Meth, Sudafed and Gun Laws (Part II)

Let me add that I have had some serious problems lately with....(drumroll)...
a meth user.

If anybody knows how badly meth can stir up somebody who's already nuts, it's me.

If anybody would have benefitted from its being unavailable, it's me. And I do mean GREATLY benefitted.

But meth, despite its mere Schedule III status, is WIDELY available. The people who get their hands on it do so in a very uncontrolled way, illegally.

Let's suppose that the stats say nothing one way or the other. Same number of users illegal or not. Illegal, the users are guaranteed to be connected to the underbelly of the world. Legal, the users are getting them from people who will give them disapproving looks when they come in to buy looking trashed.

Legal, dangerous labs are in industrial parks. Illegal, they could be next door. Make Sudafed hard to get, and there's a good chance that what follows will happen.

Sudafed is used because it contains the basics of meth and only needs a little rearrangement. However, ephedrine or pseudoephedrine are not complex compounds. They can be made from simpler compounds. Or P2P, another alternative starting chemical, can be made from simpler compounds. Or another yet-unrevealed starting compound can be used. That's how organic chemistry works.

So somebody will find a process that uses common (but still dangerous) materials to make the ephedrine or pseudo or P2P or the new starting compound. Who knows what dangers this process will pose. Nearly none of the techniques for building up organic molecules is gentle.

Then, once that dangerous process is done, the home lab still has to do the dangerous process NOW being done to get meth.

As long as Toluene or Xylene are for sale at the hardware store, somebody can find a way to get them to turn into meth. The process, though I don't know it, will absolutely involve something very nasty like bromine, cyanide (gas) or phosgene.

Then we're going to be faced with outlawing toluene and xylene. At the very least, there will no longer be shelves containing gallons of the stuff at Home Depot. You'll have to sign for it.

With chemistry, it is truly never-ending.

A lot of police departments have websites. Some of them list things to look for when you suspect a neighbor might be running a meth lab. You can verify what I'm saying here yourself. The stranger items are:

lithium batteries
stained coffee filters
matchbook covers
starting fluid (whatever that is)
aluminum foil
sweet aromatic smells
smells like cat urine

As for your comments that anybody coming at you who's on meth will be in for some hurt, well, I'm the last person to disagree with that one. Anybody coming at me, meth or no, will be in for some hurt.

And regarding convenience stores, well, I don't go there. I have always felt creepy in them, and it's just as quick to run into a Publix. Same for liquor stores and check cashing stores.

Antipitas is trying to put things into terms of the erosion of rights and to make a parallel with gun laws, from what I can see.

I am trying to flesh out what he's saying, and hopefully I'm making the same point a different way.

We are ensnaring ourselves every day more and more deeply into a web of laws created to protect ourselves from those dangerous drugs and their users. The problem is that the only danger they pose is in the minds of those who swallow the propaganda of the Partnership for a Drug Free America, just like the only danger from guns and their users is in the minds of those who swallow the propaganda of the Brady Bunch.

Yes, there are people who should not have guns. There are laws in place to stop those people from doing harm without restricting the availability of guns to the rest of us. And there are people who should not have drugs. There are laws in place to stop them from doing harm withough restricting the availability of drugs (and, eventually, it seems, of everything else).
 
Close contact of the worst kind.

Invention_45 and Antipitas,

If that is the direction you are both going (as 45 said and just recently antipitas) I feel it is one of the things that are not changeable.
Good Luck.

Hundreds of law makers sitting around trying to protect you from yourself or how to best relieve you of your money.

Pretty cynical but that is my thoughts.

Look what is happening right now as I type, the endless politicing. For politicing only is the way I see it. No middle ground with some of these people, and they get in and you can't hardly get them out.

Showing up every time their is a change in the govt. It's seriously bad.

The Brady bunch is just one of them, there are hundreds that are vieing to take their place. Brady is just doing what he did best before he was injured just shifted a little.

We are a very greedy society, and with that you need some form of regulating, unfortunate but true.

HQ
 
"too late....."

Don't I know it!



"Controlled substances are highly regulated. If you have chronic pain you will have to find a doctor who does chronic pain managment. Everytime you get a prescription of a controlled substance that information goes to the DEA who actually tracks what doctors prescribe. That has made some doctors fearful of prescribing some controlled substances on a regular basis."

Ten years ago the shells of most of my molars (the rest were huge fillings from childhood) started to come apart. I started to have a series of root canals/crowns to save the teeth, such as they were.

Root canals can get painful between visits. Real painful. After the first time, I insisted that my dentist give me Percocet (Rush's favorite) between visits until the swelling was down and the nerves were gone.

I had 8 root canals, so I consumed a LOT of Percocet.

