I am totally horrified at most DUers attitudes about meth!

[eeyore]

I have posted about meth many times on DU, and have started a number of threads about it as well. I live in Oregon, a state where the problem has reached epidemic proportions and continues to grow. I can take a drive to certain parts of town and within minutes find a person whose life is beyond fucked up by meth.

I've tried to educate people about the problems that meth causes: the incredible property crime it creates, the abused and neglected children of addicts, the burden placed on social workers and law enforcement, the environmental dangers of meth houses.

Nearly every time meth comes up, so comes up the chorus of people who argue that if we just legalized all drugs everything would be fine. This is nothing but an intellectual wank-off! We've got real problems that need real solutions right here in my neighborhood. Legalization is a hazy utopian fantasy that will not happen any time soon in this country. Get over it! Put down the fucking bong long enough to look at the possiblility that there is such thing as a drug that has no possible redeeming value. And, yes, I smoke pot and drink.

Oregon recently put Sudafed and all other drugs containing pseudoephedrine behind the counter. Just take a look at the reactions to a proposed national bill that was posted about over in LBN. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2151418

Does the subject of meth turn people into insane self-serving Libertarians, or do they just come out for the meth threads? Do people really believe that doing absolutely nothing about meth is the best solution to the problem? How is it that all people can seem to talk about in regards to meth legislation is how it limits their personal rights? Are people really that selfish and paranoid that they can't see the logic behind making the most common ingredient in cooking meth more difficult for cooks to acquire?

I just don't get where DUers are coming from on this. But wait your turn, because it will affect you at some point, then maybe you'll get it. I hope it never affects your life, but I do hope you eventually get it for the sake of the lives that are ruined by it in my city, state, and neighborhood daily.

[Teaser]

1. So if I said

Give me Librium or Give me Meth,

it would be UNCOOL, right?

[babylonsister]

6. Yep, you teaser!

:spank: :spank:

[FatDave]

190. No, it would be hilarious (nt)

[RagingInMiami]

2. Pot is one thing

But meth is one of the worst drugs out there, if not the worst.

[Katherine Brengle]

14. Yes, ill health effects and...

the likelihood of accidents for people who have been smoking pot are similar to those of alcohol and tobacco smoking, so this is one drug I can understand legalizing. Everything else is just too damn dangerous.

I don't think anyone ever committed a violent crime or anything like that while under the influence of marijuana... Taco Bell, beware, but if it was sold legally with the same restrictions as alcohol (as far as age requirements and driving under the influence), it would save a lot of people a lot of headaches and bring some nice tax dollars into the states to cover recovery programs for people with serious drug addictions.

[corkhead]

148. If the good ones would be legalized, the "invisible hand"

of "market forces" would drive the meth producers out of business.

I'm not sure if this is :sarcasm: or not

[RagingInMiami]

157. I really doubt that

I'm all for legalization of marijuana, but I honestly believe it would have no effect on meth use. It's not like people can't buy pot easily right now.

In Amsterdam, even though you can buy several types of marijuana and hash in coffeeshops, heroin and cocaine is readily available on the streets.

[HEyHEY]

3. I agree

People don't understand that this is the kind of drug that FUCKS people but good. It's not like Pot, or booze. Yes, you would cut out the black market for it and shut down labs through legalization.
However, you still aren't dealing with the problem of pie-eyed people walking around and cutting their own balls off then running down the street screaming. Besides, government meth wouldn't be as strong and so you probably would still see a market for harder meth.
As for a "Meth centre" or some place for them to do it, it's not like heroin. People LOSE their minds on the shit, putting them all in a room together would just be a powderkeg.

[eeyore]

7. Good god, sanity exists!

Thank you, HEyHEY. You're the most rational person I've found on DU when it comes to this issue.

:toast:

[antistoic]

12. re

If meth were legalized I doubt the government would be responsible for its production in the capitalist economy we live in. Which means that whatever the majority of people want the pharmaceutical companies would create.

The problem is still in the people, the drug is not innately evil.

[donheld]

16. Welcome to DU antistoic

:hi:

[antistoic]

23. Thanks

I've been here since the last election, just not talkative. You guys are a great resource. *thumbs up*

[Rebelry]

160. ? The drug is not innately evil?

I've yet to see a positive/medicinal use of meth. If it's out there, please illuminate me.

A drug is a drug, but not all drugs are created equal- and some drugs, like meth, are incredibly dangerous - even to a first time user.

true, it's the person who makes the choice to use or not, but that doesn't mean we should make incredibly damaging/dangerous drugs legal or easily available.

Reb

PS Welcome to DU :)

[SPKrazy]

226. The CIA Has Certainly Been Interested In It

Meth producers have been approached by CIA in my area to try making different formulas to see how they work. Kind of like human guinea pigs, which the Meth heads were all too eager to try.

Apparently they made some pretty good product, as some of these folks started mysteriously being killed off.


Maybe this was all just Meth paranoia that was being spread around, but I heard it from people who were not Meth heads that knew of people that had talked about this and ended up death.

[High Plains]

301. self-delete. Message in wrong spot.

[High Plains]

302. Yes, meth has legitimate medical uses.

It's a Schedule II drug under the Controlled Substances Act.

Sold under the brand name Desoxyn.

Read more at http://www.healthsquare.com/newrx/des1613.htm

Imputing something like "evil" to a chemical compound is silly.

[BBradley]

304. Thank you.

Meth isn't evil, it's just a thing. Addiction is the problem, and there's always going to be something to be addicted to. It used to be Crack. Then it was Heroin. This decade it's meth, and next decade we'll have a new bogeyman. It's just the way it works.

[roguevalley]

58. my niece works for the police department in Oregon and the

meth heads are unbelievable. She says they pull parts of their faces off, their faces rot, their teeth rot, they are nuts. Their children are completely fogotten. Totally, unbelievably bad.

[XemaSab]

4. I agree with you

Meth is a problem that I think many people here don't realize the scope of.

I live in Redding, and in order to see the ravages of meth, I only need to go around the corner from my house.

The war on drugs is problematic, but letting our rural communities be destroyed is untenable.

[eeyore]

11. Oh, Redding....

Yeah, you know exactly where I'm coming from.

Watch this documentary if you get the chance - it's really interesting.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/

[JHB]

136. I saw that (the Frontline program on meth)...

... which was a wakeup call.

I think the main reason some people have the "just leagalize everything" is that after decades of "Reefer Madness"- and "crack baby"-scare'em stories, they mistakenly think ALL the horror stories are rooted in bullshit.

That, and the fact that it's worst effects are (so far) taking place outside the big media centers.

[Uncle Joe]

199. I have never seen anyone age so fast

as the meth users in that Frontline episode, it was startling.

[mom cat]

194. thanks for the link. this is a must watch.

[kineneb]

250. problems with meth here

as in lots of rural CA counties. We are in Lake Co. and there has long been a meth problem here, with both users and labs.

Incidently, Redding is my hometown. :hi:
I didn't want to move back because of the heat, and too much family. (I like my family...about 2.5+ hours away...)

We need to remember the line from the 60's: Speed Kills.

[antistoic]

5. meth

I would say that no, the united states as it is right now is now ready for the legalisation of meth. But that it is a viable option somewhere down the road. What needs to be there first is a much higher level of education and intelligence.

If all drugs were legalized and I was every person in the country, I know it wouldnt be an issue, because I am smart enough not to abuse drugs to the point of harm.

[EFerrari]

119. Careful. Substance abuse is no respector of I.Q.

Most of the heroin addicts I've known are quite brilliant.

And the meth addict in my family has an I.Q. over 160.

So, no, you don't "know" that, unfortunately.

[eeyore]

176. Mine too.

My brother is fucking brilliant. He tweaked himself out of an $80,000/year job and ended up with a 12 year prison sentence for paralyzing a 19 year old woman in a head on car crash. IQ has nothing to do with it.

[EFerrari]

184. I'm so sorry. I'm more or less in constant prayer over

my kid. Here's hoping today works out. :hug:

[arcane1]

202. same here, one of the smartest people I ever knew, in Virginia

wrecked himself, his girlfriend, and her son, with that shit

[Rebelry]

161. Sometimes only takes ONE dose of meth

to screw your brain up totally.

Don't have to 'abuse' it regularly to have it fry your brain. It only takes one bad dose.

personally, I don't think it's worth the risk.

Reb

[Milspec]

237. smart enough?

No one is "smart enough" to avoid abusing meth once you get into the pipe with it. I self committed to a mental hospital in the early 80's for snorting. But the late 90"s well I got into the pipe, spent $35 large in under 3 years on the shit, lost the job, most of my friends, my apartment, (had to go live with my kid sister, bless her heart) most of my self respect and you really don't want to see my teeth.
This stuff is DEATH. In both cases I was a well paid professional with a masters in engineering.

[eeyore]

282. I'm glad you are okay...

You sound just like my brother. I'm glad that you are doing well now, and that you have been able to keep it in check to survive.

It's important for people to hear the stories of people like yourself. I think a lot of people believe that anyone who gets addicted to drugs is just a dumbass loser who's not smart enough to take care of themselves. It's people like you who disprove that theory.

Take care.

[Katherine Brengle]

8. Agreed--legalizing all drugs is not the answer--

Decriminalizing drug use is a step in the right direction, not legalization. By decriminalizing, and establishing mandatory rehabilitation, we can bring people who have been destroyed by drug abuse back into society, instead of locking them up.

Legalization just opens the door for corporate control and government profit--imagine the tax revenues from cocaine, crack, meth, heroine, and any of a number of "recreational" drugs--CEOs are probably drooling over the possibility of legalization.

Decriminalization puts the emphasis back on supporting our fellow citizens and doing our very best to make sure they can succeed in life.

[antistoic]

15. RE

Marihuana legalization is a very viable government cash cow if handled well.

[Katherine Brengle]

25. I mentioned this in another post on this thread--I support marijuana

legalization. I think its effects rank with alcohol and tobacco use, so there is no justifiable reason to keep it illegal.

I propose we use the tax revenues from marijuana legalization to fund state-sponsored rehab programs for people addicted to actual drugs.

[K-W]

269. So you think prohibition is the answer?

The answer to what, exactly?

The issue isnt legalization versus decriminalization (and im fairly certain they mean the same thing).

The issue is prohibition, and whether it is effective, neccessary and constitutional. (It isnt, it isnt, and it isnt.)

[IsItJustMe]

9. I bet if you did of poll of DU'ers, 80% would be against meth. I don't

think blanket accusations like that are fair.

[preciousdove]

10. Why are the other chemicals not made hard to get? Another control for them

Meth IS a problem. Allowing OTC life saving drugs (yes I have asthma and this works fast and well with NO side effects) is the first step to total control. When you can't breath what wouldn't you do to get your medicine? They are not putting the other chemicals used to make meth away so you have to sign for them are they?

This is a trojan horse issue and I am NOT on your side on this because to do so would be suicide for me and several family members.

Putting these things behind the counter HAS NOT WORKED. It allows organized gangs from Mexico into our communities. Use has not dropped.
Drug abuse is a society problem not a chemical one.

[eeyore]

18. Pseudoephedrine is the common link with the ingedients

Watch this documentary - it will explain a lot. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/

If you want someone to blame, blame the drug companies who refuse to look at anything beyone their profit margin with this issue.

[preciousdove]

22. Sorry wheat grass does not stop my asthma. n/t

[cedahlia]

127. Asthma

This is what I was honestly wondering...are there any medical conditions that absolutely cannot be treated with anything but pseudoephedrine? Is that the case with your asthma? (I am not being snarky or anything...I really would like to know this.)

[Hubert Flottz]

181. Pseudoephedrine is not the only thing at the drug store that can

be used to make Methamphetamine Hydrochloride. And that's all I'm gonna' say about that.

The thing is, if they lock up all the pseudoephedrine, the crank heads will find another way. Dangerous drug is putting it mildly, if it's made by crazy people, who don't know, or care, what they are doing. It is wrecking so many people's lives in this country, that it does need to be stopped. Even if the drug is pharmaceutical quality stuff, it WILL kill you, if you stay on it very long, or take too much. I've known of young people dying of strokes and heart attacks, when they were geeked out on the shit.

I've known of people who were using the pharmaceutical grade stuff back 40 years ago, but I never saw it wrecking folks lives back then, like the bathtub grade stuff that's around Everywhere now. It's a mghty sad thing.

