Meth, Sudafed and Gun Laws (Part II)
- Thread starter Al Norris
- Start date
Control That is my concern. Gov't being/ having Control.
Not the substance being controlled, the Government using control in We The People's being.
One member here has 5 boys, she posted in another thread a very good point. The boys cannot sign for these Meds. So when snotty nose / allergy seaon hits, well there is a monthly limit on the number of boxes of she and her husband can buy. My state also has monthly limits. Now, if everyone gets sick at the same time- now that means making Doctor Appointments, and getting 'scripts filled in order to get the quanities needed .Note the plural.
Now my gut feeling is - not so much the Meth, just as it is not so much the War on "[ ]" - I forget what the schedule is for next week. Control is Goal.
We have various "Controls" already , and these vary among our respective locals.
Databases scare me, especially when a Governing Body uses them. I do not trust a lot of "the original intent" because too many times the original touchy feel good intent was to appease the whiners and allow Governing Bodies - revenue, and the ability to abuse these databases - or were they just "presented to " the whiner as being one thing and the real intent is not shared?
Database?
North Little Rock First To Test Meth Deterrent
http://www.kthv.com/news/search/results.aspx?storyid=24729
I mean we all know how well Databases Prevent Criminals from buying guns, or buying more guns than allowed in a month...or...or...
Control of any substance only means Criminals intent on obtaining said substances just do so in other ways. The Law Abiding Person is the one "restricted".
My problem with NLR in the above link? Is it the War on Meth, or the Federal Money they are going to get? Is this database really for something else down the line, and whiney folks bought the War on Meth Speil?
If enough laws are passed we all become felons. Felons cannot have guns.
Then again -
When the Policeman become the criminal - the criminal must become the Policeman - Atlas Shrugged
Yes I know folks abuse Meth and Meth is made. I realize how dangerous it is for not only LEO to combat Meth use, add Fire Depts, Insuance claims when a house goes up taking neighbors homes as well.
Are the monies designated ALL actually going for LEO and such to combat Meth - or is the monies going for databases and other controls for a bigger use down the road?
Seems we had this dance before ...Prohibition dance was it not?
Something to think about.
Regards,
Steve
Not the substance being controlled, the Government using control in We The People's being.
One member here has 5 boys, she posted in another thread a very good point. The boys cannot sign for these Meds. So when snotty nose / allergy seaon hits, well there is a monthly limit on the number of boxes of she and her husband can buy. My state also has monthly limits. Now, if everyone gets sick at the same time- now that means making Doctor Appointments, and getting 'scripts filled in order to get the quanities needed .Note the plural.
Now my gut feeling is - not so much the Meth, just as it is not so much the War on "[ ]" - I forget what the schedule is for next week. Control is Goal.
We have various "Controls" already , and these vary among our respective locals.
Databases scare me, especially when a Governing Body uses them. I do not trust a lot of "the original intent" because too many times the original touchy feel good intent was to appease the whiners and allow Governing Bodies - revenue, and the ability to abuse these databases - or were they just "presented to " the whiner as being one thing and the real intent is not shared?
Database?
North Little Rock First To Test Meth Deterrent
http://www.kthv.com/news/search/results.aspx?storyid=24729
I mean we all know how well Databases Prevent Criminals from buying guns, or buying more guns than allowed in a month...or...or...
Control of any substance only means Criminals intent on obtaining said substances just do so in other ways. The Law Abiding Person is the one "restricted".
My problem with NLR in the above link? Is it the War on Meth, or the Federal Money they are going to get? Is this database really for something else down the line, and whiney folks bought the War on Meth Speil?
If enough laws are passed we all become felons. Felons cannot have guns.
Then again -
When the Policeman become the criminal - the criminal must become the Policeman - Atlas Shrugged
Yes I know folks abuse Meth and Meth is made. I realize how dangerous it is for not only LEO to combat Meth use, add Fire Depts, Insuance claims when a house goes up taking neighbors homes as well.
Are the monies designated ALL actually going for LEO and such to combat Meth - or is the monies going for databases and other controls for a bigger use down the road?
Seems we had this dance before ...Prohibition dance was it not?
Something to think about.
Regards,
Steve
Antipitas
Point well taken.
25mg 100% Ephedrine HCL tablets were available for sale in the back of magazines for years. They were sold by the 1 gallon container full to anyone who wanted them, they were cheap. This combined with other easily accessible chemicals allowed anyone with the inclination to produce meth in huge quantities in their kitchen and to produce a residential explosive toxic waste dump.
Should this source for ephedrine still be available?
I don't disagree with the belief Americans should be allowed to self medicate if they wish. I also agree that moving Sudafed behind the counter is a little silly. It seems easy enough to put some limit on the amount purchased at one time IMO this is not unreasonable.
I have to draw the line at allowing people to build and keep bombs in residential areas under protection of the 2nd or for production of meth.