Near the end of all this, I sat in the dentist chair one day and my dentist quipped that he was getting calls from the DEA. I could tell he was only half-joking. He continued to prescribe the Percocet, but I think he mentioned it because he knew that 8 root canals in a short time was unusual and feared the DEA looking at him for it. If he were a jerk, he could have cut me off or cut back, leaving me in at least some pain.

My freedom and ability to get proper medical treatment that I am willing to pay for is more important than protecting Rush from becoming an addict.

It's worth noting that after about 650 Percocet pills, when the root canals were all done, I never craved or needed another single one.

There are those who would say I should just "grin and bear it". To them there's really nothing else to say other than "take an aeronautical sexual intercourse at a rotating circular pastry".
 
Some will remember me doing this, I ask you to bear with me for the benefit of the newer members.

Do we really want to live in a society that restricts or prohibits anything or everything that can be abused? The vast majority of citizens will obey the laws. It has always been a very few that will ignore them. These are the criminals. They are criminals because they ignore law. No amount of additional laws will stop them. Punish them, not the law-abiding citizen.
Click to expand...

I am an older Student, and just my Luck I had an instructor originally from the UK.
I mean everything this Eng Lit put on the syllabus had "her slant" - which is fine, she has a right to her beliefs. I have a right to my beliefs - such as my Rights.

"If the US would do as my home country would do we would get rid of crimes. Just see how we deal with drugs, guns, terrorism...etc."

Okay, I can do this, I mean I have a right to express my views, all I have to do is give her the answers to test questions she wants - get a grade and go on...

I started with Drugs and brought in Cites in regard to Aspirin being abused and bleeding ulcers, patients undergoing surgery and not clotting, and included my fun experience of learning by surprise that I was allergic to Aspirin [anaphalatic shock was not fun].

Now she also said "Guns are bad and at least put a lock on them until they are all gone".

So I mentioned that is it the intent of a user - not the tool. Being the student, I was "incorrect" of course.

Fire extinguishers are a useful tool. So I obtained some small kitchen sized ones, and demonstrated with some fellow students also feeling the way I do...
I could hurt a student by hitting them with one, I could cause eye damage if sprayed directly into eyes, ...etc.

Then put a gun lock on the fire extinguisher, and one of my demonstrations in the classroom was tossing a peice of colored construction paper to represent a trash can fire.

:D

There is something very satisfying in hearing a Anti with UK Accent trying to get a locked fire extinguisher into action

"<cuss> if the bloody thing did not have a lock on it I could put out this fire..."

"Yes ma'am, then again the lock is for protecting kids from hurting themselves, prevents the fire extinguisher from being used to hit someone , spray them in eyes..."

"If I need the <cuss> bloody thing to save a kid I do not have time to undo a lock..."

"Really? Then whom is responsible for one's self and teaching a child?"

Folks from the UK cussing is quite amusing to a Southern Boy *grin*

I took a letter grade hit in that class as we did not see eye to eye. It was worth it. See at the beginning of the semester the room was divided, very few of us on the Pro Gun /Less Gov't meddling side of the room. Comes semesters end more folks on the Pro Gun / Less Gov't side.

Classmates went shooting for the first time, some obtained CCW. So a letter grade hit and being out for fire extinguishers - it was worth it IMO.

Instuctor just had to share about her weekend, she turned green when "her" students shared about going shooting. Some of these had formerly backed her up.

"Why is there a gun lock on my umbrella?"

"Would not want it to to just jump up and poke someone's eye out - just protects you from that happening is all...someone getting hurt..."

Pretty sure we ruined her fun weekend in about the first 10 min of class.

Use Enough Stubborness
 
Meth. Guns and Glory..

Hi all,
This just happened in the town of Elk Grove Ca.

It is not unusual it happens daily many times across the US of A

One of the reasons I am against Meth, and I am for Law Enforcement.
Brave people put their life on the line all the time.

Edited by Antipitas: Harley's story can be found here.
 
A story of one loser does not an argument make -- not with regard to this topic at least.

What does it prove?
Is the meth to blame?
Is the coward to blame?
Is his wife to blame?
Is his employer to blame?

If anything it proves that the laws in place are not working.
 
Relax? Do I seem high strung? Sorry if you are taking my post(s) that way -- it's unintentional.

Thousands of these stories a month.
Click to expand...
Further proof that criminalizing does not solve the problem.
 
Harley, believe it or not, I agree that there is no simple answer.

However, do you really think the anwer lies in diminshing our own control for that of the Government?

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." George Washington, speech of January 7, 1790 in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790.
 
Harley,

The point is we have probably have hundreds of laws on the books against drug use. Yet we hear horror stories everyday about drugs and tragedy. If we cant enforce the laws on the books already how are new laws that effect only law abiding citizens going to work.