[preciousdove]

247. The rest have severe side effects, are RX and are very expensive.

There seems to be an running assault on breathing medication. They just said that the propellant in epinephrine inhalers was making them pull that one off the market. They did the same with Seravent. The current Seravent uses a powder. That does not sound healthy to me and I have not tried it. I have a substitute inhaler but it only works half as well as Seravent. Govt just put warning labels on Seravent and another highly publicized inhaler with that as an ingredient.

BUT the actifed works just as well as the Seravent (Seravent works in 10 minutes, actifed in 15)except when I have a respiratory infection. I had a bone infection for two years, that knock on wood, is finally gone but I could not take the steroid type medicines that take down your immune system. I have tried most other antihistimines/bronchidialators and they do not work nearly as well for acute symptoms.

It makes no sense to go to the emergency room for hundred or more dollars when a 3 cent tablet will do the trick.

[Blue_In_AK]

44. I agree with you 100 percent on the drug companies.

I watched that documentary a couple of weeks ago. I found the attitude of the big drug companies on this issue despicable.

[cedahlia]

126. pseudoephedrine

I watched that episode of Frontline...it really opened my eyes to this issue, which I previously was pretty ignorant about.

After watching, my opinion is that if we really are ever going to eradicate this problem, the production of pseudoephedrine has got to stop. Of course, the pharmaceutical companies will do whatever they can to keep that from happening, because profits are always more important than doing the right thing. :puke:

And of course, there will be those law-abiding citizens, who rely on products like Sudafed, who will probably also object. I was talking about the meth problem with my brother, who is an awesome, intelligent guy, but he said something like "why should they punish people who just want to take Sudafed for their colds?" "Well," I said, "Who the hell actually needs to take Sudafed when they get a cold???" The answer: Probably, no one! I personally can't take anything containing pseudoephedrine, because I have a bad reaction to it (racing heart, extreme, long periods of insomnia, etc.) Yet, I get at least one cold a year, and I am fine! Nasal spray and ibuprofen work wonders for muddling through a miserable cold. If there truly are people who have to have pseudoephedrine for a medical condition (other than a cold), I would certainly like to hear about it. Yes, this drug certainly makes some people more comfortable when they have a cold, but we have to give a hard look at what price that comfort now seems to be coming.

So anyway, I don't see it happening, but I definitely think the only way this problem is ever going stop is if they do away with pseudoephedrine forever. As long as that shit is in production, the meth chemists will find it and use it to produce one of the most evil drugs the world has ever seen. I think people who are indifferent to this problem now, just haven't seen firsthand the terrible problems it causes.

Edited: I didn't realize the drug may also be used to treat asthma (as another poster pointed out.)

[Caoimhe]

165. Sudafed is the only thing that clears me up

I live in Oregon and it is getting very hard to get at all. I've tried Coricidin, Guifan, Phenylpropanolamine, dextromethorphan, phenylephrine which is in the "new formula" of Sudafed, benadryl, etc and the only thing that works for me is good old pseudoephedrine. I have even had a hard time getting a doctor to prescribe it because they are under so much pressure. Its too bad that drug abusers have to ruin something like this for everyone. For many many years I have taken it and had no ill effects. Before that I took actifed. I understand the meth problem, but I don't think this will solve the problem. They will find other poisons to put in their systems for a high, mark my words. Or they will get it bulk from Mexico. I can't help but think perhaps what we should be focusing on is WHY people turn to these drugs to escape their lives? We used to have a guy who wandered the streets here with silver paint all over his face from huffing. He ended up dead and stiff by the side of the highway. People tried to help him, all the stores refused to sell him spray paint, yet he figured out how to get it. I just don't know how to help people so intent on killing themselves.

[LostinVA]

274. Me too -- NOTHING else works -- without it I am truly miserable

Sleepy, heachachy, lethargic... can barely breathe, let alone go running.

And, Prohibition has also never worked.

[Patiod]

172. It's the only thing that will help me breathe w/a sinus infection

Given the horror and extent of the meth problem, I've got no problem with psudoephedrine being behind the counter, under lock and key, and subject to restrictions. I'll show my I.D, give a fingerprint, I DON'T CARE. But PLEASE don't take it off the market.

Every year or two I get horrible, 3-week, raging, face-swelling, vicious sinus infection - and "nasal spray and ibuprofen" just don't touch them -- my eyes stream and my sinuses are burning and completely clogged and I look like a crying mess. Massive amounts of Sudafed is the ONLY thing that shuts down the water-works when that happens - Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold used to do the job great without any noticeable side effects, but something in THAT was causing other people problems and got pulled off the market, and the re-formulation no longer works.

I dread taking Sudafed because it makes me irritable and mean (what I imagine really bad PMS must be like) but it's either that or walk around with tears streaming down my face ALL DAY. I wish the pharmacos would come out with something else that works, but no one wants to work on a relatively low-profit drug that might cause lawsuits down the road.

[CountAllVotes]

292. Have you tried Allegra?

I too suffer from basically year round allergies. I wake up all stuffed up every morning. The first thing I do it take an Allegra-180, a very effective allergy pill for me anyway.

I was taking a drug that was pulled from the market as it contained Sudafed. It was giving me high blood pressure and I couldn't sleep very well. My teeth were going to hell in a hand basket (6 cavities found in one visit!) due to having a "dry mouth" I was told. It wasn't until later that I realized it was from the pills I was taking! Yikes! So, I stopped taking that drug that has now been recalled and switched to Allegra-180 which was very expensive before it became a generic option just this past year (wouldn't you know it? :grr:).

To make a long story short, I realized how important it is for me to keep my sinuses clear so I don't develop infections. I've been taking Allegra-180 (now aka generic fexofenadine I believe it is called) for about 5 years now with no harmful effects, no rise in blood pressure and it keeps my sinuses clear and I've had no more infections nor huge numbers of cavities appearing.

Re: Sudafed. I used to work for doctors and the drug company salesmen used to come around a couple of times a week and they used to give us "free" samples of Sudafed all the time (this was in the early 1980s). I never really cared much for it, but it does work as a decongestant which can be very useful at times if you have a bad cold, etc.

I don't think Sudafed should be made illegal as it does help some people where other medications might not help. I think this is the key to it really. If Sudafed is used as it was meant to be used I think it is ok.

They make Allegra-D which is Allegra + Sudafed. I have some of this that is quite old in my drawer. If I get a bad head cold I'll take this medication vs. the regular Allegra for a couple of days at the most as it seems to clear this type of problem up quite well but it raises my blood pressure up almost instantly.

We have a HUGE problem with meth here where I live too in rural California. You see the meth heads on the street grinding their teeth, paranoid as hell and they look old and decrepit regardless of their age.

As we used to say in the late 1960s SPEED KILLS and that it does do along with ruin the lives of others around the people that use meth. Very sad. :(

These types of drugs do have medicinal use but it seems that they must be carefully controlled I would say. I had no idea that Sudafed was a dangerous drug and to think they were giving it out to us as samples in the early 1980s at the job I had at a medical center.

:kick:

[Patiod]

298. Don't want take something QD for problem that's only Q/year

Allergies aren't a problem, and the infection is unpredictable - I've gotten it in Fall, in Late Spring, in Summer - doesn't seem tied to any allergy season. Fortunately, I don't get more than one every year or year+half.

I am blessed that I don't have to take anything daily, and that I don't suffer any allergies except when things are extremely dusty. So I'll keep my fingers crossed that Sudafed stays on the market!

Sounds like you found a decent solution for yourself in Allegra.

Thanks for the recommendation!
:hi:

[Trillo]

309. Is there any equally effective replacement for the same price?

You know, something us poor folks can live with, like $5.00-$10.00 for a 2-3 months supply that works as well? Pseudo used to cost me $5-10 for a several month supply when I used to be able to find it in a bulk bottle (much cheaper than individual foil wraps), but I only needed to buy that bottle every few years.

The prices I see for Allegra from Google are $105 for 90 tabs, (possibly 3 months).
Here's one set of generic Allegra prices: 90 x 60mg for just $34.34
These newer drugs always cost more! Maybe it's cheaper elsewhere, but that's nowhere near as reasonable as pseudoephedrine was: it's about 3-4 times more expensive than before the DEA got involved in disrupting allergy medicines 10-15 years ago.

Will the people who outlawed pseudo take financial responsibility to subsidize the difference in the cost for its replacement to consumers? Maybe they should subsidize all of our health care, completely, since they seem to want to control us and data mine us...

Why are we financially responsible for the poor decisions of others? Why is everything possible done to eliminate inexpensive medicines from the market while at the same time everyone is screaming about the rising costs of healthcare?

Who's making a financial killing off of sick folks? Who's making poor folks who can't afford higher prices sicker than they otherwise need to be?

From the drug information Allegra looks like it causes a slight increase in viral infections, headaches. Backaches... oh, here's a cut and paste from fda.gov:

Twice daily dosing with fexofenadine capsules
at rates of greater than 1%
Adverse experience Fexofenadine 60 mg Placebo
Twice Daily Twice Daily
(n=679) (n=671)
Viral Infection (cold, flu) 2.5% 1.5%
Nausea 1.6% 1.5%
Dysmenorrhea 1.5% 0.3%
Drowsiness 1.3% 0.9%
Dyspepsia 1.3% 0.6%
Fatigue 1.3% 0.9%

Once daily dosing with fexofenadine hydrochloride tablets
at rates of greater than 2%
Adverse experience Fexofenadine 180 mg Placebo
once daily (n=293)
(n=283)
Headache 10.6% 7.5%
Upper Respiratory Tract Infection 3.2% 3.1%
Back Pain 2.8% 1.4%
http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2003/20786se8-014,20872se8-011,20625se8-012_allegra_lbl.pdf

The adverse effects of Allegra sound rather unpleasant fortunately, they only happen in a small number of people.

Why are they selling us drugs that are appear to, ever so slightly, decrease immunity? Is it good for repeat business for even more meds?

From the FAQ for Allegra:

http://www.allegra.com/aboutAllegra/faq.do
" Q: SHOULD I TAKE ALLEGRA ONLY WHEN MY SEASONAL ALLERGY SYMPTOMS WORSEN?

A: No. It's important to take Allegra regularly, as your doctor prescribes - even when you start to feel better. Waiting too long between doses gives your symptoms a chance to worsen."

Great, not only do I have a slightly higher chance of catching a cold, they want it to be taken when there are no symptoms. Make more $$$ by taking the drug even when you're not experiencing symptoms. With pseudoephedrine, I took it when symptoms told me I needed it, and sparingly even then.

From the Important Safety Information for Allegra:

http://www.allegra.com/aboutAllegra/faq.do
" Side effects with Allegra 180 mg for seasonal allergies are low and may include headache, cold, or backache.

Side effects with Allegra 60 mg for seasonal allergies are low; less than 3% of people experience cold or flu, nausea, menstrual pain, or drowsiness.

Side effects with Allegra 60 mg for hives are low and may include backache, sinusitis, dizziness, or drowsiness.

Side effects with Allegra 30 mg are low and may include headache, cold, coughing, or accidental injury."

Accidental injury? Is that like driving and having an accident cause you feel dizzy and drowsy? Or accidentally slicing your finger while chopping vegetables, because you aren't paying attention and you'd really rather be in bed resting?

And what's with the drowsiness? I'm already tired enough, most of the time; it's one reason I don't like chlorpheneramine maleate for allergies. Why take an allergy pill that has to be taken even when you're not having symptoms which also causes some drowsiness? Do 'they' want the workforce more tired than we already are? Why?

Maybe Allegra is safe, maybe it works well, but why do I have to pay more for it if it is to be the suggested replacement for the DEAs decision to impede the time proven and cheaper medicine?

Oh, that's right, here it is, right from about on the DEA page:

Asset Forfeiture.
http://www.dea.gov/programs/progs.htm

They apparently don't want inexpensive medicines on the market. Get the people all riled up with some drug problem, create the perception that it's the biggest reason for crime in poor neighborhoods (ignore such common sense things as unemployment and wages less than a living wage), then send in the storm troopers 'to tell us' that our meds will be more expensive in the future.

You know, the real kicker comes with Allegra D--it includes pseudoephedrine! So really, this is all about making cheap medicine more expensive with a reformulation and the assistance of the DEA and its clever Asset Forfeiture program!

Those sneaky corporatists! It's all about increasing their money. Everything else is a diversion.

[politicat]

210. Pseudoephedrine SULFATE is the only decongestant my husband can

take. The rest are either ineffective or they give him heart palpitations. When combined with Loratadine (AKA Claritin D), it is the only drug that effectively controls his allergies (to pollen, dust and industrial pollution) enough that he can sleep without choking and breathe enough to exercise and walk to and from the bus.

