Oregon anti-meth law would require prescriptions

Reuters ^ | 7 31 05 | Reuters

[oldfarmer]

PORTLAND, Ore. (Reuters) - A bill passed by lawmakers on Saturday would make Oregon the first U.S. state to require a doctor's prescription for cold medicines containing an ingredient that can be used to make the illegal drug methamphetamine.

"We hope this will reduce the supply" of meth, Democratic state Sen. Ginny Burdick told Reuters after the Senate passed the bill.

Oregon's House of Representatives approved the measure earlier this month and Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski was expected to sign it.

The bill has widespread support, but critics say it would hurt people without medical insurance who cannot afford to go to a doctor for a cold or an allergy.

Although much of the nation's meth supply is produced in large labs in Mexico, the addictive drug can be made in smaller labs with easily available equipment and ingredients, including cold or allergy medicines containing pseudoephedrine.

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said recently that meth had surpassed marijuana as the drug posing the greatest danger to the nation's children

[riri]

This is pure idiocy. The makers of the studd will lose massive amonts of revenue. I generally take NYQuil when I get a cold. But, I don't have to. I sure as hell won't bother going to the doctor for an RX for the stuff, I'll suffer through it.

[riri]

studd=stuff

[Know your rights]

tax payers will get a return on their prison cell investments when these law breakers are WORKING off their incarcerated time by doing county road clean up, road repair

I suspect you seriously overestimate the market value of that labor (or understimate prison costs).

[Know your rights]

This doesn't seem to bother the medical marijuana supporters.

So you think marijuana has no more significant side-effects than pseudoephedrine?

[SunnySide]

"I suspect you seriously overestimate the market value of that labor (or understimate prison costs)."

Regardless, I don't suspect your motivation, it's obvious. At least I'm trying to offer opinions to curb problems unlike you, offering no solutions, just sitting there nit picking posters.

[Know your rights]

At least I'm trying to offer opinions to curb problems unlike you, offering no solutions

Some problems have no "solutions" (other than changing one heart at a time); what I offer is the sound conservative advice to not create more problems than we solve just to be 'doing something.'

[musanon]

robertpaulsen:

The Tylenol killer makes my life far more miserable on a daily basis than any meth chemist.

---

huh?
21 posted on 07/31/2005 7:20:56 AM PDT by Hildy

---

To: Hildy
In the Chicago area in 1982, a person tampered with Tylenol capsules, filling them with cyanide and returning them to the store shelves. Seven people died.

Thanks to him/her, medicines are in bottles I can't open without using my teeth and packaging where I have to use a knife or scissors to open. Too young to remember these?

Life was much simpler prior to 1982.
26 robertpaulsen

---

Hildy, that's not true.

-- Life was much simpler before the socialists insisted that we all would be 'safe' if we just let them control all aspects of living, -- and the majority rule sycophants among us agreed.

-- These 'control' types are dismantling our constitution and using criminal acts like the tampering incident to gain political power.

[blackie]

Another example of government's heavy hand, penalizing law abiding citizens for abuses by criminals!

[freepatriot32]

Abram;AlexandriaDuke;Annie03;Baby Bear;bassmaner;Bernard;BJClinton;BlackbirdSST;blackeagle;Calvinist_Dark_Lord;Capitalism2003; CSM;Da Bilge Troll ;dale3fan;Da_Shrimp;dAnconia;dcwusmc;DaoPian;DemWatch;dread78645;duznshwrnkd;ellery;ex-Texan;Extremely Extreme Extremist;fanfan;FatherFig1o155; FreeKeys; Gardener;gdobbs18;getsoutalive;Greenback_dollar;GSWarrior;imfleck;JeffAtlanta;jess35; jfreif;jimt;jmc813;LibertarianInExile;LibertyRocks; mhking;Mortikhi;muggs;NJ Freeper;pbmaltzman; rasblue;Rob_DSM;SamFromLivingston;Semaphore Heathcliffe;salo;SalukiLawyer;SittinYonder;society-by-contract ;SoVaDPJ;stevieboy;The Great Yazoo;t_skoz ;traviskicks;Tristram Shandy;Types_with_Fist;Turbopilot;txnativegop;utahguy;Utmost Certainty;ValenB4;VRing;wartman;Xenalyte;GoodWithBarbarians JustForKaos; mosquitobite Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[SunnySide]

"Some problems have no "solutions" (other than changing one heart at a time); what I offer is the sound conservative advice to not create more problems than we solve just to be 'doing something." ............ Well, "some" people like an outlet to vent.