I think the ephedrine laws will drive the meth industry to Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean. Why import ephedrine? Why not the drug itself? Moving the manufacturing process south doesn't upset me. We will not get rid of the addicts, just getting rid of the cookers is OK with me.
Point well taken.
25mg 100% Ephedrine HCL tablets were available for sale in the back of magazines for years. They were sold by the 1 gallon container full to anyone who wanted them, they were cheap. This combined with other easily accessible chemicals allowed anyone with the inclination to produce meth in huge quantities in their kitchen and to produce a residential explosive toxic waste dump.
Should this source for ephedrine still be available?
I don't disagree with the belief Americans should be allowed to self medicate if they wish. I also agree that moving Sudafed behind the counter is a little silly. It seems easy enough to put some limit on the amount purchased at one time IMO this is not unreasonable.
I have to draw the line at allowing people to build and keep bombs in residential areas under protection of the 2nd or for production of meth.
I think the ephedrine laws will drive the meth industry to Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean. Why import ephedrine? Why not the drug itself? Moving the manufacturing process south doesn't upset me. We will not get rid of the addicts, just getting rid of the cookers is OK with me.
I did ask for that, didn't I?
Re: Racism and drug prohibition, this is a good old speech which reaches the same conclusion you did: it's all about controlling the others.
invention_45
New member
Chlortrimeton contains, I think, the antihistamine chlorpheniramine. I think it's a Schering product. Antihistamines make you drowsy.
Taking an antihistamine does, among other things, inhibit what histamine does. In part, that is causing your mucus membranes to secrete fluids. In other words, antihistamines dry them up. They are running for a REASON. To help flush infectious particles out.
Sudafed opens the passages, allowing the drainage of fluids but NOT inhibiting their production.
Antihistamines can sometimes CAUSE sinusitis, whereas Sudafed can PREVENT it. So can Sudafed PE, but the side effects are nastier.
In addition, most antihistamines can make you SERIOUSLY drowsy, particularly if you are already tired. So if somebody were to decide to be a good boy scout and substitute Chlortrimeton for Sudafed on a late night drive home from a family gathering, the results could be disastrous.
---
And I AM on the side of the meth users. I'm not trying to weasel out of that fact. Let them do what they want to their own bodies. Not my problem. Just like alcohol. When they commit a crime caused by meth or alcohol, then arrest them. Add an alcohol/meth charge to the crime they committed if you want.
The fact is the world is made of shades of gray. Not of the shalts and shalt nots that you think it is.
Some people can manage addictive drugs better than others. That's gray. Alcohol is a shining example. Some handle it fine, having a glass of wine with a meal. Some handle it intermediately, going to bars but stopping short of driving home drunk, and keep their jobs. some handle it in another intermediate way, occasionally driving drunk but never injuring anybody or getting caught. Some handle it badly, drinking themselves to death.
This is gray, not black and white.
The same thing is true for drugs. Somebody here admitted he used drugs in a past life. He was able to go on to make what sounds like a wonderful life for himself. Some people overdose and die. Some people wouldn't touch drugs even if they were legal.
This is gray, not black and white.
It's the attempt to take what's truly gray and uncontrollable and rein it in by making it black or white that has resulted in the web of laws we're living under
and has eroded our freedoms so severely. And there's no end in sight.
If god tells you don't do drugs, then don't do them. But keep your nose out of my and everyone else's business.
Taking an antihistamine does, among other things, inhibit what histamine does. In part, that is causing your mucus membranes to secrete fluids. In other words, antihistamines dry them up. They are running for a REASON. To help flush infectious particles out.
Sudafed opens the passages, allowing the drainage of fluids but NOT inhibiting their production.
Antihistamines can sometimes CAUSE sinusitis, whereas Sudafed can PREVENT it. So can Sudafed PE, but the side effects are nastier.
In addition, most antihistamines can make you SERIOUSLY drowsy, particularly if you are already tired. So if somebody were to decide to be a good boy scout and substitute Chlortrimeton for Sudafed on a late night drive home from a family gathering, the results could be disastrous.
---
And I AM on the side of the meth users. I'm not trying to weasel out of that fact. Let them do what they want to their own bodies. Not my problem. Just like alcohol. When they commit a crime caused by meth or alcohol, then arrest them. Add an alcohol/meth charge to the crime they committed if you want.
The fact is the world is made of shades of gray. Not of the shalts and shalt nots that you think it is.
Some people can manage addictive drugs better than others. That's gray. Alcohol is a shining example. Some handle it fine, having a glass of wine with a meal. Some handle it intermediately, going to bars but stopping short of driving home drunk, and keep their jobs. some handle it in another intermediate way, occasionally driving drunk but never injuring anybody or getting caught. Some handle it badly, drinking themselves to death.
This is gray, not black and white.
The same thing is true for drugs. Somebody here admitted he used drugs in a past life. He was able to go on to make what sounds like a wonderful life for himself. Some people overdose and die. Some people wouldn't touch drugs even if they were legal.