He was on the prescription version until Pfizer took it OTC; we now use an OTC version because it works for him and the prescription ones don't.

I use it as well during the winter when MTBE is added to gasoline and the levels of ozone go up; we live in a metro area and cannot live in the middle of nowhere (he's a programmer, and sheep don't give a damn about JAVA or C) to avoid pollution. I have a chronic sinus headache from November to the end of March because of the ozone levels and that's WITH decongestants and antihistimines. I have no idea how bad it would be if I didn't.

I have no love of Pseudoephedrine hydrochloride, but pseudoephedrine sulfate has been a godsend for us. (Also, the chemical composition of the sulfate makes it much harder to use for meth production, but most people don't realize that.) If it is taken off the market, we will have to leave our professions and start living off the land somewhere where gasoline pollutants aren't used. Which isn't going to happen.... We're not going to find such a place.

[eridani]

266. Me. Severe sinus condition

NOT a cold. Pseudoephedrine plus Flunisolide nasal spray keep it under control. I am very grateful to have recently discovered a timed-release version of it that I tried when my pharmacy ran out of the regular stuff. Without it, I CAN'T FUCKING SLEEP! Which would make me a pretty dangerous commuter and worker. I don't mind filling in the book and showing my driver's license if that will help meth heads.

[benEzra]

281. Sudafed and a BC powder are the only OTC combo that works for my headaches

which I get fairly often, and are debilitating. No side effects for me.

And don't tell me I need to shell out $40+ per month for Zomig or Imatrex; we can't afford it. We have average insurance with poor pharmacy coverage, and a special needs kid. I haven't been to a primary care physician in three years because I can't afford to go, so don't tell me I need to shift to a prescription drug with significant side effects that costs 50 times as much.

But even if you could ban every molecule of Sudafed from the United States, the major manufacturers of meth (which are NOT located inside the U.S.) could merely smuggle in foreign-made pseudoephedrine disguised as a routine cocaine shipment...or could smuggle in meth just like they do now. Has the domestic ban on opium poppy and cocaine hydrochloride made the trade in cocaine, heroin, and crack go away? No? Then why do you think a domestic ban on Sudafed would halt the meth trade?

Banning sudafed brings severe consequences down on those of us who innocently use sudafed, while posing only a minor inconvenience to meth manufacturers, smugglers, and users.

Yes, meth use is a big problem. I suspect, but cannot prove, that legalizing the cannabinoids would reduce the demand for meth. But I can say with near certainty that banning ME from being able to cheaply get sudafed will not affect meth use one bit.

[donheld]

13. eeyore, I know far too many "meth heads"

and so I know what you are talking about. It's really sad too many people including DUer's don't seem to understand that.

[Katherine Brengle]

20. Especially considering the amount of press meth addiction has

gotten in the past few years--it's not a secret, even for those of us who don't know anyone who is a user.

Sometimes it's easier to just ignore reality, I guess...

[Mythsaje]

17. What do you suggest we do about it?

Thirty years of the drug war has put drugs in every community in America. You think more of the same will help?

[ProfessorGAC]

94. And Therein Lies The Problem

In Illinois, the AG pushed for a law to make all pseudoephedrine containing OTC's behind the counter. That happened about 18 month ago. The results:

Addiction levels, arrests for meth, and estimates of the size of the meth trade all increased!

They have, once again, failed to address the actual problem and will fail to solve any problems this drug creates.
The Professor

[eeyore]

111. The Bush administration refused to back a national bill

How can we have any idea if this approach works when cookers can just buy the shit in a neighboring state? Perhaps Illinois is a great place to cook, and they can buy the ingredients right next door. I don't know that for a fact, but it seems pretty damn logical.

Do you have a problem with monitoring the sale of bomb making ingredients like the ones used in Oklahoma City? I don't see how this is any different. A huge bomb has gone off in the Northwest, and we're just trying to stop it from exploding.

Are you saying that a do nothing approach is the way to go? All I ever get with this issue is people who rant about restrictions and failed policies, but I never hear any actual ideas from the same people. What would you suggest be done?

Please watch this documentary.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/


It's incredibly informative, and actually exposes how the Bush administration has actually helped to spread the epidemic by ignoring it.

[ProfessorGAC]

116. Then You'd Be Wrong

"How can we have any idea if this approach works when cookers can just buy the shit in a neighboring state? Perhaps Illinois is a great place to cook, and they can buy the ingredients right next door. I don't know that for a fact, but it seems pretty damn logical."

Indiana, Iowa and Wisconsin have all enacted similar legislation. Yet, no positive results. It's obviously a failed solution, that makes it inconvenient for those who AREN'T trying to make meth. In addition, since i'm originally a chemist by training, i can assure you that there are FAR more efficient and effective ways to make meth than by using the tiny amount of raw material available in OTC's. So, it's not logical if it's completely incorrect.

"Do you have a problem with monitoring the sale of bomb making ingredients like the ones used in Oklahoma City? I don't see how this is any different. A huge bomb has gone off in the Northwest, and we're just trying to stop it from exploding."

I don't really care about the epidemic or the use of the term. The term has been in vogue with the anti-drug parasites for too many years for me to any longer take it seriously.

And, bomb making ingredients have no practical value for those with some common malady. So, apples and oranges. Besides, the OKC bomb was fertilizer and diesel fuel. Do they restrict the purchase of those things in the Northwest? No, they don't. Apparently, we're not that worried about people making bombs. And as a chemist, i would not make a bomb that way anyway. So, restricting their sale would not stop someone who really wanted to do it, and more effectively to boot.

Last point on your Rant #2: You said the bomb already went off. How do you propose to prevent the explosion of a bomb that already went off. Consistency is your friend.

"Are you saying that a do nothing approach is the way to go? All I ever get with this issue is people who rant about restrictions and failed policies, but I never hear any actual ideas from the same people. What would you suggest be done?"

First, i wasn't ranting. Try to be a little more attentive. I simply criticized the solution as being apropos of nothing.

Now: Why would i be responsible for coming up with a solution? Why is it my problem to solve? I've got a job and a life where i have problems for which i'm responsible. I'll take care of those, thanks very much. We pay these politcos to solve societal maladies. When the ideas they propogate are utterly stupid and failures, my responsibility is to let them know they've failed. It's not my job to do theirs. It's my job to monitor their work.

And no, i didn't say do nothing. What i said was, quite clearly, that the approach is failing. It's been in effect for 18 months and is having zero impact. I am criticizing a failed policy that was doomed to ineffectiveness in the first place.

However, i will admit, that most times it's better to do nothing than to do the wrong thing. Doing the wrong thing is far more likely, no matter the system being tweaked, to do more harm than good. (Ask Al Greenspan.) So, if the best solution they can muster is to move OTC's behind the counter, and we already have data to support that it's not accomplishing anything, then perhaps the right thing to do is rescind this failed approach and go back to the drawing board.

I'm not diminishing the negative effects meth can have on those who abuse it. Not at all. But, shotgunning for a solution to a serious problems is almost NEVER the way to find a solution, and since the same people looking for a solution are those who have supported, nurtured and scaled-up the war on drugs, i wouldn't trust them to find a workable solution anyway.
The Professor

[Viva_La_Revolution]

208. I'm not surprised it went up... I told people before they passed the law

The only thing it has affected, is the # of home labs has gone down. That's great, because landlords don't have to spend $20,000 to clean up, and your neighbor doesn't burn the house down cooking it.

But the stuff they were making was crappy compared to what they are bringing in from Mexico now. The higher quality and strength, and availability all translate into higher addiction rates and arrests. Too bad they don't ask these questions of us before making these laws.

[alittlelark]

19. I will say that Meth is EVIL.... really - it is.

My sis was into it for a year or so and her dentist bills are now in the $3000 range. Her brain seems RELATIVELY OK. She's pulling it together..... but, DAMN... it's been a long haul.

[Jack_DeLeon]

51. Meth didnt do that to your sister...

she did it to herself.

Inanimate objects do not do things on thier own.

[XemaSab]

192. Clearly you've never known a hardcore drug addict

[Jack_DeLeon]

261. No I dont, but I blaming the actions of an individual...

on something that isnt alive is idiotic.

[Telly Savalas]

235. "That bad tuna didn't give you food poisoning. You did it to yourself."

[alittlelark]

246. Guns don't kill people......

....psycho gun laws do.

[Iris]

271. That's just stupid semantics.

Ok, so her sister took meth and it made her teeth rot out.

Happy now?

[Ron Green]

21. Life is full of pain,

and meth is one of the worst responses to life's pain. TV and shopping, as bad as they are, are not nearly as bad as meth.

[Betsy Ross]

24. This is a failing of the "Just say no" business

I took the time to speak with my nieces about drugs when they were teenagers. I did not want them poisoned by the Just-say-no propaganda that says all illegal/recreational drugs are the same. They are not. "Gee, I tried pot and it wasn't all the bad things THEY said so I guess they lied about Meth too." Pot is not Meth and peyote is not Xtasy. If you are old enough to have experienced the drug culture in the 60's you should have the wisdom to talk to young people about drug use. Speed, crack, meth, whatever the latest form the drug takes is never good. Pot should be decriminalized/legalized as should a number of other drugs. But Meth should not, it is a destroyer of life.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

26. This nation spends too much time on the supply side of drug control and

not enough on the demand side.

The ingredients for meth have available for decades, if not longer. I first heard of the drug itself in the 1970s, but it has become an epidemic only in the past ten years. Why?

My theory is that there are more people feeling hopeless about ever getting ahead financially, so meth looks like easy money. There are people who have to work two jobs to survive, and meth looks like an easy way to stay awake. There are people who are hurting so badly in so many ways that the euphoria produced in the early stages feels like a good way to forget.

Happy people don't use meth.

Until we deal with those issues, all the police and customs efforts are just sweeping at the waves with a broom. We already imprison a larger percentage of our population than any other country, most of them for drug offenses.

We have to start doing something besides building more prisons.

[Traveling_Home]

34. Meth's been around

Was involved in Boulder, Colorado with large amounts of meth coming into town - was a preference with many over Coke. That was in the 70's

Was involved in Las Vegas, New Mexico with large amounts of meth coming into that town - was a preference over coke and heroin. That was in the 80's.

One place was urban - one was small town.

So whats the difference now other then media focus providing justification for police departments to write grant to get new toys to enhance their own expansion interests.

B2 pilots are routinely assumed to be using pharmaceutical meth on long flights from Dakotas to IRAQ and AFGANISTAN and back. Might not be true but a commmon assumption that I hear often.

[Blue_In_AK]

47. Meth was around in the late '60s, as well...

I knew a lot of people doing it at the time, only most of them were shooting it then, not smoking it or whatever people are doing now. I think the difference then was that it was pharmaceutical, not this garbage that people mix up in their kitchens; however, it certainly wasn't harmless even being more pure. I think it was the speed that kind of blew the peace-and-love hippie movement all to hell.

[Occulus]

107. Something happened...

I think you may be right: the kitchen cooked crap doesn't appear to be the same stuff to me from the descriptions people have been giving. It sounds as if the '60s meth wasn't as addictive, or had the same effects. Something, anyway, because if it had been this bad it wouldn't have been around this long. Ergo, something about meth itself changed between then and now.

I don't think this is one of those situations where "nobody knew how bad it was for you" at all; I think we should look at the differences between pharm meth and kitchen meth and see if we can't figure it out. Maybe it's the manufacturing processes, impurities, or whatever else happens in a kitchen lab that changed meth from something that appeared relatively harmless into something whose general badness is apparent.

I'm not defending meth or meth use at all here. I just think you've hit on something- meth is different now than it was then. We need to find out why.

[eeyore]

122. I has changed dramatically.

Watch this documentary. It explains how and why it has changed, and what has gotten us to the epidemic state we are in.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/

It was produced by Oregon Public Broadcasting for Frontline. If Oregonians know anything it's the ravages of Meth. Check it out, it will likely change the way you think about it.

[hedgehog]

154. One possible difference may be the dosage

I'm just guessing from an article I read in Newsweek, but when I compared the dosage Newsweek gave for a typical Meth hit to a pharmaceutical dosage of amphetamine for narcolepsy or ADD, it was on the order of 300x the normal dose.

[kineneb]

252. Hells Angels in San Joaquin Valley in 60s

were infamous for manufacturing meth (speed). I am not sure their version was any better or purer than the kitchen stuff of today.

