Lawmaker wants to ban drugs like Sudafed

associated press ^ | January 10, 2005

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

You wrote:

Other drugs have potential side effects and only someone with medical training will know if it is safe for a person to take or mix with other medications.


Let's hear it for Epocrates!!

[digitalbrownshirt]

I don't like signing for the sudafed, but it's not like it's banned here in Oklahoma. It's just not out on the floor where a would-be cook could just shoplift a case of them. I buy two packages at a time, so I don't have to go back as often.

Bottom line, meth labs busts are down 75% in Oklahoma, and 60% in Oklahoma County (OKC). Either the cops aren't doing as good a job this year, or the number of labs has gone down.

[Servant of the 9]

Our legislature took that tactic in trying to reduce this drug ingredient that the criminals use for meth labs. It is a pain but worth it if it puts a dent in the meth labs.

Yes, but it doesn't.

SO9

[Lijahsbubbe]

I say we ban anything that we have caught State Senators abusing.

[zeugma]

Sudafed is one of the few things that actually helps with my sinuses.

Ya. Sudafed and Actifed are my favs when I get stuffy. It clears me up so fast it ain't funny. I wasn't aware that it was an ingredient of Meth, but I'm not suprised at all. My scalp tingles after taking an actifed.

I'm heartened to see that there are very few jackboots supporting this move on this thread (so far at least). There are a few that manage to support anything that the police state does though. I often wonder why they consider themselves 'conservative'.

[goldstategop]

For instance, John Duncan of Oklahoma's Bureau Of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Check out Monday's Los Angeles Times which has a front page story on the meth lab epidemic.

[radicalamericannationalist]

Please explain where the Constitution says that a state government cannot regulate narcotics.

[zeugma]

What you described is frigenting indeed. Sounds like a bad combination of power hungr politicians and sheeple mized together to brew up really bad law. If you look at it closely, I think you'll find that the reason Indianapolis has so few busts is because the city is pretty much a criminal enterprise itself. From what I understand, it's one of the most corrupt places in the country.</P>

[thoughtomator]

The state governments can... but this is the result of the federal WoD, not some wild coincidence. Banning alcohol led to moonshine, banning cocaine led to crack, banning speed led to meth. Now they are going to ban Sudafed? Like someone isn't going to just mail-order a crate of the stuff anyway? Then what... search the mail to make sure none gets through?

[radicalamericannationalist]

First you say that laws against drugs are beyond the state's authority. Now you admit that you were wrong but it's all the fault of a federal government conspiracy. Or do you really argue that in the absence of a federal ban on meth that the states would legalize it?

And as to your argument that folks will simply mail order a crate of the stuff. f this were possible, why aren;t they doing it now? One would think such bulk purchases would be cheaper than buying sudephedrine products retail?

[redheadtoo]

I believe they should make all drugs over the counter, and just have information packets sold with the medications.

Vioxx, as you probably already know, has been removed from the market because a few people had serious side effects. This has caused my stepmother a great deal of pain. For two years she had taken Vioxx for her arthritis. Now she takes another medication that is not nearly as effective. She says that she would be willing to take the risk. However she has had that choice taken away from her.

[bootless]

Hell, no! It's one of the very few anti-congestion things I can take and still be conscious enough to fly!

[cherry]

this makes me mad as well....

I have to actually PAY for my medical insurance and PAY huge medicare taxes so others can NOT PAY and yet, I still have some deductable for doctors visits and medicines....

so I try to limit how often I go to the doctor and try to avoid prescriptions...

yet now, it seems like they want me to be pestering the doctor more and they want me running into the emergency room for simple colds and sinus headaches....

why can't I treat my simple symptoms myself with some very inexpensive over the counters like plain old Sudafed, or its generic cousins....

BTW....it is always better to take only the medicines you need whenever you are sick....putting Sudafed in with other medicines seems to me to be bad policy....

[freepatriot32]

Clerk Convicted Of Selling Meth Ingredient (10 Bottles of Cold Medicine Could Bring 10 Years)

[thoughtomator]

I did not say that. I was speaking of the larger context in which this story plays out.

I can see some states legalizing it, but that's beside the point. This Quixotic crusade to stop people from doing drugs backfires horribly because it is that very crusade itself which makes the drugs so attractive to a large portion of the users.

In the absence of such a policy, a certain number of people would still do it, but the number would be far fewer than today.

You ask why a meth lab wouldn't mail order Sudafed or other precursors even without a ban, and the probable reason why they don't is because it's more convenient to pick it up at a pharmacy or corner store. Ban the sale of Sudafed in town, and they'll get it elsewhere. Ban it from the entire state, and they'll smuggle it in at great profit.

The only way to fight the drug dealers is to take the money out of drugs. Most drugs that people get high on are dirt cheap to make, it's only prohibition that makes it a profitable business. While this state senator may fashion himself a rescuer, the fact is that he is the best of friends to the fiends in the labs. And so are all the holier-than-thou prohibitionists.

[Tall_Texan]

I would not support an outright ban and think it would create greater harm than good. It appears to be like using a bazooka to cure a blister.

If they want to make it a controlled substance again where a prescription is needed, I could grudginly live with that but an outright ban or having to buy them one pill at a time is downright ridiculous.

There's a lot of stronger stuff out there than people can get a 30-day supply with a prescription just about whenever they need it. I can't fathom the need to make psuedophedrine more controlled than that.

And if you want to gauge the success of such a law, you shouldn't base it on drug labs closed, you should base it on how many fewer cases of meth addiction you are treating. Let's see *those* numbers before declaring any such law a success.

[oyez]

Sudafed is worthless.

[Mad Mammoth]

No, I didn't miss it. I just thought it was outweighed by the two previous sentences

I'll try to be more fair and balanced next time.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Pretty soon practically everything will be illegal. I could make a fortune just by selling aspirin alone!

[Military family member]

Now that my man Mitch is in Office, maybe that will change.

I keep asking the question, do we have more meth here , or just better drug enforcement?

I know most of the task force, and these guys are sharp and hard working.