This is gray, not black and white.
It's the attempt to take what's truly gray and uncontrollable and rein it in by making it black or white that has resulted in the web of laws we're living under
and has eroded our freedoms so severely. And there's no end in sight.
If god tells you don't do drugs, then don't do them. But keep your nose out of my and everyone else's business.
invention_45
New member
I do not like the idea of meth labs in neighborhoods either.
I'll say again what I have said before. Let everyone have the meth they want. Abbott, Schering, Merck, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Goldline, Ivax will then make it for a fraction of its current price and still make a buck. They will make all that's desired or contract Dow and Monsanto to do it. All of this will take place in industrial parks or strictly industrial areas.
Let pharmacists (not clerks) sell it, something like Schedule V. This way they can see if your teeth are rotting out and either limit or refuse to sell to you, or can refer you to a doctor if you seem to be addicted.
Control freaks won't like this. But I don't much like control freaks either.
I'll say again what I have said before. Let everyone have the meth they want. Abbott, Schering, Merck, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Goldline, Ivax will then make it for a fraction of its current price and still make a buck. They will make all that's desired or contract Dow and Monsanto to do it. All of this will take place in industrial parks or strictly industrial areas.
Let pharmacists (not clerks) sell it, something like Schedule V. This way they can see if your teeth are rotting out and either limit or refuse to sell to you, or can refer you to a doctor if you seem to be addicted.
Control freaks won't like this. But I don't much like control freaks either.
Harley Quinn
Moderator
I believe the peace pipe was smoking 13
MaryJane, has been around ever since the Mayflower hit the east coast (for the puritans).
Coke was used by Cola for a long time. Cigarettes are the most addictive drug going they say. Who has the right to pollute your air?
Taxes and Death, you are not going to get away from them.
To use the word gun different then you would armed is pretty prickly in my opinion.
I believe you are after something here other then what you purport.
HQ
MaryJane, has been around ever since the Mayflower hit the east coast (for the puritans).
Coke was used by Cola for a long time. Cigarettes are the most addictive drug going they say. Who has the right to pollute your air?
Taxes and Death, you are not going to get away from them.
To use the word gun different then you would armed is pretty prickly in my opinion.
I believe you are after something here other then what you purport.
HQ
Humm...
Seems DC for instance had some pretty tight gun control going on and gun crimes rate higher there than other parts of the country.
Seems "controlling" Furniture Polish bottles for bootleg whiskey, and bathtubs for bathtub gin, worked about as well as "controlling" mason jars, sugar, and metal tubing before that with moonshine whiskey.
Now folks better at quoting /citing history help me out here.
Gas rationing by the Government, along with other "controls" - well did not folks obtain what they needed? Did some sell /barter gas stamps and other "control pcs of paper" for other "wants" or "needs"? Be it food or illicit substances?
Read Sir Thomas Moore's Utopia , then read Orwell's 1984
Now some may get upset Moore made mention in picking a partner for life to see how well that partner was in bed - I mean you don't buy a cow without knowing if it produces milk. Utopia is a great daydream, just never has worked for anyone for any length of time.
Orwell on the other hand , akin to Jules Verne and "boats under the water" , seems to have better predicted future events - the behaviors of those that want to feel "safe and secure" and the Governing Powers using these feelings of "safe and secure" to control the masses.
Government has found some teats that produce the milk of Control and produce very well indeed. Find more teats that produce even more Control and milk them for all they are worth.
Guns, Milk, Meth...Gov't gonna need more buckets pretty soon....
Seems DC for instance had some pretty tight gun control going on and gun crimes rate higher there than other parts of the country.
Seems "controlling" Furniture Polish bottles for bootleg whiskey, and bathtubs for bathtub gin, worked about as well as "controlling" mason jars, sugar, and metal tubing before that with moonshine whiskey.
Now folks better at quoting /citing history help me out here.
Gas rationing by the Government, along with other "controls" - well did not folks obtain what they needed? Did some sell /barter gas stamps and other "control pcs of paper" for other "wants" or "needs"? Be it food or illicit substances?
Read Sir Thomas Moore's Utopia , then read Orwell's 1984
Now some may get upset Moore made mention in picking a partner for life to see how well that partner was in bed - I mean you don't buy a cow without knowing if it produces milk. Utopia is a great daydream, just never has worked for anyone for any length of time.
Orwell on the other hand , akin to Jules Verne and "boats under the water" , seems to have better predicted future events - the behaviors of those that want to feel "safe and secure" and the Governing Powers using these feelings of "safe and secure" to control the masses.
Government has found some teats that produce the milk of Control and produce very well indeed. Find more teats that produce even more Control and milk them for all they are worth.
Guns, Milk, Meth...Gov't gonna need more buckets pretty soon....