[Blue_In_AK]

255. Probably not...

I don't know where the meth was coming from that I was seeing in Denver in 1968-69, but it was all over the place around Capitol Hill. My 18-year-old paramour at the time was very much into it to the point where his veins were basically shot. I never got into needles at all, but did take it orally sometimes mixed with water (yech, nasty stuff) just to keep up with him, although I'd never get as wigged out as he did. He ultimately ended up being murdered about five years after we split up, but I always knew he wouldn't live very long anyway. A very sad person, which I suspect is the case with most meth users.

[WhiteTara]

27. my niece is going into rehab tomorrow

morning. My partner suggests that this is a drug of the hopeless. My niece who is a bright young woman, who had some serious setbacks, succumbed to meth. She has battled other addictive drugs for the past several years. Three days ago, she was arrested for forging checks and faces 10 to 20 in a federal prison. We are hoping that she will be able to go to rehab and make restitution, but we will see what happens. If she goes to prison,her life will be over before it began.

[Erika]

35. The daughter of a good GOP friend

is now in prison for meth. Third offense in as many states. She's also pregnant and due in June. We're all hoping the baby will give her a reason for hope and to kick addiction.

[WhiteTara]

37. I'm hoping that our child

will find something to live for too.

[justabob]

93. That is what did it for me

Thankfully I had not been addicted for very long, and never sunk to the depths that many others I knew fell to, but it was a terrible time. Like others in this thread have said, meth is not a happy person's drug. It is the nectar of the miserable and the hopeless. Had I not found myself pregnant, I would have killed myself. It was very close thing even then. The addiction can be beaten, but it is not easy. Even now, ten years later, I have moments when I think, "damn, a bump would be great right about now". I would never actually do it, but the thoughts still come.

I do not think locking up Sudafed (and others) is the answer though. The only way to make a difference IMO is to do what can be done to reduce misery and suffering that precedes the first snort (or whatever). Of course, that makes too much sense and would solve WAY too many of the problems our society faces.... crime, abortion, drug addiction, poverty.... *sigh*

[Caoimhe]

306. Here's hoping the child is healthy nt

[Digit]

38. I am sorry to hear of the plight of your niece...

I wish they could find a remedy to remove the addictive curse of this drug.
I wish her the best.
:hug:

[WhiteTara]

56. thanks

we all need that hug :hug: right back at you!

[eeyore]

72. I'm sorry to hear about your niece, BNL

She sounds just like my brother. He got sentenced to 12 years after a head on accident that paralyzed a 19 year old woman. He's out now, and is doing a halfway house and working again. He can't leave his county and has to check in for urinary analysis multiple times a day. I hope that he'll be okay again one day, but I can't help resenting everything he's done to my parents.

I wish you and your family all the best.

[WhiteTara]

240. thanks eeyore

I'm somewhat annoyed about the costs myself. I keep telling my sister that she needs to make restitution to the family as well as her victims. She may be lucky and not have prison time, it's one day at a time right now. This is one of the nastiest drugs that have ever run through the world community.

[tmooses]

28. I moved here to Oregon about 2 years ago and always noticed

the "meth-joint" whenever cruising the rural areas. Then I got to meet people who have been completely taken over by this drug-not like anything I've seen before and I've been around the block a few times. Then I got to talk to teachers and other parents at my daughter's school about how this problem is impacting kids and social services in state that can't afford it. Then I got an education from my dentist on the problems caused by meth on the teeth of addicts-as a captive audience. I don't think those who pass this drug off as some recreational pasttime has any idea what they're talking about. The human and social cost is unbelievable.

[Erika]

29. Meth is a systemic problem of our society

Until we heal the real problems, meth will be out there full force. Meth is a relief, a self-medication, to all those who believe they've been rejected by a phony society.

That is where we need to start.

[jbnow]

277. Even in good times

it can be the way of youth to experiment. In my teens in the 70's I tried many things a time or two. The experiences were fun but nothing I chose to keep doing.

Now I hated needles so wouldn't have considered that. But if this had been around and someone offered me a hit and I didn't know much about it...
Well there but for the grace of chance go I.

With a drug like that once you try it on a lark that element of choice might be gone. Even people who were happy and loved and doing well can go from giving it a try to being an addict.

Many drugs are a relief or self medication, even some addictive ones. I've never heard this described that way. People seek relief from the effect of their addiction when they don't have it, but having it is not a relief or escape either.

Education is important but with our fairy tale drug world teachings it can sound as made up as the rest.

Not to downplay the importance of what you said about the deeper societal issues. I'm sure they are part of people being willing to take the risk or be even less interested in beating the addiction, cause 'fuck it, what does life have to offer?'.

But with drugs like this it isn't the starting place or at least shouldn't be the only starting place. We should strive to heal those deeper problem, always, even if meth wasn't around. But meth needs more direct action as well, though I've no idea what.

[EST]

30. Kind of "all them ay-rabs is terrists" or

the other fear-fear-fear that comes from the idiots in charge, I've been beaten over the brain with fifty years of anti-drug so I tend to discount the reports. I am aware that there is a meth problem: I saw the npr 2 hour presentation, a few weeks ago. I don't mess with meth or know anyone who does, so it's a distant problem.

Knowing that most of the real 'drug problems' are actually created and supported by the drug war, as well as being painfully aware from nearly a half century of being a draft resistor in that war, I am quite clear of how ineffective we are at much more than rescuing people and picking up the shattered bits, afterward.

A third factor, at least for me, is a measure of outrage burnout, resulting in less screaming and more coping.

[Zookeeper]

31. It is a horrible problem, that largely affects rural areas...

in a way that other drugs don't. IMHO, this has a lot to do with lack of living wage jobs and the high cost of secondary education.

Anyone that doesn't take it seriously should consider the environmental consequences of meth production. There are some extremely toxic chemicals involved. The next apartment you rent, or the next motel room you stay in could have been a meth lab with traces of dangerous chemicals left behind.

I've also read that there is a higher grade, more potent form of meth now being produced in Central America, which is contributing to increased border violence as it's brought to the U.S.

Many, many years ago I worked with someone who started injecting meth. He was a very handsome guy, who turned into a wreck. This was also at the begining of the AIDS epidemic and we worked at a gay resort, so the risks involved with sharing needles was extremely high. Meth certainly didn't strike me as a harmless, recreational drug.

[mrcheerful]

42. A drug is a drug is a drug.

Bottom line with addicts regardless of what drug they use, Alcohol, pot, crack, coke, heroin, it leads to one of 3 things, death, institutions or death. making laws against them didn't stop addiction in 1900, (the year drugs stared becoming illegal), nor did it stop it in the 1920's, 40's 50's 60's 70's, 80's or 90's. You can't stop people from doing them no matter what the out come is, after 100 years of war on drugs all the government has managed to do is fill the prisons. The only difference in all the drugs out there is the amount of time it takes to screw up a persons life. There is no such thing as this drug is worse then that drug, bottom line is whatever you choose to use it has side effects and you end up in the same place weather its pot, alcohol crack heroin or meth.

[Zookeeper]

45. So, you really think all drugs are equal?

Granted, there are plenty of people who have ruined their lives with alcohol, but plenty of people consume alcohol without ruining their lives. I seriously doubt that there are as many casual, non-addicted meth users as there are casual, non-addicted drinkers.

[mrcheerful]

57. Well from my understanding of drug addiction, that includes alcohol,

theres an addiction gene that your either born with or not. Then you have to look at other things with the alcoholic/addict, like the fact that they will go on a journey to find their drug of choice, the drug that does what they want. Sure theres a lot of people that can drink with little or no side affects that sets them on the path of destruction. But what sets the alcoholic/addict apart is the simple fact that regardless of what they use, the brain turns it into a heroin like substance. That was researched in the 1950's using winos that died on skid row, a doctor did an autopsy of wino's and discovered heroin like chemicals in their brains, yet none of the winos ever used heroin. I wish I still had those research papers, but they are very well known and some treatment programs use them to explain addiction to addicts. Not everyone is born with the gene that allows the brain to cause the chemical reaction. The bad thing about all of this is, the only way you know if you have that gene is after you pick up that first drink or drug. I know people that smoked crack and walked away from it just as easy as the person that can take a drink and walk away from it. Take a look at the skid row drunks and you'll see how much they are like the crack addict or the heroin addict or the meth addict, the only difference is how fast it brings a person down. An alcoholic takes years to lose control where as the crack or meth addict gets there in a matter of months or days for that matter. 11 year recovering crack addict is what I am, started out on alcohol at 12, then pot, then speed then downers, then in 1991 I was introduced to crack and within 4 years i was at my rock bottom. It took me 4 trips to detox before i wised up and stopped using, its not a pretty road to travel. BTW, when I was using there wasn't anything or anyone that would stop me, laws were a joke because who cares about laws when the monkey is on your back. Its not something a person can control on their own, but until you get to the point of being sick and tired of being sick and tired, nothing will stop you. Another thing is putting a person in prison changes nothing without treatment, the addiction will just sit back and wait until your let out then its right back to using. Thats why so many alkies and addicts keep going through the system.

[annabanana]

87. Thank you for telling your story.

I remember reading that the "addict gene" maybe handed down through the male line. I think that came from the same study. And I think you remember correctly that the propensity for addiction doesn't discriminate between the drugs of choice. Someone hard-wired to addiction will have some problems with everything from caffeine to crack.

Congratulations on your hard work and here's to success on your continuing journey!:bounce:

[wordpix2]

164. glad you stopped using

[Zookeeper]

197. Yes, thanks for the response.....

I admire your strength and 11 years of "sobriety." :thumbsup:

[notadmblnd]

211. What your saying makes sense

but do you know if science has considered the fact that there may be more than one variation of the gene and how susceptible different individuals are to the different variations?

I know people addicted to cigarettes but not alcohol or crack. I don't currently know any crack addicts but I would think that not everyone who smokes crack also smokes cigarettes or drinks. I know people that smoke pot, but don't care to drink and I know drinkers that don't care to smoke pot. I know a lot of people addicted to various substances that can be harmful if abused. Sugar, salt, fat, processed foods etc.

So it just occurred to me to ask the question because I'm thinking that it may not be a matter of whether or not we have the gene but what variation of it, each of us possess.

Does that make sense?

[mrcheerful]

228. Actually what your thinking is gateway drugs, IE...cigarettes and

alcohol are said to be gateway drugs, most addicts and alkies can trace their start to either one. Your also correct in that something in the addict gene could be why some stop where they stop. I've seen and met people in their late teens and early 20's that had the same problems dealing with their lives as hard drug users. Just remember its not mind over matter that makes one stop using, its learning how to face life on lifes terms and accepting things as they are. Most addicts and alkies are control freaks, they end up trying to control everything and everyone around them, yet are out of control in their own lives. Shrub is a very good at showing that type of behavior, the I'm never wrong and its everyone else that has a problem because they don't understand my greatness.

[Jack_DeLeon]

54. IMO better druggies kill themselves, than government take my freedom...

The war on drugs is a war on the citizens of this country.

Why should we give up our freedoms such as the right to privacy, the right to be safe against unreasonable search and seizure, and why should we be denied effective over the counter medicines all for the sake of some fucking junkies. Its fucking rediculous.

[XemaSab]

196. Again, it's clear you've never known anyone who became a drug addict

I've had three pretty good friends become hardcore drug addicts, and it's something that has no respect for class or intelligence.

You'd be really surprised at how otherwise smart, reasonable people can spin out of control.

[Jack_DeLeon]

263. Anyone can become anything...

anyone can become addicted to drugs, anyone can become corrupt, anyone can become a murderer, anyone can become a thief, it is all up to the individual.

There are plenty of people right now who have access to drugs if they so choose yet they do not. There are also those who have done drugs but choose to stop.

I've had a few friends who became addicted to drugs, one of them got worse and I dont know where they are now, and one stopped doing drugs, and a few use drugs in moderation.

Yes people can fuck up thier lives, it happens, we should not restrict everyone's freedoms just because some people make bad decisions.

[Erika]

32. Meth has a high 20 times of that of Cocaine

It's something that if you've been there once, you want to go again, if you're into the drug scene. A very powerful drug.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

33. Do you mean to say that

you have found an issue on which "most DUers" agree? That's got to be a first. I have been reading DU for four years and have never seen ANY topic that qualifies for that distinction. I'm even willing to bet that most DUers rarely if ever post.

I find there are just a lot of posters here who will post only to piss on the OP's POV. Maybe they like the attention. People who post "I agree!" don't get many responses. And if that's all I've got to add to the discussion, why should I bother?

