how to put clandestine meth labs and meth smugglers out of buisness.

I don't think so. Why capitulate to criminal behavior? That 'solution' has the same reasoning as restricting/outlawing pseudofed IMO. All you're doing is outsourcing the problem to the general public, even worse, because you'll have new meth heads all over the place.

Bad idea.

 

[Sindawe]

Are YOU gonna run out and start tweakng on meth should it become legal to use? Do you think any of your fellow High Roaders will? I think we've all seen pictures of what happens to meth heads. In case any have forgotten, here is a reminder: http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/sheriff/faces_of_meth.htm

We as a society ALREADY HAVE a problem with meth users. Frankly, I think most of those are lost souls. The decrimminalizaion of meth use will aid in getting rid of the problem of clandestine labs and the smuggling, with out infringing on the legitimate use of Sudafed.

IMHO the way to prevent the problems we have with meth users now is to reach the kids in school at a young age (late Elem/Middle School) with THE TRUTH and not hype like D.A.R.E. Some will eventually ignore it and chose to use, just as they do with EtOH, tobacco, street racing and other dumb stuff. But thats part of the cost of living in a free society.

Of course, I'm willing to consider your ideas on the problem.

 

[Crosshair]

RileyMc, a person is allowed to be a drunk, loose everything and then be a homeless drunk. Homeless drunks commit lots of crime given the chance to score some booze. What will be different about meth? Sure they will be much more likely to end up on the street, but that is their right to screw themselves up.

 

[saltydog]

I live in rural Crack (Creek) County Oklahoma and there are a couple meth labs in my neighborhood. Matter of fact is that they are everywhere here in the rural areas. My neighbors and I know there are as you can smell it sometimes. Do the officials here know about? I think so. I have yet to see this "Great Law" of registration of "Cold Medicines" work. People who live in the "Real World" can see more than people who live "Behind a Desk"

 

[Ivy Mike]

You know what else would "work" and "have an effect?"

Decriminalize the use of meth. You want to screw yourself up, go for it. Once it's legal for companies to produce meth, with the proper permits and zoning in place, we'll have no risk from underground labs and we won't be funding organized criminal groups. They won't be able to compete.

Be careful Beren, you are so dangerously close to a rational thought that you might make a politician's head explode.

 

[mons meg]

The problem with the idea of decriminalizing drugs is different drugs have these widely different effects on people. For example,

Pot: we have an upsurge of hungry mellow dudes, not roaming the streets.
Meth/LSD/PCP: we have an increase in people running naked on the lawn with scissors. Oh, and they're barking at stuff.


Maybe that's a bit of hyperbole...but you see what I mean. Most people can agree that legalizing/decriminalizing pot probably would have too much of an effect on society as a whole. But I doubt you'll get Joe and Suzy Homeowner's support if you want to go much further.

 

[fjolnirsson]

Meth/LSD/PCP: we have an increase in people running naked on the lawn with scissors. Oh, and they're barking at stuff.

This, I think, would be a self-correcting problem. Naked Meth/LSD/PCP head runs at someone's wife or child with scissors in hand, homeowner performs a failure drill on said druggie. Pretty soon, there is a diminishing supply of druggies.

Just in case anybody missed it, that was mostly sarcasm.

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Drugs, life and 42

Some drugs are worse than others. Meth is one of the worst.

Now if drugs had never been made illegal, very few would get involved with meth. It's that bad.

Back in the daze, I knew more than a few people mixed up with coke. Some of those messed up their lives a whole lot, but most all of them grew out of it. Let's face it, a certain percentage of the population seeks altered consciousness in one way or another. That percentage stays roughly the same regardless of prohibition.

If you make someone a criminal for drugs, it tends to limit their options if or when they finally grow up. It may even delay or prevent them from growing up.

 

[Biker]

Well said, Overby.
Biker

 

[another okie]

I guess reading skills are down to about zero. I never said this was a good law, or that I was in favor of it, or that I was against legalizing drugs. I just said the law was working where I live. Laws that work are sometimes immoral and unjust laws that I oppose. That doesn't mean they don't work.

Can't we learn to think like adults? If you believe in libertarian ideas such as legalizing drugs, you should admit what the likely consequences are and say you are willing to accept those consequences.

That's much more convincing that saying there won't be any downside. Every act, thought, or law has good and bad consequences. As adults we must learn to balance the good and bad consequences and stop denying something has bad consequences just because we like it or want it.