[freepatriot32]

oops lets try that again. sorry aboutthat ive been freebasing sudafed all day lol

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[manic4organic]

I just heard a snippet about Texas passing a law that puts pseudoephedrine products behind the counter. Still availabe without a prescription but you must sign for it and there's a limit of two boxes.

They also said Oklahoma passed a similar law (don't know when) and it had reduced the amount of meth labs by 50%.

[robertpaulsen]

"So you think marijuana has no more significant side-effects than pseudoephedrine?"

Who's talking about side effects? Not me.

I was talking about the horrendous inconvenience and expense of visiting a doctor.

[robertpaulsen]

"what I offer is the sound conservative advice"

Hah! More like unsound, theoretical, pie-in-the-sky, libertarian advice.

[TKDietz]

"You need tens of thousands of these pills to make a batch of meth. People who are running meth labs aren't getting their supplies at Walgreen's, they're getting them in bulk from over the border. Oh, sure, there are probably a handful of people here and there who create much tinier supplies by buying a thousand pills, but those people are easy to spot if they wanted to."

You are wrong about this. The vast majority of meth labs operating in this country are little small batch kitchen type labs where these guys are using a few boxes of pills to make a few grams of meth that will mostly be used by the cook and those who help him gather the supplies and cook the stuff. These little labs were being busted left and right in my state until we passed the law a few months ago putting the pseudoephedrine behind pharmacy counters. I'm a public defender and I've handled tons of meth lab cases. Our office used to get several of these cases a month and now we are hardly getting any. Narcs around here are now giving their little snitches pills so they can give them to people who know how to cook in exchange for dope. If that wasn't going on I don't know that we'd be getting any new cooking cases.

Most of the meth on the market in this country though does not come from these little small batch labs tweakers set up themselves. Most of the meth comes from the "super labs" in Mexico and western states that make pounds and pounds of the stuff at a time. It is true that those labs aren't getting their pills from the drugs stores, gas stations, grocery stores, discount stores, and so on like the little small batch tweaker labs. They get the pills smuggled in bulk or buy them in bulk from crooked wholesalers in country. These laws making the pseudoephedrine harder to get from retail sources won't have any effect on the super labs, but cutting out most of the little labs supplying tweakers everywhere with cheap or free dope is a worthwhile endeavor that costs very little to accomplish and in reality only causes a minor convenience to legitimate pseudoephedrine consumers if they have laws similar to Oklahoma's where they can get pseudoephedrine without a prescription if they just stop by the pharmacy and sign for it.

Oregon's new law is crazy though. Making pseudoephedrine a prescription drug is going to be a major pain in the butt for legitimate consumers. It's going to make the stuff too expensive for a lot of people who really benefit from it now. If I were in Oregon I'd be all over my state representatives and the Governor telling them to stop this law before it goes into effect.

[TheBattman]

Not necessarily confused - just too many thoughts coming from a sleep-deprived mind....

Maybe more clear if divided into two lines of thought:

1 - Anti-freedom Nazis - those who answer every problem with banning or seriously restricting otherwise perfectly legal and necessary medications because of the misbehavior of a handful - much like gun "control".

2 - SERIOUS consequences for those manufacturing and selling Meth - and not just the "little guys" - go all the way up - even when that steps on politicians toes.... I'm all for death penalty for the manufacturers and distributors of meth - as well as complete forfieture of property - and as it is WAY expensive to clean up houses that have had meth labs -it would be far easier to just burn them down.....

[Know your rights]

I was talking about the horrendous inconvenience and expense of visiting a doctor.

So you think anyone who argues for OTC status for any medicine is logically obligated to argue for OTC status for all medicines? If not, then what's your objection to people saying it's OK to require a prescription for marijuana but not pseudoephedrine?

[Know your rights]

what I offer is the sound conservative advice to not create more problems than we solve just to be 'doing something.'

Hah! More like unsound, theoretical, pie-in-the-sky, libertarian advice.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about whether "don't create more problems than we solve just to be 'doing something'" is "unsound, theoretical, pie-in-the-sky, libertarian advice."

[robertpaulsen]

My point was that the poster was complaning about paying $53.00 to see a doctor to get " a piece of paper" for pseudoephedrine.

I thought it was funny in that the pro-medical marijuana people were more than happy to pay $53 to see a doctor to get their piece of paper.

Let's read the posts first, and not make this any more complicated than it has to be. OK?

[robertpaulsen]

"I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about whether "don't create more problems than we solve just to be 'doing something'" is "unsound, theoretical, pie-in-the-sky, libertarian advice."

If it is advice, coming from you, about drugs ... I guess we will.