If it's any comfort to you, I agree. Although crack is still a bigger problem where I live (even though local retailers have started putting meth ingredients behind the counter). And the bigger problem than the drugs are the lives of the people who don't get where they wanna go with just pot and booze. Which came first, the drug or the fucked-up lives? I don't know the answer.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

36. eeyore, I get you. I'm a former tweaker...

It almost ruined my life, and I know several people who's lives it HAS ruined.

My argument against the psudophedrine (sp?) laws is that it really doesn't stop the supply.
The stuff coming in from Mexico is cleaner, and if I was still using, it would be my first choice. I only did the 'bathtub crank' when the good stuff was unavailable.

The problem is the demand. It took me 3 years of trying to quit before I actually could. My SO and I were addicted, and if it weren't for his parents, who gave us enough work to pay the bills while we acclimated to not taking the stuff every day, we wouldn't have been able to kick it. It took 3 months of sleeping sometimes 15-20 hours per day (at the beginning anyway) to get our bodies to function with out it, so we could go out and get a real job.

We need more beds to be available in recovery programs (I tried for 3 years to get help) and we need people to understand, this shit is harder to kick than Heroin or Nicotine.

I'm right beside you in this fight, it's one of the great scourges of our time.

[eeyore]

62. I'm so glad you're okay, Viva_La!

My brother got really fucked up on it, and started stealing from my parents. Eventually he bottomed out in a head on collision with a 19 year old woman who became parylized and mentally disabled. My brother got sentenced to 12 years and broke my poor parents' hearts. He's out now, and doing halfway house stuff. Luckily he survived, and is doing much better, but the girl will never be better and he will always be paying for it.

I had a friend who got really into it, then we convinced him to go to rehab. The day before he checked in he went for a hike with a friend out on the coast. He was really delusional and was hearing voices, got separated from his friend, and jumped to his death off of a cliff.

So, yeah, this issue is pretty intense for me, and I'm getting more and more pissed when people don't get it.

Just this morning I got a call from a friend of mine who lives near 20th and Main in South East. He woke up at 5am this morning to a huge meth house bust on his street. Total chaos with tons of cops, all the news crews, flash pots, battering rams, the whole bit. There was a baby in the house, and they called a grandmother to come pick it up. She told my friend that she wished she were dead, that she just couldn't deal with this anymore. Her daughter just can't kick.

Sorry to vent on you. I really hope that everything keeps working for you. I know how hard it is, and I'm glad to know someone who has made it out. You're really lucky, no matter how hard it is.

[CabalPowered]

98. Kick cuz I've lost good peeps to this stuff

When you're sticking needles in your toes and selling yourself for sex, we're not talking about simple bong hits. I am all for legalization of everything, except meth. This stuff should be purged from every corner of the earth.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

212. thank god I never fell down that low!

I never had to steal to feed my habit, I was a low doser. What some people would do in a night, I would make last all week, just enough to keep going to work, not get all gacked out, usually.
But I knew if I didn't kick it, I would end up there, sooner rather than later.

[CabalPowered]

222. I'm glad you did Viva! And I hope you're stronger b/c of it

Our community has been hit especially hard with it and it was a shame watching friends fall down that hole. I sampled it a couple times in my youth but it just didn't do anything for me. And it felt a little strange to be shampooing my carpets at 3 in the morning.

[norml]

39. There are differences between legalization and decriminalization

Meth is horrible stuff, and I could go on for a few pages about how horrible it is.

Of course I want pot/hemp made legal for sale.

I'd never want meth made legal for sale.

I would however like to see the really toxic substances like meth treated more as public health concerns, and less as criminal justice concerns.

A big part of it's popularity is that a lot of money can be made without much skill from some very cheap ingredients.

Like crack, in time as it gains more negative stigma it's popularity will wain.

[eeyore]

183. Agreed...

Thank you for a rational response. Why can't people seem to get to the place where we can agree upon limiting the purchase of the ingredients? Personally, I hold the drug companies and the current administration hugely responsible for putting profit over people. It can't be that hard to formulate a similar drug to pseudoephedrine that can't be used to make meth.

[norml]

230. Some people are so anti-regulation that they are right wing nut crackpots

At some point everyone wants a little regulation.

However the so called conservative movement is really all about moving the taxation and regulation off of those at the top, and putting it on those at the bottom, the riff raff.

[Trillo]

40. "But wait your turn, because it will affect you at some point, then maybe

you'll get it"

Yup. Already got it. Can't buy psuedoephedrine convieniently at a mass-market price anymore---I was held responsible for what someone else did.

This is not how "choice" and "freedom" is supposed to work. I'm supposed to be held responsible for MY CHOICES, not someone else's. Holding any of us responsible for the choices of another is a suckers game that can't be won.

It's what "the war on terrorism" is all about.

[Jamastiene]

41. I agree that meth is horrible.

I may be for legalizing other drugs, like marijuana, but meth is really really bad shit. You know it's bad when it makes heroin look like a healthy alternative. Meth makes heroin look like a week at a health camp. I agree with you that meth is horrid wretched shit. We really need to get a grip on this drug. I mean how can we get it through to people that meth leaves holes in their brains and that it ruins lives beyond anything else we have ever had. I wish I could find the "Faces of Meth" picture again. If that isn't a great deterrent, I don't know what is. Ick!

[NYC]

214. The picture you requested.

From Google images.
http://images.google.com/images?q=%22faces+of+meth%22&hl=en&btnG=Search+Images

[Jamastiene]

305. I wish more people would pay attention to that picture and

stay away from meth. Thanks for finding it. It's a living horror story. I can't wait until this drug loses appeal and goes away for good, if ever. I can dream, I guess.

[Blue_In_AK]

43. You will get no argument from me...

People I have loved are dying (and have died) from it. I think it's the worst scourge out there, even worse than crack - which I thought nothing could top. I have no problem at all with cold medicine being locked up behind the pharmacist's counter. If somebody has a cold and needs it, they shouldn't mind the extra little bit of inconvenience involved in keeping this stuff out of the hands of the cooks.

[ebayfool]

64. I don't mind the extra little bit of inconvenience, but I do mind having

to cut my asthma meds in half w/a pill cutter to try to stretch them a little farther since the price more than doubled here (CA). A not always effective method to control an asthma attack, BTW. As soon as CA enacted a similar move as this one & moved it behind the druggists' counter, they jacked the price up & many stores just stopped carrying them - they didn't want the extra hassle, I guess. All I know for sure is that now I have to stop at several stores to locate it, & pay more than I afford. No more looking for sales to stock up at a decent price, just parceling them out in as small dose as possible to try to keep from triggering a full blown, on the floor, pee my pants, oh-god-let-me-breathe attack.

And yes, I live in an area that is over run w/meth-heads. This won't stop them from getting their drug of choice ... just me from getting sufficient asthma meds.

[LeftyMom]

46. You know what?

I had no mother most of my childhood because of meth. So anybody who wants to lecture me about what it does to people can kiss my ass- I know damned good and well and I suffered as a result. I also know tweakers will damned near anything to keep thier supply going, so I don't see what good making cold pills harder for the average citizen to get will do. Tweaks will just get them in Mexico.

Many of the other components are restricted and increasingly hard to get, but that doesn't stop people from cooking and using meth. Laws don't matter to addicts, but they punish non-addicts.

[Erika]

60. So sorry for you n/t

[eeyore]

68. I'm really sorry about your mom, LeftyMom...

I can relate. My brother has ruined my parents' lives over it, and I had a good friend commit suicide because he was so fucked up.

I'd really like to know what you think can be done. I don't claim to have any answers, but I see how bad it is here every day. Literally every day. Every time this issue comes up I get nothing but people wanting to talk about legalizing it, how that will make it all better. I think we both know what a fucked up idea that is.

I honestly think people don't get it at all. They really don't know what it's like to watch a person you know disappear. I just get into the same over-intellectualized conversations over and over, and I just can't deal with it anymore.

What do you think will help? I honestly want to know.

[LeftyMom]

113. I hate to be defeatist about it

but I think the only thing that makes people quit is being ready to quit. I don't really think there's much that can be done about it externally.

[eeyore]

118. So we shouldn't even try?

I'm not trying to be flip. I realize that this issue has caused you a lot of pain, and that you'd probably rather just not deal with it. But we can't just sit around and do absolutely nothing in the face of more and more dead-eyed zombies.

It's only getting worse here in Oregon, and it's taxing all of our systems at unsustainable levels. Just yesterday I saw an article about how the social services can't keep up with the increasing number of teen addicts. These are kids that grew up with parents like your mom, but they didn't have the luck or good sense to get out of it. Tweakers are breeding, quite literally.

I'm not going to preach at you about this, because I know you get it. But I wonder if you have just had so much pain around it that you just don't want to deal with it. If so, that 's fine, I'm not going to argue with you about it. I just think that doing nothing is a huge mistake, and that's pretty much what has gotten us where we are today.

I can't bring this up without being heckled for being on the side of the man, and it's really bringing me down. People whose opinions I've grown to respect are totally unwilling to explore this issue, and I just don't understand why. All I can think is that they haven't seen it yet like we have.

[wordpix2]

168. sorry, LeftyMom. At least you didn't follow in her footsteps, good 4 you

[bluestateguy]

48. It's not a priority for me

This nation is a war. A war that is wrong and that is doing great damage to America and the world. That is my concern.

I am also fed up with government making things illegal and harder to access based on what people could do or might do or that they might abuse something: guns, drugs, internet porn, tobacco, etc.

Hell, I was in the grocery store the other day doing my shopping only to find out that the razor blades are now kept behind the counter. I asked why. "Oh, people steal them." Swell. I guess because people soda and chips too, next we will have to ask for customer assistance for those items too.

A little personal responsibility goes a long way. So, yes, on those things I am very libertarian.

[Zookeeper]

52. Interesting about the razor blades.

I wasn't aware of any stores doing that, however I am well aware that there is a "fad" among teen girls of cutting themselves. I wonder if this could be the reason for shoplifting that particular item? :shrug:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

96. nope, those girls will pay for them. It's the meth heads who are

lifting them. :(

[Jack_DeLeon]

49. Meth is not the problem, people are the problem...

People commit crimes. Drugs do not commit crimes. Drugs do not need to be illegal.

The whole war on drugs is a farce and it is a war against this countries citizens.

If someone on drugs commits a crime, what difference does it make that they were on drugs. Rape, murder, and theft are already illegal. You do not need to make drugs illegal to punish the people that commit real crimes.

How will banning sudafed stop the meth problem, when banning meth itself didnt stop it.

Banning alcohol didnt stop the alcohol problem, banning drugs doesnt work.

As for the criminals themselves. I live in South Texas, and supposidly alot of drug traffic comes through here, but I've yet to have to deal with criminals. In the case that I did though I have some .45 cal solutions to the problem.

[Erika]

61. people's pain is the problem

not meth

[RevolutionStartsNow]

198. Amen

You said a lot more in a few words than most of the blather in this thread.

[DrGonzoLives]

278. What difference does it make?

Maybe the desire to get money to get the drugs?

Nah, that couldn't be it. Meth never caused anything like that to happen.

[Yollam]

50. Legalization is clearly not the answer for dangerous drugs like meth...

...but neither is prison. Compulsory treatment or commitment to a psychiatric facility would be a better idea. I don't believe a person should have a criminal record for having an addictive personality, and then succumbing to an illegal drug rather than a legal, but equally destructive drug like alcohol.

As for a harmless drug like marijuana, there is no reason for it to be illegal at all. I don't use it, and would not if it were legal, but I tried it enough times in my youth that I'm convinced that the ban on it is a product of hysteria and nothing more.

I think your characterization of DUers as being blasé about meth abuse is a bit unfair. Meth is a horrible killer - which is why meth users should be TREATED, not imprisoned.

[TreasonousBastard]

53. Meth is poison, and we knew it...

back in the '60s.

Speed freaks were more pitiful than heroin junkies, and speed most definitely did kill. There are lot of old junkies, but who gets more than a few years out of speed. And they are not pretty years.

I don't have a clear answer to getting it off the streets and out of the veins, but it's obvious that what we've been doing for the 40 years I've seen this stuff kill just hasn't been working.

I do know that putting everything for the head in one bag and labelling it "bad stuff" is a large part of the problem. A taste of the mushroom or a righteous spliff doesn't come with a death sentence and leaves you in quite good shape the next day. Even heroin isn't as toxic to the body as, say, alcohol, although its use is still not exactly advocated.