According to an article in yesterday's Omaha World Herald, there have been 70% less meth labs discovered since the law was passed only a few months ago. Same significant decrease in Iowa. So the assertion that putting the Suda behind the counter will not "in any manner" stop illicit meth production is (according to the Press, anyway) simply incorrect.
The article did state that the law has not impacted meth consumption, so that part of your assertion appears to be correct.
I said this in the thread that was closed, and I will say it now, the peudoephedrine laws do work. I am in Oklahoma, often the leader in Meth Lab busts and accidents. The year the Nik Green/ Rocky Eales Law went into effect, the total labe encounter number decreased by well over 50%, and has continued to decline ever since. Whtas more, the total number of meth encountersof any kind have steadily decreased.
When I first started, you could not throw a rock without hitting a tweaker, now meth busts arent nearly as common. The days of the mom-and-pop meth lab are over, thank God, and pseudoephedrine laws are the cause of this.
When I first started, you could not throw a rock without hitting a tweaker, now meth busts arent nearly as common. The days of the mom-and-pop meth lab are over, thank God, and pseudoephedrine laws are the cause of this.
Defination clarification please...
My understanding is pseudoephedrine is a generic term used to describe drugs containing ephedrine HCL or ephedrine sulfate combined with other substances to remedy other specific symptoms. Does manufacturing meth from pseudoephedrine (Sudafed) require additional steps to extract the eph. HCL or eph. sulfate?
If so I don't necessarily agree that regulation of pseudoephedrine has had as much of an impact as regulation of pure ephedrine HCL and sulfate sold as illicit drug look alikes in every truck stop and in the back of magazines. Sudafed is significantly more expensive than the pure stuff was.
My understanding is pseudoephedrine is a generic term used to describe drugs containing ephedrine HCL or ephedrine sulfate combined with other substances to remedy other specific symptoms. Does manufacturing meth from pseudoephedrine (Sudafed) require additional steps to extract the eph. HCL or eph. sulfate?
If so I don't necessarily agree that regulation of pseudoephedrine has had as much of an impact as regulation of pure ephedrine HCL and sulfate sold as illicit drug look alikes in every truck stop and in the back of magazines. Sudafed is significantly more expensive than the pure stuff was.
Yes, there are additional steps whn usinf the Pseudo, but it is the most common form of ephedrine used, in my experience. I have seen very little of pure epedrine used.
Its not very expensive when its stolen, by the way. Sudafed on the aisels is easily shoplifted. I have seen people steal a thousand tablets in a day, easily.
Its not very expensive when its stolen, by the way. Sudafed on the aisels is easily shoplifted. I have seen people steal a thousand tablets in a day, easily.
pipoman,
I do not have handy the information you ask.
Now back when I first as an older returning student and taking English Comp, I wrote a Paper.
Crack:The Dealers Dream - The Addict's Nightmare
Crack [rocks] at that time were the big drug concern. I simply went to the College Library and found out how Crack is made. It was not hard to find out, just like anything else - the information is easily availble to anyone that want to know, for legal or illegal purposes. I was writing a paper, no interest in making the stuff.
Cocaine is obviously an ingredient. Baking Soda is another. It has been some years since I did that paper - the gyst is - taking a small amount of Cocaine, and Exponentially that small amount returns HUGE profits. I want to say $200 of Cocaine would yeild after being made into "dime rocks" something like $3,000.00. [I forget , and it depended on strength made].
Not once do I recall , nor do I know see Baking Soda being "controlled" or regulated. I bought the Family Store Brand Baking Soda the other day , 3/$1.
I use it to clean with as it does not scratch sinks and other materials, rinses off and no adverse smells or anything with folks with sensitivities to chemicals and such.
Crack is easy to make in one's home, regular pots and pans, stovetop and whatnot.
I have never had to sign for Baking Soda, never been limited on the number of boxes, never been questioned as to why I was buying it alone, or in conjunction with Lantern fuel for a coleman stove/lantern, a new pan, wooden spoon, Zip-Lock baggies for my lunch, ...nada, nothing.
Meth is the current "concern" , Crack - one does not so much as they used to.
Anyone in LEO or Drug Rehab please advise how much of a problem Crack is compared to what is once was. Clarify and Correct me if I am wrong - please.
Baking Soda is still easy and trouble free to get , was then. Sudaphed may be controlled , then some day a "new concern" will take its place. Difference is, baking soda most likely will still be easy to get, Sudaphed not.
Kinda like - sure glad we "Controlled" all them "machine guns" ...WE didn't have a problem with "machine guns" - we still don't.
What we do still have a problem with are folks controlling "stuff" in the guise of protecting Liberties and folks trading Freedom for these Liberties.
I recall Micro Lab. Two rules the first time class met and repeated all the time.
1) Keep fingers out of mouth
2) Anything one puts on their skin ; or ingests - one can become allergic to that substance.
Happend to me in regard to Aspirin .
Folks - I have an allergic reaction to a lot of Control Matters Government keeps ramming and trying to ram down my throat.