The big problem is the sheer amount of revenue illegal drugs generate. As long as there are big bucks in it you will always find greedy and power hungry folks to push the stuff. As long as the money is there new rules and law will be bypassed.

Another piece of the puzzle is our bordens which are easily bypassed. If we cant control our borders the problem is never going to be controlled.

What about drug consumption. These heavy duty drug users will do anything to get a fix.

Tell me how a law that effects OTC Sudafed is going to fix all that. The more new laws we pass are like poking your fingers in the dike with each new leak. Pretty soon you run out of fingers and the dam collapses.

The answer to this issue is complex and is going to require us to look past the trees at the beginning of the forest and to look deep into the middle of the forest.
 
Abuse vs Use

I'm seeing a lot of posts in this thread that say that abuse of drugs, meth in particular, is bad. With that I must agree. Abuse of any drug, or anything else, tends to create problems. However: not all use is abuse.

The idea with the push for drug (marijuana mostly) legalization is that moderated use will take the place of abuse and the dangers associated with it. Legalization will also help assure safe manufacturing processes (booby traps in corn fields anyone?), and quality control in products. I can't guarntee this is an accureate assessment, but what we have right now does not seem to be working particularly well.

Guns are much the same. Several Denny's in CA have lately shown that the abuse of firearms is irresponsible and dangerous. However responsible firearm use saves lives every day through things like home defence and concealed carry.
 
I'm gonna head this one off at the pass...

This thread is about several things, but legalization or decriminalization of currently illicit drugs is not one of them. Whether or not I or anyone agrees or disagrees with that issue is irrelevant to this particular thread.

Let's not get sidetracked.
 
Antipitas, I know. I think it is a good thread

Just saw the story and the correlation thought I would let others see the information.

It is truly a sad situation. The sensless killing and the glory (heroic) of the officers.
Just thought it was worthy of this thread.

We have a very bad problem in the No. Ca area regarding Meth. I believe it goes to the old location of the Hells Angles and because of its central location in the No state. I think one of the reasons I am so against the idea of relaxing the control but what you say is correct and I will copy to this what you mentioned.

Antipitas wrote:

Harley, believe it or not, I agree that there is no simple answer.

However, do you really think the anwer lies in diminshing our own control for that of the Government?

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." George Washington, speech of January 7, 1790 in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790.
__________________

Or first President was right on.


HQ
 
Not saying that drugs themselves are the issue, just trying to define some terms.

I agree that the drug legalization issue does not belong on a firearm forum.

However, placing the sudafed behind the counter to prevent meth manucafture seems almost as practical as K-mart no longer selling handgun caliber ammuntion after Columbine.

Other sources abound for both, and both measures seem to do little more than make lawyers/politicians feel good.
 
BigFunWMU said:
However, placing the sudafed behind the counter to prevent meth manucafture seems almost as practical as K-mart no longer selling handgun caliber ammuntion after Columbine.
Click to expand...
By George! I think you've got it! :D

We have thousands of laws, both state and federal, that deal with the unlawful use of firearms. Likewise there are as many laws dealing with illicit drugs. Can't say that it's helped in either case.

I can say the further restrictions on our freedoms, regardless of what the law attempts to address, won't do any more good than the current level of laws.
 
The real problem is that nobody stops to think about things. Well, few at least.

The vast majority of the populace eats down whatever is said in the media as fact. So all an interested party has to do is find some hot buttons (guns, drugs) and they can get the people all hot and bothered.

Then they offer some "relief" in the form of new laws and they're elected.

I repeat what I have quoted elsewhere. Even though it was written by a '60s icon, Grace Slick, it pretty much sums up the situation.


Don't feel so badly
about current anxiety
About your frustration,
emotional uncertainty.
That's the way you're supposed to feel,
that's the way they want you to feel.
Dissatisfaction,
dissatisfaction.
Massive demoralization,
family unit break down.
You are supposed to believe
that war is imminent.
That crime soars
and chaos prevails.
And then they give you a moment
of sweet, sweet peace.
And you become so happy
you don't send them to jail!

-- from "Over the Line", Grace Slick (gun owner)

That pretty much sums it up. Stir the pot, create factions, and use it to make laws that seem to relieve the strife you yourself generated. Then use the laws to make everybody sing your tune.

Works with guns.
Works with drugs.
Works with prostitution.
Works with gambling.

The constitution and bill of rights was designed to limit this. But it has been stomped flat.
 
Business, big business, and bigger business

Hi,
Grace Slick was there to stir the pot and I remember the turbulance on the streets of the time frame.

Heroin, seconal, alcohol were out there doing their thing.

Of the 3 Alcohol was probably the less of the evils at the time. But for the reason of tv and advertisment and drug control and laws against the other 2 we still have Alcohol and it is tearing up our society.