Speed Kills. Now more than ever.

[eeyore]

63. Great post!

I agree with you that not all drugs should be considered equal. That's a problem on all sides, because the cops think they are as well.

I don't know the answers, but I'm really surprised by the responses that come out when this subject comes up. I just don't think most people get it at all.

[WeRQ4U]

133. If everyone knows that not all drugs are created equal....

Then why the hell is it that people constantly try to FIX the problems with the same measures. For instance, I've encountered numerous people who want to treat the problem of meth as they would with marijuana. You cannot do that. The problems caused by each respective drug are different in scope and severity.

You can BE a productive, safe, intelligent member of society and still smoke a yard of grass a day. You cannot, however, do the same with a wicked meth habit. Because of this, the probably success of legalization or decriminalization of ONE doesn't necessarily equate to success in doing the same with the other.

Why do people do this?

[Jamison]

55. Meth is BAD here in Missouri.

It has been for years. I've seen the destructive things it has done to good people. I would never go along with legalization of it. I'm all for legalizing pot & that's about it. Ordinary folks who are only just using meth should have alternatives to prison such as long-term rehab (at least one year). The traffickers, big-time dealers and producers should have prison sentences.

The drug DOES have some legit uses. I know of one lady who is prescribed the pharma. version of meth. It's a drug called Desoxyn. She takes it because she has severe chronic fatigue syndrome, bad enough that she could not even get of bed before being put on the drug. When she takes this drug it doesn't make her "tweak out" and get her all high, it just simply allows her to have energy and function normally. Medical use such as this is the only use for meth in my opinion.

[skids]

59. Here's a clue for you.

You might be more persuasive to the people who's minds you are trying to change, if you left out the dismissive "put down the bong" comment.

[eeyore]

65. Sorry, I'm pissed off at being dismissed like I'm some lunatic

I don't think I should have to convince anyone on this board about this subject. I've gone though countless debates over the merits of legalization, the rants from people who are freaked out about their rights. I'm long past the point of entertaining utopian ideas of legalizing meth. The shit is poison - period.

[Jack_DeLeon]

67. Insanity is repeating the samething and expecting different results...

So how many more years of this drug war, and how many more things must be prohibited before we "win."

IMO the war on Drugs is worse than both the Vietnam War and the current Wars combined.

Its been going on longer than both and has probably ruined more lives and we still dont have shit to show for it except more people in prison, more government power, and more government waste.

[eeyore]

70. This isn't about the war on drugs to me

It's about trying to save the lives of real people who I know. People who are so fucked up that they no longer resemble the person they used to be. I agree that the war on drugs is shit. I'm talking about trying to take small steps to make it more difficult to have access to the drug that is killing people I know.

People need treatment, not prison. The public needs to begin to understand that drug addiction is a sickness not a crime. On those things we can agree.

But drug companies refuse to reformulate their products to take out the main ingredient of meth. The Bush administration has helped them ignore the problem repeatedly in favor of profits. I think they need to be legislated so that they will be forced to deal with it. Take away their profits and make them deal with it.

[U4ikLefty]

73. I see more lives destroyed by alcohol...should we prohibit the sale

of alcohol???

[Jack_DeLeon]

75. It is still the war on drugs...

It's about trying to save the lives of real people who I know. People who are so fucked up that they no longer resemble the person they used to be.

Its sad that people do that to themselves, but no one is forcing them to, they do it of thier own free will.

I agree that the war on drugs is shit. I'm talking about trying to take small steps to make it more difficult to have access to the drug that is killing people I know.

Prohibition doesnt work, whether it is small steps or big ones. If making meth illegal in and of itself doesnt stop people from abusing meth, how do you think banning cold medicine is going to stop it? Most cocaine, heroin, and opium comes from abroad and it still gets here in enough quantities that if I wanted to I could find some.

Where there is a demand there will people willing to supply it. You cannot stop the freemarket, especially in a free and open nation like our own.

People need treatment, not prison. The public needs to begin to understand that drug addiction is a sickness not a crime. On those things we can agree.

Yes we can agree on that, people that want help should have access to it, but the rest of society should not be forced to change for the sake of the people who have choosen to hurt themselves.

But drug companies refuse to reformulate their products to take out the main ingredient of meth. The Bush administration has helped them ignore the problem repeatedly in favor of profits. I think they need to be legislated so that they will be forced to deal with it. Take away their profits and make them deal with it.

Why should they, and why should I be relgated to using a substandard product just because someone choose to abuse it.

There are people that extract a certain chemical from Robitussin called DXM, and they get high off of that. Should I be forced to use substandard cough medicine just because someone abuses it? There are plenty of things in the world that can be abused, we should not ban something just because someone does.

Not even if it is for the "children."

[LanternWaste]

163. Sorry, couldn't resist...

"Insanity is repeating the samething and expecting different results..."

So insanity and "practice" are the same thing?

(Sorry, couldn't resist....)

[Jack_DeLeon]

178. No...

when you practice something you arent repeating the same thing, you are learning from your mistakes and chaning what you did wrong.

If you were truely repeating the same thing you would be doing the same mistakes, and if you expected to improve without changing anything then yes that would be insane.

[BigBearJohn]

243. you cant return to normal after being a meth addict. It's insidiious

Talk about destroying a person
Phew.

[Ignis]

151. Very true.

Especially so when "put down the bong (sic)" is a very commonly used phrase by reactionaries against "dirty hippies" and the like...you know, anyone to the left of Atilla the Hun.

[fishwax]

170. true n/t

[Lexingtonian]

66. it's awful stuff, that's true

But there's always some drug around that is unbelievably bad and has some wonderful short-term consolations. And it attracts people who feel doomed. Distilled varieties of alcohol are traditional ones. Opiates were big for most of the past century. Ether was chic for a while. Cocaine and crack cocaine more recently. PCP never quite caught on, but it's Bad. And now we're at amphetamines...again.

I had to deal with drug-related crimes for a while, lived in that part of a Great Lakes city. Was victim of some property crimes and other sides of it all.

I feel wierdly fatalistic and pragmatic about it all. I'm glad you are an activist. a doer,

[rucky]

69. Cooking Meth is a Public Health Hazard

do what you want to your body, but this is just as much of an environmental issue if your neighbor is running a meth lab.

[Jack_DeLeon]

76. Meth doesnt have to be illegal to punish people for that...

I'm sure there are plenty of laws already on the books to punish people for creating a health hazard.

[rucky]

77. And those laws ban the poisonous substances. n/t

[wordpix2]

166. home meth cooks often use their children's bedrooms to cook up meth

How awful is that? They are causing these innocent kids to have brain damage, or at least breathing problems and asthma.

Drug busters go into meth labs and homes wearing protective gear and gas masks, that's how bad this stuff is.

[U4ikLefty]

71. The big problem came when the "home recepie" for garbage speed

became widely known.

[nonconformist]

74. I agree with you. I do not think that all drugs should be legal.

I do think marijuana should be legal, because there are no serious health risks involved with pot.

Meth is a terrible problem in my area too. It's a horrible, horrible thing.

[phrenzy]

78. Am I The Only One Who's Done Meth And..?

Am I the only one who's done crystal and not become a jittering nut-case? I've done the stuff several times recreationally throughout my life ( ZERO interest in doing it again though) - And basically spent the day (and night) cleaning the shit out of my friends apartment or making bad music that I thought was great. Or, even more fun gritting my teeth until my jaw hurt for a week. I admit, some of those times were 'fun' in an altered state sort of way - and, I def. saw how going on a binge for even more than 3 days could fuck a person really bad -

But let's not get all "Do a line, and your life is over" here... It's the same point somebody made with pot - if you start crowing about how your life will come crumbling down around you if you mess with a drug, people won't understand the REAL truth if they actually have a real experience with it that falls far short of the dire consequences that were supposed to be guaranteed.

Anyway, I don't know what my point is - but I've done meth and not ended up a tweaker - so I'm sure other people have too.

I agree with the point - an addict is an addict - if you want to destroy yourself with ANY substance you CAN do it!

[justabob]

95. No

but I'd bet you and those like you are definitely in the minority. It only took one line for me and I was on the shit for about a year and a half. Ten years later I am still fighting back from that time in my life.

[pitohui]

124. you're not the only one, you're probably the majority

however how many are going to speak up and share their experience and go against the popular hysteria of the day?

meth has been around an awfully long time, gosh, it's amazing that there is a human left alive in north america if all the scare stories are true


hell, the hysteria actually created a lot of the problem, when amphetamines were easily available from any general practitioner, what need to buy speed from a street dealer, when speed could be manufactured from quality chemicals, what need to manufacture it from crap in cold medicines and cleaning products

[Jack_DeLeon]

135. Good points...

you never heard about the people who use drugs and live normal lives, you only hear about the ones that are problems.

[Iris]

272. Check out Frontline's program about this at PBS. Meth has gone through

various stages of potency depending on various factors. At the Frontline.org website, I think they show various graphs that co-relate the level of addiciton with the purity of the drug at various times.

You might have just got lucky.

[AndyTiedye]

79. If People Could Do Any Drug They Wanted, Would Anyone Get Into Meth?

Never done it, never wanted to.

It seems to be everybody's least-favorite drug.
If all drugs were legal and people could do any drug they wanted, would anyone get into meth?

Just asking...

[pitohui]

125. time management

you can drive longer w.out falling asleep, you can study longer w.out falling asleep, ideas (admittedly most of them shitty in the cold light of day) come pouring out and you can do brainstorming more easily (just leave lots of time to edit out the shitty stuff when you come back down), its relative amphetamine used to be prescribed to fighter pilots because it enhanced alertness

it is not all bad but it does have the usual problems you expect from sleep deprivation, risk of accident, risk of getting grouchy, for me i discovered that it really caused me to be signficantly angrier and more violence-prone so i would not risk taking it any longer, also i felt really depressed and sad after it wore off, so just not worth it to me

however it is not realistic to assume that people are idiots who are taking this drug even tho it has no positive perceived benefit, of course, it has a positive benefit, indeed, the press is guilty of hysterical claims that you can have sex for 72 hrs straight and similar exaggerations that are $$$ in the pocket of the drug manufacturers

i would like to see some of these "news" reporters take some meth and have sex for 72 hrs and show us how! truth in advertising would be one way to cut down on people's attraction to the drug

[K-W]

268. Well, no, they would use cocaine. EOM

[Tsiyu]

80. Meth is a nightmare

and it is an epidemic everywhere

Throwing people in jail only to let them back out for more is not working.

We need ads on TV exposing the dangers of meth, not more ads for pot. We need pot legal, because it is safe and can provide a high - much like alcohol if not abused - that is not going to significantly alter one's brain and body chemistry.

Alcohol is legal because people want to get high. Meds - legal prescribed meds - are taken by the armloads in every community in America. Why? because people want to feel good.

The president gets high, Rush Limpdick gets high, people with eating disorders get high on food, people with shopping addiction get high on credit, people addicted to porn get high in front of their computers. Are we going to demonize every addiction in America? I just can't be so judgemental.

I have seen "crank" destroy people, but the methods used to punish them DO NOT WORK. It is time to pull a bit of dough out of the prison system and attempt some rehabilitation programs, some outpatient detox, some therapy and help for addicted people. So many meth addicts are just regular, well-meaning people who get addicted trying to stay up all night for their third job, or who get caught cooking to make a few bucks. They are stupid, but not evil for the most part.

I wish there was funding to help break the hold meth has on them. We can pass all the silly laws we want, regulating everything from Sudafed to Draino, but these measures do nothing to help the addicts or the people around them.

[bowens43]

81. Why exactly should the patriot act contain

anti-drug provisions? The patriot act is a horrible piece of legislation and broadening it's scope is a truly bad idea. I don't see how any democrat could support this.

[tjwash]

206. Because we are on "terra" burnout, and needed another boogyman.

[Breeze54]

82. You are a hypocrite!

You say you're against meth...it's been around for a long time!!
Yet you admit you smoke dope!! 'Dope' being the operative word!
I knew LOTS of speed freaks in Nevada and when they weren't doing lines?
They were smoking dope!! Hitting the bong!!
The (meth) CRANK dealers SELL the marijuana, dumbbell!!!!
They get you jacked up and then sell you something to calm you down!!
AND THEY CARRY WEAPONS TOO!!! BIG oozi's!!! (sp?)
People DO get hurt from smoking weed!!!
Hurt ...like ...DEAD!!!!

Wake UP!!
:grr:
You are so naive'! Cripes!!