My firearms have never hurt a child, instead has offered a LOT of positives from teaching, learning to shoot, hunting and such.
Bathtubs on the other hand. Well phooey! Gov't wants to protect folks - especially kids from drowning, getting scalded , slipping and falling...ban bathtubs. I do not see Gov't making folks sign for bathtubs, signing for hot water, or anything else to ...
Nope - Control is Control. Similar methods are used to Control whatever. Guns, Drugs...anything can be used "wrong". I mean one can drink too much water and get hurt!
It is never the "thing" it is always the intent of the user of "thing".
Baking Soda does not scratch fiberglass tubs and shower units. That was my "intent".
Steve
I do not have handy the information you ask.
Now back when I first as an older returning student and taking English Comp, I wrote a Paper.
Crack:The Dealers Dream - The Addict's Nightmare
Crack [rocks] at that time were the big drug concern. I simply went to the College Library and found out how Crack is made. It was not hard to find out, just like anything else - the information is easily availble to anyone that want to know, for legal or illegal purposes. I was writing a paper, no interest in making the stuff.
Cocaine is obviously an ingredient. Baking Soda is another. It has been some years since I did that paper - the gyst is - taking a small amount of Cocaine, and Exponentially that small amount returns HUGE profits. I want to say $200 of Cocaine would yeild after being made into "dime rocks" something like $3,000.00. [I forget , and it depended on strength made].
Not once do I recall , nor do I know see Baking Soda being "controlled" or regulated. I bought the Family Store Brand Baking Soda the other day , 3/$1.
I use it to clean with as it does not scratch sinks and other materials, rinses off and no adverse smells or anything with folks with sensitivities to chemicals and such.
Crack is easy to make in one's home, regular pots and pans, stovetop and whatnot.
I have never had to sign for Baking Soda, never been limited on the number of boxes, never been questioned as to why I was buying it alone, or in conjunction with Lantern fuel for a coleman stove/lantern, a new pan, wooden spoon, Zip-Lock baggies for my lunch, ...nada, nothing.
Meth is the current "concern" , Crack - one does not so much as they used to.
Anyone in LEO or Drug Rehab please advise how much of a problem Crack is compared to what is once was. Clarify and Correct me if I am wrong - please.
Baking Soda is still easy and trouble free to get , was then. Sudaphed may be controlled , then some day a "new concern" will take its place. Difference is, baking soda most likely will still be easy to get, Sudaphed not.
Kinda like - sure glad we "Controlled" all them "machine guns" ...WE didn't have a problem with "machine guns" - we still don't.
What we do still have a problem with are folks controlling "stuff" in the guise of protecting Liberties and folks trading Freedom for these Liberties.
I recall Micro Lab. Two rules the first time class met and repeated all the time.
1) Keep fingers out of mouth
2) Anything one puts on their skin ; or ingests - one can become allergic to that substance.
Happend to me in regard to Aspirin .
Folks - I have an allergic reaction to a lot of Control Matters Government keeps ramming and trying to ram down my throat.
My firearms have never hurt a child, instead has offered a LOT of positives from teaching, learning to shoot, hunting and such.
Bathtubs on the other hand. Well phooey! Gov't wants to protect folks - especially kids from drowning, getting scalded , slipping and falling...ban bathtubs. I do not see Gov't making folks sign for bathtubs, signing for hot water, or anything else to ...
Nope - Control is Control. Similar methods are used to Control whatever. Guns, Drugs...anything can be used "wrong". I mean one can drink too much water and get hurt!
It is never the "thing" it is always the intent of the user of "thing".
Baking Soda does not scratch fiberglass tubs and shower units. That was my "intent".
Steve
Thanks for posting this. I saw similar comments in the closed thread, and was going to transplant one or more over to this thread.
I have a couple of comments on this.
First, this is a kind of odd situation where we see people cheering a local business being shut down and the jobs exported to a megaplant in a foreign land.
But seriously, it is a NIMBY attitude. It's not being made here as much, so who cares what those narco-gangsters do elsewhere?
Well, the really large criminal organizations can be much more dangerous than mom-and-pop crank operations. They are just dangerous in a different, and often less visible, way.
invention_45
New member
I just saw this.
"There has never, . . . ever, . . . been any research showing any useful, good, moral, helpful result of the abuse of meth."
-- Well, I rather doubt there's been a study showing the same things about the abuse of alcohol, airplane glue, automobiles, or guns, either. They remain legal.
Meth was, at one time, and still may be, a Schedule II drug. This means it had or has an accepted medical use. For this to be or have ever been the case, there had to be some research showing that meth was, for the purposes for which it was approved, "safe and effective", which amounts to "useful, good, and helpful". In science we don't really test materials for their morality coefficients.
"On the other hand, . . . there is a plethora of evidence to show the down side of
its use,"
--- assuming all use is abuse
" . . . its production,"
--- assuming it remains illegal. made legally, this problem moves to industrial areas where much more dangerous processes are already going on.