Along comes #13 and off we go Felony to own a joint. Relaxed the rules and what do we still have Gangland killings and plenty of problems with the evil weed.

The reason I mention these drugs, they are all supposed to be something that makes you relaxed.

Throw away relax and add Meth. LOL. We are talking messed up.

Add that to the party and the other items can be consumed more often and then you can get yourself going with a little meth and keep right on running until you hit the wall, go to sleep or commit some major atrocity.

Get yourself a gun or two and go out and shoot people just for the fun of it because you are having a bad time within your own head.

Go to an area that has the people in it that you dislike and shoot them randomly. If it is a gang related incident or not it is still something that is used for courage.
Wonderful. Give it to your Warriors and see how well that works.

We hear about the ones that are making the headlines, there are thousands of other crimes that are being committed that you don't hear about.

I remember a guy who went tripping on LSD and had not taken it for quite a while. He decided to go on a diet. The LSD was in a few of the fat cells that the body decided to use that it had stored and boom he is running over rabbits on the roadway. The Problem was the rabbits just happened to be people.

Anyway back to sudafed and putting it on the shelf. Not a big infringment IMO.

HQ
 
Grace Slick was there to stir the pot and I remember the turbulance on the streets of the time frame.
Click to expand...

At that time, that particular pot needed stirring so we'd remove ourselves from that boondoggle, Vietnam.



Of the 3 Alcohol was probably the less of the evils at the time. But for the reason of tv and advertisment and drug control and laws against the other 2 we still have Alcohol and it is tearing up our society.
Click to expand...

I'd say it has more to do with those who were in power and liked alcohol more than they liked drugs.




Along comes #13 and off we go Felony to own a joint. Relaxed the rules and what do we still have Gangland killings and plenty of problems with the evil weed.
Click to expand...

Gangland killings are the result of pot being BANNED, not of the pot itself. They don't kill each other over the pot. They kill each other over the MONEY that they make because they are handling black market items.





Throw away relax and add Meth. LOL. We are talking messed up.
Click to expand...

Remember the phrase "speed kills"? That wasn't a DARE slogan. It was started within the drug-user community. As I remember, friends I had who were into drugs wouldn't touch the stuff. The public's attitude seemed relatively relaxed (compared to the last 15 years) about other drugs, like pot, so why kill yourself with meth?

Given today's anti-drug hysteria, legally, you might as well do meth as smoke pot. Pot's on Schedule I. Meth's on Schedule III. So, let's say you are intent on partying on some drug or another. Meth is readily available because it is what turned out to be easy to make. You might prefer pot, which would be less likely to make you hurt somebody, but pot sort of stinks and getting caught is easier. Also, pot stays in your body longer so workplace drug testing is more likely to catch your pot use than your meth use. So you pick meth, a more dangerous substance, in most people's view.




Add that to the party and the other items can be consumed more often and then you can get yourself going with a little meth and keep right on running until you hit the wall, go to sleep or commit some major atrocity.

Get yourself a gun or two and go out and shoot people just for the fun of it because you are having a bad time within your own head.

Go to an area that has the people in it that you dislike and shoot them randomly. If it is a gang related incident or not it is still something that is used for courage.
Wonderful. Give it to your Warriors and see how well that works.

We hear about the ones that are making the headlines, there are thousands of other crimes that are being committed that you don't hear about.
Click to expand...

In the '50s, they used to give speed (benzedrine, dexedrine) to housewives. Where were all the ax murders?



I remember a guy who went tripping on LSD and had not taken it for quite a while. He decided to go on a diet. The LSD was in a few of the fat cells that the body decided to use that it had stored and boom he is running over rabbits on the roadway. The Problem was the rabbits just happened to be people.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, this sounds like an urban legend. Just exactly how did you determine that the LSD was in his fat cells and returned to his brain when he was losing weight?



Anyway back to sudafed and putting it on the shelf. Not a big infringment IMO.
Click to expand...

Other than that it will spur somebody to work out the sort of synthesis I described in an earlier post, more dangerous than the one starting with Sudafed.

Other than that it will put your name on a list somewhere just because you happen to need Sudafed for a sinus headache. And then there will be a screwup (that never happens, does it?) and somehow your name will get transferred from that list to a "no fly" list or onto a bench warrant by mistake.

Other than that there are a lot of people who see bullets and guns as more dangerous than Sudafed pills and will use that comparison to help relieve you of you RKBA.
 
Like I said in another post you are not that well read.

IMHO any way.
Sudafed is also very bad for the men, along with meth, it is bad for the prostate.

HQ
 
I have heard that, too. But it's an old medicine with lots of use, and taken as directed (i.e., not every day for 10 years) it's not gonna hurt you unless you have certain types of circulatory problems (listed on the package).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top