PS. Today's "meth" as in Crystal Meth???
ISN'T!!!
It's called CRANK!!! Synthetic Meth!!!
The Poor Man's Cocaine/Crystal Meth!!!

[earth mom]

83. I have family members whose lives were ruined by drugs.

I don't think any drug should be legalized including pot.

And meth-OMG-if there is a drug that's created hell on earth, meth is it. :(

[obxhead]

84. 5 to 40 for possession will not solve the problem....

that is my only argument.

No I do NOT have the answer, but our drug laws are not creating the desired results.

They are creating a HUGE tax burden though.

[HughBeaumont]

85. I don't think ANY form of meth or heroin should be legal.

And I think it's hilarious bordering on lunacy when it's even suggested. These are drugs on a whole other level. They fuck lives, health and mental states up PERMANENTLY. I'm related to someone who is doing heroin and is probably on her way up to meth by now. She hasn't been seen by the family in a year and a half. Each drug has extremely high first-time addiction propensity and equally low recovery rates. I can't tell you how many cases my SW wife has thanks to this shit. The biggest sufferers are the children, who have to grow up and watch everything they love deteriorate fast.

And legalizing it won't prevent a black market. If an addict is fiending, he or she ain't going down to the damned clinic to get a fix. They want it whenever and HOWever and will steal your dog to get it.

[madokie]

86. being an older pot head, everyday since '68 except when none was to be

found, The being illegal part put me in contact with a lot of serious drug users, cocaine, meth, anti-anxiety pills, downers. I just thank my lucky stars that the meth didn't rub off on me. Made me feel good for about 20 minutes then would take days to wear off. Thank you lucky stars. Both my sons feel the same way too btw. I used to lay awake at night worrying about what my kids would grow up to be like, now that they are grown i see they are so much like myself and their mother. Again thank you lucky stars.
Meth is the worst of the worst, i've seen it destroy then kill so many of my bro's and sis's that i say we do all we can to stop the manufacture of it.

[Skinner]

88. So, just curious...

(Putting down bong for a moment to join the conversation)

How effective is the current approach at fighting the Meth epidemic? Since Meth is illegal, I'm assuming nobody does Meth. Am I right, or am I right?

[eeyore]

115. It's only getting worse, and is spreading eastward across the country.

Skinner, please go watch this documentary.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/

It's incredibly informative, and exposes how the Bush administration has actually helped to spread the epidemic by ignoring it.

Laws that put pseudoephedrine behind the counter on a state by state basis are a tiny step. Western state lawmakers have been trying to get a national bill like this together for quite a while. First they, in conjunction with the DEA, tried to get the drug makers to voluntarily put it behind the counter, and they refused with the backing of the Bush administration. They claimed it would hurt their profits.

What frustrates me so much is that the common reaction at DU, no matter how sweet my approach, is that this is just a result of the failed drug war. Legalize it all and everything will be just fine. That's an insanely naive approach. This drug is not like any other, and it's just as harmful for pro-legalization advocates to lump all drugs together as it is when the DEA does the same thing. All drugs are not created equal, and the thought of having hordes of state sanctioned tweakers going to shooting galleries to get their fix is completely off-base. They would have to basically lock users up in residential programs, and make them sign their children over to the state while they are in there.

Just please go watch the documentary, then I think we can have an informed discussion about this.

All I ask is that people try to stop with the flip attitude that I'm on the side of the man when I talk about how fucked up my state is becoming because of meth.

[Skinner]

150. I bet that bothers you a lot.

"the flip attitude that I'm on the side of the man when I talk about how fucked up my state is becoming because of meth."

Imagine how much it bothers people who support drug legalization/decriminalization to be dismissed as taking too many hits from the bong. And imagine how much it bothers them to be accused of not giving a shit about the scourge of drugs like meth.

Not all advocates of legalization/decriminalization are drug users themselves. And not all advocates of legalization/decriminalization believe that government should do nothing. My impression is that they usually support legalization/decriminalization because they believe the current approach isn't working, they believe locking up drug users harms more than it helps, and they recognize that there are literally hundreds of millions of dollars that could be spent actually treating people if we stopped wasting it on failed "get tough" strategies.

[ProfessorGAC]

175. In Fact Skinner, I Didn't See One Poster Here That Said Do Nothing

Rather, many like me, said that what they're doing now is USELESS! It's not working. That's hardly the same thing as condoning doing nothing. But, doing nothing is better than wasting tax money on a solution that is accomplishing nada!

This poster just does not want to see that the difference in opinion is not correlated to a lack of compassion.
The Professor

[eeyore]

179. Skinner, I've tried every approach with this.

I am a very calm and rational person, and don't generally believe that lashing out is a reasonable or effective way of communicating. I'm just tired of having the same circuitous intellectual wank sessions over this issue. I've used plenty of drugs in my time, and for most drugs I support legalization, and for all I believe in a decriminalization approach. Drug addicts are sick and need treatment for their illness - that's priority number one.

What I just don't get is the prevailing attitude that every drug is equal. That's the same approach the DEA has been using to criminalize drug users in the failed war on drugs. People need to realize that casual meth users are incredibly rare, and that it is not equatable to anything we have ever known.

I'm not even talking about law enforcement, and have never mentioned that in my posts. What I'm talking about is the notion of removing the key ingredient for manufacturing the drug from the market. Force the drug companies to come up with viable alternatives that can't be cooked into the poison that's taxing every social system in my state. Currently 85% of the property crime in Oregon is Meth related. One very clear way to change that is to make the drug more difficult to manufacture. I'm not saying it will cure the problem, but it's better than just sitting by and watching society rot, isn't it?

Again, I've said nothing about turning drug addicts into criminals. I'd like exactly the reverse. All I'm asking is that people set aside their previously-formed beliefs for a moment, do some research about the difference between meth and other drugs, and then form an opinion about how to deal with it.

[Tsiyu]

180. Good answer

The money wasted on the "War on Drugs" could fund a lot of helpful programs. Why have I seen ZERO ads against meth on TV? Because we live in a time when we try to solve every problem with violence rather than by education, I suppose.

But many in law enforcement are sick of putting their lives at risk for an unwinnable war.

Unfortunately, many "geekers" up here are parents of young kids. Raising small kids is exhausting and expensive and can be extremely depressing in an isolated, poverty-pocked home. A little meth, and you can work a few more hours, get the laundry done. If you cook some, you can pay the light bill.

Ignorant solutions. Yes. How do you solve ignorance?

Imagine places where parents learn to be parents and learn to find joy in their kids' success and security? Group homes where parenting classes and computer classes and jobs skills classes could be taught to the recovering addict? Places where their kids could be close by to encourage and inspire them.

No, we bust into a home with loaded guns, screaming, send kids to strangers and parents to cells where they meet up with even bigger losers. We try to combat ignorance with brute force and neglect.

[eeyore]

185. I agree with you about the war on drugs

It's total crap. You're right, you never hear radio ads against meth. I hear them about pot every day - that's completely insane.

I've never known a pot smoker to break in and gut an entire house of it's wiring and plumbing to sell as scrap metal. Some tweakers just did that in Portland a couple of months back.

Stoners don't neglect their children to the point that the kids are found sitting around unfed in moldy diapers. That happened here a while back as well.

My brother stole checks from my parents while they were out of town, and wrote thousands of dollars worth of checks to himself. Stoners don't do that.

You're right, there is a complete disconnect when all drugs are proscecuted by law enforcement as equals. There is also a huge disconnect when people advocate for the complete legalization of all drugs. That's what frustrates me.

I'm disturbed that every time I talk about trying to deal with the access meth cooks have to a constant supply of pseudoephedrine I am met with a huge chorus of outrage. Immediately jump to the conclusion that I'm talking about more law enforcement, and that couldn't be further from the truth. There's a knee jerk reaction that I'm trying to combat, and I'm beginning to think it's a losing battle.

[Tsiyu]

204. Maybe you could outline your ideas

as to the best solutions and people would understand where you're coming from? I'm always eager to hear new ideas.

Some parents do all sorts of horrible things, and many are NOT on meth. I agree, meth does seem to exacerbate the evil in some people, but there are all sorts of evils being done to kids even in the "Wilderness Camps" that are supposed to get kids off of drugs.

I think the point of contention some have is that the current approach is not working. We need some new ideas.

[eeyore]

224. This whole thing started with the pseudoehpedrine registry concept

I've posted about Oregon's new law placing Sudafed behind the counter a number of times. Every time I've had to defend myself against posters who are disgusted with that law for various reasons. Some don't want their access to Sudafed limited, others just say that the war on drugs is bullshit, while others just say legalize it and the problem will go away.

That's my frustration. Most of the posters in the above camps refuse to offer any concrete solutions to anything, they just want to criticize the Oregon law for one of the above reasons. Very rarely do I get anyone to step out of their talking points and actually try to come up with some concrete solutions. People seem to be stuck on repeat, and it's driving me insane.

This thread is the first time that I've had any success in finding anyone who believes that the Oregon law and others like are a positive first step in the right direction. I'm willing to entertain other ideas, but for some reason I can't get people to engage on this topic beyond complaining about their pet issues.

[XemaSab]

201. It's a challenge

My worry is that if it's decriminalized, it will be easier for folks to try it once.

A close friend of mine first smoked crack in Central America, and he wound up dropping out of Berkeley and not on speaking terms with his parents because they wanted him in rehab. And this is 6 months after his best friend OD'd on heroin.

The war on drugs has been a failure, but there has to be a safer approach than legalization for drugs like crack, heroin, and meth. Crack, heroin, and meth destroy communities, families, and lives.

[Is It Only Me]

89. I don't get it either

I'm all about libertarian-style "everyone just minds their own business" but I'm enough of a realist to know that sometimes you have to step in, on certain issues. Sometimes people just won't know better. The meth issue is one of those where I do agree with cracking down on it. I think the government should sometimes look after the wandering toddler citizenry before they stick their wet fingers into electrical sockets.

[Zookeeper]

207. Welcome to DU, Is It Only Me! n/t

[LWolf]

90. Anyone who has seen the effects face to face

would have a very difficult time justifying legalization.

I guess if the person using the drug had an independent income, didn't have to work for a living, and had no children or other dependents now or ever, choosing to use a drug to destroy themselves might be valid. In reality, that's not the case, is it?

Working with the publics children, it appalls me to see what the children of meth addicts endure.

[Quantess]

173. I have to agree

Meth isn't in the same league as weed, regarding the damaging effects to society. Not even close.
Children in meth families are suffering, and I wish something more could be done about it. The kids get an unfair setback early in life, which affects society for future generations.

Here in Oregon, there seems to be a bigger emphasis on treatment compared to other states that have a worse meth problem. Although I'm not as knowledgeable as some, I would bet that treatment is a good way to combat the problem...or at least, treatment should be there for people who choose to get help.

[Zookeeper]

209. Welcome to DU, Quantessd! n/t

[LWolf]

229. I know that there is a high level of awareness here

of the problems, as well as a focus on treatment. As far as treatment goes, those who go through treatment and stay clean are few and far between in my small experience; just with the parents of students I've taught. That's not really a representative sample, though. I hope it works for more than those I've seen!

[Caoimhe]

308. Welcome to DU and nice to see another Oregon DUer!!!

[Bridget Burke]

91. People get suspicious about the anti-meth "propaganda"

Remember the fable of the boy who cried wolf? Eventually, a real wolf showed up.

Meth was around in the late 60's & was seriously bad back then. Junkies might steal your TV--but then they'd shoot up & nod out. Speedfreaks would cause trouble just for the hell of it. Plenty of people don't remember that time, or lived it in a privileged bubble. "Let's smoke some grass & then look for 'shrooms" was not the only attitude--unfortunately.

I'd see heroin legalized before meth. Junkies can function if they get their drug--it's a chronic condition that requires medication. I wouldn't care for that lifestyle, myself. But junkies can even grow out of their habit--if they live long enough.

Compulsory medical treatment and/or rehab would be a better for meth users than prison. But I wouldn't support "free-range" meth sales.

Last time I needed medication for a cold, I picked up a card from the shelf where the generic Sudaphed had been kept. (This was in a grocery store.) When I got to checkout, I turned in the card & signed a register. This was hardly inconvenient.

[sendero]

92. Oh boy...

... nobody hates meth more than I do, I saw my best friend's life DESTROYED by this crap and literally almost 20 years later he is still struggling to get his life back.

But I have to ask you one simple question. Exactly what has being illegal done to curb meth? I just don't see it. I don't see the legality of any drug having much to do with how many people use it.