" . . . its addictive qualities"
--- we already know of one former user among us who got off it without too much trouble
", . . . the effect on the morals and sensibilities of its addicts"
--- which are none of your business
. . . etc."
--- which is anything you can think up or parrot from DARE.
"There has never, . . . ever, . . . been any research showing any useful, good, moral, helpful result of the abuse of meth."
-- Well, I rather doubt there's been a study showing the same things about the abuse of alcohol, airplane glue, automobiles, or guns, either. They remain legal.
Meth was, at one time, and still may be, a Schedule II drug. This means it had or has an accepted medical use. For this to be or have ever been the case, there had to be some research showing that meth was, for the purposes for which it was approved, "safe and effective", which amounts to "useful, good, and helpful". In science we don't really test materials for their morality coefficients.
"On the other hand, . . . there is a plethora of evidence to show the down side of
its use,"
--- assuming all use is abuse
" . . . its production,"
--- assuming it remains illegal. made legally, this problem moves to industrial areas where much more dangerous processes are already going on.
" . . . its addictive qualities"
--- we already know of one former user among us who got off it without too much trouble
", . . . the effect on the morals and sensibilities of its addicts"
--- which are none of your business
. . . etc."
--- which is anything you can think up or parrot from DARE.
I dont think meth is healthy for people and that we should ignore it or that it should be sold over the counter. I dont think anybody here is advocating meth is a good thing.
I do question the notion that we can make it disssapear by just passing these OTC laws. We might have shut down mom and pop in the short run. As they say money talks. So how long will it be before a bigger organization recruits sellers in the area or some bright person figures out that he can buy bulk below the border and sell that to mom and pop. We have done something to take care of the symptoms at the time but we havent cured the disease.
I do question the notion that we can make it disssapear by just passing these OTC laws. We might have shut down mom and pop in the short run. As they say money talks. So how long will it be before a bigger organization recruits sellers in the area or some bright person figures out that he can buy bulk below the border and sell that to mom and pop. We have done something to take care of the symptoms at the time but we havent cured the disease.
Drugs and Guns
I am not the only one that can share - shared interactions with those with crimianl minds. One I will share.
Juvy Detention center. Young Man age 16 wanted out of the Gang Life he had been involved in since age 12. He was "getting out" and shared with other folks in detention and parents of those in detention and others invited to listen to this young man's story. Part of "getting out" involved assisting Judicial system in "some matters" and educating other youths. Kind of like a Witness Protection Program if you will.
Underage remind you to purchase guns and ammo. We have controls for that in place. So they broke into places and stole them. Drugs, well , backing a stolen tow truck into a Drug Store works quite well.
His stepdad worked hard 40 hrs a week and paid taxes on $10 an hour until shot and killed.
At age 13 this young man made $500 standing on street corner for 4 hours as a lookout for the drug house down the road. Why go to school and get a job, when he made more in 4 hours than his dead stepdad did in 40 hrs and - his money was tax free?
"We made near $10k one weekend. We had stolen a bunch of handguns and run up to Chicago, a stolen Charter Arms .38 brought $300. Some kind of really nice one, brought $1k. Parents, and adults, we gangbangers really like gun control and having to have a "pad" for a med [perscription]. Everything is Controlled against you law types, and everything is controlled for us bangers to steal it. We don't care about laws, does not affect us - actually makes our "bidness" easier....
...now we really got messed up and turned around being high, we thought we were in a place that hated guns, we chose gun controlled areas. Breaking in - less chance getting shot. That old man come running out with shotgun as we tried to steal another tow truck, dangit...we had two drug stores picked out and ready to hit....
We made up for it though, we watched a drug store delivery truck one day, and later figured beating the driver up and stealing from the truck easier than stealing a tow truck and having to drive into a drug store..."
Parents dropped jaws. He was very "expressive" with foul language in gang colors reaching for lower body parts as he spoke. During a smoke break - in which he asked a Marshall if he could smoke...and yeah why not. He was ( I think) sincere about getting his life right.
"Gangs" - yeah you folks got prayer groups , poker night, quilting bees, and bowling leagues. Thems gang stuff too. Just now I am sick and tired of being sick and tired, and getting shot hurts. I will stay a gang member, just never bowled before and when I got to with some Po-lice...I want to live long enough to be in a bowling gang and eat pizza on Fri Night."
Some mother said more control was needed...hated guns and so forth. We are still outside during break...
"Ma'am, ( then he explained how a girl is intiated into his former gang) you don't know what control is now do you?, oh and if I wanted to steal your car, you made it easy, your car is the ____ - you left the keys in it a second ago,and unlocked and even if had not , take me about 10 seconds tops - even with the "control" of it being locked and no keys...all that key and locking does is give YOU a sense of Control against folks like me".
Yep, easier to beat up a truck/ delivery driver to steal drugs. Then easier to follow said truck to distribution center where more drugs are.