 

[Beren]

I just said the law was working where I live. Laws that work are sometimes immoral and unjust laws that I oppose. That doesn't mean they don't work.

What metrics are you using to quantify that the law "works?" If it is because "number of meth labs busted" has gone done, I could achieve the same impact by decriminalizing meth labs.

I don't think so. Why capitulate to criminal behavior? That 'solution' has the same reasoning as restricting/outlawing pseudofed IMO. All you're doing is outsourcing the problem to the general public, even worse, because you'll have new meth heads all over the place.

Why is it "criminal?" Only because our representatives have passed laws making it so. There is nothing inherently evil or immoral in drug use. Murder is inherently immoral. Smoking weed is not. Want to huff glue, jump in front of a bus, or drink a bottle of wine in a single evening? I might try to stop you, but I won't use lethal force or incarceration to do so.

 

[R.H. Lee]

All drugs are not equal. Alcohol may have some redeeming social value. People have a couple of drinks, it relaxes them; it's good for the heart. Meth OTOH, has no redeeming social value and is physiologically and psychologically damaging and addictive even in small doses.

Legalization of all drugs is the main reason I won't vote Libertarian. That and the open borders thing.

(I don't drink any alcohol ever, btw, nor do I use any drugs, legal or otherwise) .

 

[Sindawe]

Meth OTOH, has no redeeming social value and is physiologically and psychologically damaging and addictive even in small doses.

Really, then why is the drug Desoxyn still manufactured and marketed if it has no redeemaing social value?

 

[R.H. Lee]

Methamphetamine ( Desoxyn ) an amphetamine used to treat narcolepsy and attention-deficit-disorder in children. In some cases but rare this drug is used to treat depression. This drug is from a family of drugs known as central nervous system stimulants. The habit-forming potential is high. Psychological and physical dependence is possible. Addiction is rare in children but a problem with adults.

from here: http://www.psyweb.com/Drughtm/jsp/desoxyn.jsp

Administered by prescription only under a doctor's care.

You don't need a scrip to get a gin & tonic or a shot of Jack Daniels, do you.

 

[Sindawe]

Ahhh...but you said NO redeeming social value.

 

[Beren]

Whether something is of "redeeming social value" or not is irrelevant. To many people, my AR-15 is of no redeeming social value. It can cause great harm if misused, and some harm even when properly used (hearing loss, even with protection.) It's also very addictive and habit-forming. An EXPENSIVE habit, at that.

I don't drink any alcohol ever, btw, nor do I use any drugs, legal or otherwise

Really? Never once used an antibiotic? Never once had a can of cola or a cup of tea? Why do you feel it proper to force your beliefs on what holds "redeeming social value" on others, even if their use is causing you no harm?

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Sullum himself adds, “After the precursor phenyl-2-propanone was restricted in 1980, traffickers switched to ephedrine; when large quantities of ephedrine became harder to come by in the late ’90s, they switched to pseudoephedrine.”

Insanity: doing the same thing for 25 years and expecting different results each time.

As an aside, what makes meth labs so hazardous/explosive? Is it the ingredients, the "cooking" methods or the by-products?

 

[Firethorn]

As an aside, what makes meth labs so hazardous/explosive? Is it the ingredients, the "cooking" methods or the by-products?

A combination of the ingredients and cooking methods. Many of the chemicals used to create the drug are highly flammable solvents. While industry uses them safely all the time, the black market chemists are often high on product, and are using jury-rigged equipment that either involves open flame or can spark. Other chemicals such as Ammonia are just plain nasty, especially in quantity.

Meth Cleanup site explains stuff

 

[R.H. Lee]

To many people, my AR-15 is of no redeeming social value.

There is no constitutionally protected right to keep and use drugs, so firearms are not a good corollary IMO.

Beren, maybe you would care to explain why is is good public policy to 'decriminalize' drug use. Please offer some real benefit. Maybe you'll want to point to the Netherlands as an example. Pot is legal; heroin addicts are provided free heroin by the government. Is that what you had in mind?

Earlier you suggested making meth legal. Have your really thought that through? You wouldn't mind a 'meth bar' in your neighborhood with all the attendant comings and goings? You wouldn't mind someone jacked up on meth driving down your street? How is that a good idea? Who benefits?

 

[Sindawe]

There is no constitutionally protected right to keep and use drugs, so firearms are not a good corollary IMO.

Back to school with ya RileyMC. Where you should review the 9th Amendment to U.S. Constitution.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.