He and his gang figured out OTC was not worth it, the narcotics in a drug store not worth the effort vs payoff. Now hitting delivery and distribution sites...that is a different story.
I sure hope he straightened out and got his life together. Facinating young man, and the potential is there - if he just applies it.
Oh...."them Armories , Nat'l guard ones. We got bunch of rifles and "nines" from one of them one night...".
Hit a small town NG armory and took the guns and ammo. These too were under "control" of razor wire, fences, doors, locks...just a long holiday weekend and had at it.
I am not the only one that can share - shared interactions with those with crimianl minds. One I will share.
Juvy Detention center. Young Man age 16 wanted out of the Gang Life he had been involved in since age 12. He was "getting out" and shared with other folks in detention and parents of those in detention and others invited to listen to this young man's story. Part of "getting out" involved assisting Judicial system in "some matters" and educating other youths. Kind of like a Witness Protection Program if you will.
Underage remind you to purchase guns and ammo. We have controls for that in place. So they broke into places and stole them. Drugs, well , backing a stolen tow truck into a Drug Store works quite well.
His stepdad worked hard 40 hrs a week and paid taxes on $10 an hour until shot and killed.
At age 13 this young man made $500 standing on street corner for 4 hours as a lookout for the drug house down the road. Why go to school and get a job, when he made more in 4 hours than his dead stepdad did in 40 hrs and - his money was tax free?
"We made near $10k one weekend. We had stolen a bunch of handguns and run up to Chicago, a stolen Charter Arms .38 brought $300. Some kind of really nice one, brought $1k. Parents, and adults, we gangbangers really like gun control and having to have a "pad" for a med [perscription]. Everything is Controlled against you law types, and everything is controlled for us bangers to steal it. We don't care about laws, does not affect us - actually makes our "bidness" easier....
...now we really got messed up and turned around being high, we thought we were in a place that hated guns, we chose gun controlled areas. Breaking in - less chance getting shot. That old man come running out with shotgun as we tried to steal another tow truck, dangit...we had two drug stores picked out and ready to hit....
We made up for it though, we watched a drug store delivery truck one day, and later figured beating the driver up and stealing from the truck easier than stealing a tow truck and having to drive into a drug store..."
Parents dropped jaws. He was very "expressive" with foul language in gang colors reaching for lower body parts as he spoke. During a smoke break - in which he asked a Marshall if he could smoke...and yeah why not. He was ( I think) sincere about getting his life right.
"Gangs" - yeah you folks got prayer groups , poker night, quilting bees, and bowling leagues. Thems gang stuff too. Just now I am sick and tired of being sick and tired, and getting shot hurts. I will stay a gang member, just never bowled before and when I got to with some Po-lice...I want to live long enough to be in a bowling gang and eat pizza on Fri Night."
Some mother said more control was needed...hated guns and so forth. We are still outside during break...
"Ma'am, ( then he explained how a girl is intiated into his former gang) you don't know what control is now do you?, oh and if I wanted to steal your car, you made it easy, your car is the ____ - you left the keys in it a second ago,and unlocked and even if had not , take me about 10 seconds tops - even with the "control" of it being locked and no keys...all that key and locking does is give YOU a sense of Control against folks like me".
Yep, easier to beat up a truck/ delivery driver to steal drugs. Then easier to follow said truck to distribution center where more drugs are.
He and his gang figured out OTC was not worth it, the narcotics in a drug store not worth the effort vs payoff. Now hitting delivery and distribution sites...that is a different story.
I sure hope he straightened out and got his life together. Facinating young man, and the potential is there - if he just applies it.
Oh...."them Armories , Nat'l guard ones. We got bunch of rifles and "nines" from one of them one night...".
Hit a small town NG armory and took the guns and ammo. These too were under "control" of razor wire, fences, doors, locks...just a long holiday weekend and had at it.
invention_45
New member
Talk about your demonization.
I realize that meth seems to be the bogeyman of the day. But I just checked the DEA website that shows exactly what's in what schedules.
Methamphetamine is only in Schedule II if it's in injectable form.
Methamphetamine is otherwise in Schedule III, along with amphetamine.
By definition, methamphetamine is only even "bad for you" some of the time. If there were no studies, no legitimate medical use (things that would make it GOOD for you), it could not remain in Schedule III.
So now we have a situation. Let's put aside for a moment that methamphetamine is the devil's drug, in other words, take away all the biblical worry that somebody might use it for fun.
What we are left with is two possibilities. Here they are.
1 -----
Make this useless, deadly (Schedule III) drug legal. Dow and Monsanto will make it in places you'll never get within 100 miles of, and they will do this with the same efficiency with which they make aspirin. Legally produced meth will be QC'd and of known strength and purity. Every single tabletop lab will vanish within two weeks. They'll be without a customer. As long as it's listed, it can be added to foods. Soft drinks will contain it in small amounts. It'll be used like coffee, and will be every bit as safe. You'll buy it in Publix and Piggly-Wiggly, not on a seedy street corner. You say no? Cite me proven deaths from methamphetamine. Not "ER Mentions". Death certificates.
2 -----
Keep it illegal. Those wanting it will get it. They'll get it from new tabletop labs using a different process. Chances are the new process will be more dangerous than the current ones are, because they will have to MAKE stuff they now BUY, adding more steps. When a truck driver buys his weeks worth of "good meth" he gets used to it. Since there's no QC, let's say the next weeks' worth is heavily cut with an inactive substance. Now this driver of a 20-ton rig is tailgating you at 85 mph and his "bad meth" allows him to fall asleep. And instead of your kid being able to drink a cold Mountain Dew Plus, if he wants to get a few kicks he'll have to risk his life in a dangerous neighborhood and ingesting unknown materials.
Which do you prefer? I like option 1. It has the added benefit of restoring some of my constitutional rights.
I realize that meth seems to be the bogeyman of the day. But I just checked the DEA website that shows exactly what's in what schedules.
Methamphetamine is only in Schedule II if it's in injectable form.
Methamphetamine is otherwise in Schedule III, along with amphetamine.
By definition, methamphetamine is only even "bad for you" some of the time. If there were no studies, no legitimate medical use (things that would make it GOOD for you), it could not remain in Schedule III.
So now we have a situation. Let's put aside for a moment that methamphetamine is the devil's drug, in other words, take away all the biblical worry that somebody might use it for fun.
What we are left with is two possibilities. Here they are.
1 -----
Make this useless, deadly (Schedule III) drug legal. Dow and Monsanto will make it in places you'll never get within 100 miles of, and they will do this with the same efficiency with which they make aspirin. Legally produced meth will be QC'd and of known strength and purity. Every single tabletop lab will vanish within two weeks. They'll be without a customer. As long as it's listed, it can be added to foods. Soft drinks will contain it in small amounts. It'll be used like coffee, and will be every bit as safe. You'll buy it in Publix and Piggly-Wiggly, not on a seedy street corner. You say no? Cite me proven deaths from methamphetamine. Not "ER Mentions". Death certificates.
2 -----
Keep it illegal. Those wanting it will get it. They'll get it from new tabletop labs using a different process. Chances are the new process will be more dangerous than the current ones are, because they will have to MAKE stuff they now BUY, adding more steps. When a truck driver buys his weeks worth of "good meth" he gets used to it. Since there's no QC, let's say the next weeks' worth is heavily cut with an inactive substance. Now this driver of a 20-ton rig is tailgating you at 85 mph and his "bad meth" allows him to fall asleep. And instead of your kid being able to drink a cold Mountain Dew Plus, if he wants to get a few kicks he'll have to risk his life in a dangerous neighborhood and ingesting unknown materials.
Which do you prefer? I like option 1. It has the added benefit of restoring some of my constitutional rights.
Sorry you fill that way Harley. Words mean something. When discussing anything to do with the Constitution, we should use the words that are used therein. And we should use the words as they were meant, then. Not now. Fail to do this and we fail to understand the Constitution. We see this in many of the opinions put out by the Supreme Court.Harley Quinn said:
Justice Scalia operates this way when it suits him. Justice Thomas operates this way each and every time. There have been times I have disagreed with Thomas, but only until I stop and really think through what he has said, and research his opinions.
That is the way I look at Constitutional issues. If that is too anal for you, then sorry, but I really believe it to be the only way to discuss these issues.
No, I'm pretty transparent about what I am after. I stated in the other thread that if gun nuts want their unfettered rights to own guns, they should be willing to allow the rest of the citizenry the right to do what they wish. Anything else is hypocritical.
The issues I am trying to deal with here are actually larger than the issues of gun bans or drug bans. You were aware that if you grow your own wheat, solely for your own consumption, you could be fined? Are you aware many other things, seemingly innocent things, that if done would result in fines and/or jail time, if the federal laws were strictly enforced?
So Harley, give it to me straight. Put it right out on the table. What is it that you suspect my "agenda" to be?
Since consumption has not been affected, then meth production must be taking place elsewhere, yes?Fremmer said:
My statement remains true. Production and consumption have not been adversely affected. Correlation does not imply causation. All that one can say for sure is that while local production may have been affected, such effect has been negligible upon the overall consumption pattern.
Not according to the DEA:liliysdad said:
Whom am I supposed to believe? You or the DEA?
I am not disparaging what you say liliysdad, really I'm not. I actually tend to believe you more than the DEA. You are much closer to the problem. But in the propaganda wars, who will the Public, and more importantly, your Legislators believe? Who will your superiors side with, when Federal funds hang in the balance?
The simple fact of the matter is that you and other officers on the line will be ignored. Make a big enough stink about this and you will be out of a job. That is the political ramifications of the day.