You can make idiocy illegal, it's not going to make one jack shit bit of differece, the idiots are all still here.

If all the money that is spent on "law enforcement" was spent on treatment for those who realize they are powerless against something so insidious, then at least something could be accomplished. As it is, absolutely nothing is being accomplished, the stuff is EVERYWHERE and I HATE IT.

[Toots]

97. How many people die from tobacco use verses meth?

Speed kills we all know that but it doesn't hold a candle to tobacco yet no great outrage here.. Priorities folks. This is just one more boogie boogie fear fear thing...Meth has been around for decades. You are aware the military distributes meth at times called "stay awake tablets" Methampheteminesulphate. It is packaged in every survival kit.

[TX-RAT]

99. If you haven't seen this link, you need too.

http://www.drugfree.org/Portal/DrugIssue/MethResources/faces/index.html#

[meganmonkey]

100. I agree with you that Meth is in a league of its own, as far as drugs go

In fact, the first time I heard of it, I was on a road trip and going through Grants Pass, OR, and I asked a friend "What the hell is wrong with that family" - parents and a couple teenage kids with messed up teeth and sores on their faces - that's when I learned what meth was.

I can understand where you are coming from - 10 years later and meth is all over the country and it is some FUCKED UP shit.

But I don't fully agree as far as legalization goes. One thing that drug legalization in general will provide is REGULATION. And meth clearly needs to be regulated the hell out of the picture. I know it is not that simple, but I think an argument can be made that if drugs in general are decriminalized and regulated, the illegal manufacture of tweaked out dirty meth will decrease. It would also help destigmatize drug addiction treatement and make it more readily available e.g. with the tax dollars earned from legal, regulated drugs.

So that's my 2 cents.

Peace!

[NuttyFluffers]

299. i agree with you, esp about legalization.

what people forget is it is easier to control something when it is within the system than when it is from without the system. when it is in the system there is more controls and safeguards and management involved. from control of the propaganda (removing the romance of illicitness), to stripping the monetary advantages, to focus on treatment, putting an overwhelming stressor within your social framework helps to strongly mitigate its effect on the community. kicking it out and leaving it to its own devices is just asking for trouble. keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer.

[FlaGranny]

101. My attitude is the same

as yours. I have two close friends, both in prison at the moment, both with destroyed lives.

[CottonBear]

102. I agree with you. I never even knew what meth was a few years ago.

It is a plaugue and a scourge upon our society.

[nolabels]

103. Most anything you put in your body will eventually kill you in one........

way or another. Drugs should be your last resort even if you are a suicide jockey.

btw, if you really feel the need to kill yourself try something interesting, like skydiving :banghead:

[BushOut06]

104. I don't know if we should criminalize their use either

I agree, we shouldn't legalize the use of such dangerous drugs as meth, heroin, and crack. But at the same time, I don't think putting addicts in prison is the answer either. We need to focuse on rehabilitation and treatment programs instead of punishment, which really does no good.

Now for those manufacturing and peddling this stuff, I don't have a problem with locking them up.

[Walt Starr]

105. Yeah, put sudafed behind the counter

then force the meth chemists to go back to extracting ephedrine for their illicit labs out of a freely growing weed and where they can get seeds for the plant (which are not illegal) all over the internet.

And note that ephedra is not a commponly recognizable plant, either! Certainly not easy to recognize like cannabis sativa!

[eeyore]

110. Do you object to bomb making materials being regulated Walt?

Do you have a problem with monitoring the transactions of the kind of materials used to build the Oklahoma City bombs? Essentially an OKC sized bomb has gone off in the Northwest, and we're trying to deal with it. Meanwhile, the Bush administration sides with the drug companies who refuse to monitor the sales of their product, saying it will hurt their profits.

Watch this documentary, Walt.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/
It talks all about the history of meth ingredients, and how the drug has evolved over time. The head of the DEA talks very specifically about trying to get rid of the meth problem through getting rid of access to the ingredients.

Sure, meth can be made from other ingredients, but the epidemic right now has been caused by psuedoephedrine.

How can it be wrong to monitor who buys the shit and in what quantity?

[Walt Starr]

112. Actually, no, I don't

all I am doing is pointing out the next method that will be used because, quite frankly, any attempt to regulate the current methodology will only result in a movement to the next.

If you regulate the current methodology whith an eye towards the next steps they take, you'll be able to actually do something about the problem.

If you take no steps to prepare for the next methodology they will use, you've accomplished absolutely nothing.

[eeyore]

120. Agreed.

There's a large section of that documentary that deals with supply issues, and it's really fascinating. I had no idea that drug manufacturers in India were selling pseudoephedrine in bulk to anyone who wanted to buy it. Stopping that is what has driven tweakers to need to buy Sudafed. Their supply of the pure shit has been shut down.

Check it out. It's really informative.

[High Plains]

146. "The epidemic has been caused by pseudoephedrine." WRONG

Home-cooked meth accounts for a small fraction of all meth, maybe 20%. The vast majority is manufactured in real labs in the Southwest and in Mexico.

A better name for the meth provisions of the Patriot Act would be "The Mexican Meth Market Share Enhancement Act."

[Batgirl]

106. Just because someone doesn't agree with your approach

to dealing with this problem doesn't mean they are guilty of downplaying the horrible effects of meth addiction.

Usually it just means they don't agree the approach you favor is going to help anything.

Maybe making it a bit harder to easily obtain large quantities of Sudafed will help a bit. I'm certainly not bothered enough by a minor inconvenience for this aspect of it to matter. But everytime they put up a roadblock like this it seems to have some other unintended consequences. For instance, I've heard that meth producers in Mexico really like that it's getting harder for people in the US to cook their own meth. Means there's more market share for the smugglers, with an accompanying rise in organized crime.

It's possible to understand how devastating this particular drug is, and at the same time not agree that the solution is an increased legal crackdown. Prohibition hasn't ever worked that I'm aware of, wishful thinking won't make it work now.

[mdmc]

108. Crack, cocaine, and heroin have kept meth ENTIRELY out of my city

The drug war is a failure. The destruction that you see in your city is facilitated by addiction and criminality.

[MadHound]

109. You want to lessen the impact of meth

You want to decrease per capita usage, end the scourge of the crime wave that accompanies meth, you want to put an end to the toxic waste sites dotting the landscape?

Then I'm sorry, but the only thing to do is to legalize meth, and every other drug.

It has been show time and again that when a drug is legalized, be it heroin in England or alcohol in America, the per capita usage rate goes down.

Legalize meth, make it clean, cheap and plentiful, then you will no longer have to deal with the crime wave that accompanies it today.

Legalize meth and let it be manufactured under safe, sanitary, controlled conditions, and not only will you see the disappearance of these garage chemists' toxic waste sites, but you will also see a decrease in some of the health effect that accompany illicit meth.

Legalize meth, and tax it, and you can fund education and rehab programs that will bring down the usage rates even further.

Legalize all drugs, and control them like one would do with alcohol. Including taking children away from addicted users, just like we do with alcohol.

This isn't a libertarian arguement, this is a common sense arguement. We've fought the War on Drugs for decades now, and all it has done is increase usage rates, incarcerated otherwise law abiding citizens needlessly, caused a huge secondary crime wave to ravage this country, taken away our civil liberties, and made money for the few, the lawyers, politicians, police and criminals, all at the expense of the rest of us. There is one definition of insanity that goes like this, doing the same thing over and over again, yet expecting a different result each time. We have been collectively engaged in insanity for years and decades now. Don't you think that it's time that we wised up and treated this sensibly and sanely?

[Frank Cannon]

114. I haven't seen a lot of "meth sympathy" on this board

Most of the people I've discussed that topic with are easily as disgusted with it as you and I are.

There are always a few "devil's advocates" out there. ALWAYS. Some people just need to feel special or something just by being different from all the other posters, no matter how absurd they come off looking.

[ProfessorGAC]

121. Well, Perhaps The Issue Is. . .

. . .that you're not reading carefully. I am showing no lack of sympathy for those addicted, but i don't want the gov't working on any more solutions like shoving OTC's behind the counter, since that's not working. If it were, the "epidemic" would already be subsiding since that solution is so easy to implement.

But, it's not working. And, they aren't changing direction. So one wonders, is the epidemic based upon the same data gathering schemes used to continue the needless funding of the war on drugs? If so, i don't want those public funds spent.

I can sympathize with those INDIVIDUALS with a problem due to meth. I don't sympathize with any sweeping social "solutions" organized by the same buffoons whose WAR ON DRUGS has fostered a $50 billion black market.
The Professor

[pitohui]

117. well some of us have actually taken meth

i'm sorry but people make a choice to be addicted to this product, it isn't automatically addictive, i have a friend right now who is an addict and you know what? she was a shithead always ripping us off and screwing people over before she started on the meth, she is what she is

as far as i'm concerned, it's time to let life's losers kill themselves and get out of my way

not very progressive of me, i know, but i'm tired of all society being reorganized and MY freedoms being crushed to provide price support to drug manufacturers, which is what all the new laws based on meth hysteria are there to accomplish

there are plenty enough billionaires in mexico, we don't need new laws to give them better control over meth production and distribution

if that is cold and libertarian of me, so be it

the lives ruined by meth were already ruined, a healthy person does not continue to take a drug that doesn't improve and support her, meth made me grouchy and violent so *grok this, radical concept* i stopped taking it, allergy medications originally prescribed by the doc but then OTC greatly improved my life and allowed me to breathe normally so i continued taking them

how hard is that?

people who want to destroy themselves will find a way

i no longer tolerate such people in my home nor do i enable their self-destructive activity, the sooner they hit bottom, the sooner they can turn it around, when we pretend we can change all society to humor the drug addict and make her safe we are just enabling

and i'm done w. enabling

so you see those who are affected by the drug addicts can have a different response and different beliefs than you have, our comments are not based on lack of experience, our comments are based on the simple observation that throwing our drug addicted family member or friend in jail by criminalizing their activity just stops them from getting useful work and causes them to rip us off even more

it is silly to be against prohibition of alcohol and yet support prohibition against meth, which is actually less addictive and harmful for most of us, i bet until we created the culture of meth hysteria most people over the many decades since its invention had taken it a few times to study for exams or to party all night and then had never taken it again, no harm, no foul, but when you create a culture that is actually centered on the drug and your entire circle is involved, then you have just greatly increased the chances of creating addicts, haven't you?

[WeRQ4U]

128. If it were JUST the tweakers that are injured by their habit, then I agree

But it's not. These people have children that they neglect and harm. They accidentaly blow up apartment complexes and start basements on fire. They commit crimes, sometimes violent, against other members of society. They put an undue burden on law enforcement, not simply because of the TAKING of the drug, but of the crimes committed to SUPPORT taking the drug. What do you think we should do about that? Should we just let them continue to abuse the drug and commit these crimes against others simply because YOU haven't been inconvenienced yet? If that's your position, then I couldn't disagree with you more.

I live in a rural state and deal with meth addicts every single day at my job (and will be seeing even more of them in a couple weeks when I start my new job). My best friend growing up is currently recovering. I have experience in this area from a criminal justice point of view. And my criticism of your option is that it's idealistic and, quite frankly, lazy. You cannot just say "let life's losers kill themselves and get out of my way" because it's a lot more complex than that. I agree with you that throwing meth addicts in jail for using the drug is not working and it won't work. Criminalization without rehabilitation is pointless and an undue burden on our prison system. But TREATMENT is needed. Thinking that all tweakers will fair as well as you did, without some form of direction, is ridiculous. Likewise, equating a methamphetamine addict to the casual pothead is equally bonkers. They need guidance and the state should provide that guidance and make it mandatory. I find this to be the most progressive option. But the problem is, you cannot have this type of treatment without some restriction of personal freedom. After all, these people haven't shown that they want to get off the drug, and become productive members of socity on their own. Nor have they shown the responsibility needed to get themselves off the drug without "assistance". Therefore, you HAVE to lock them away in some type of facility while they undergo that treatment. It has to be intensive and supervised. And if they turn to the drug once they leave treatment, and if they engage in criminal behavior because of it, I think the state has to be VERY strict. At that point, if they refuse to assimilate into a productive, thoughtful society, and they remain a danger to everyone they meet, they put them in the clink with the rest of society's misfits.

And no, this doesn't apply equally to all drugs because not all drugs produce the same collateral damage that meth does.

[MadHound]

129. And guess what, it isn't meth itself that is bringing about these crimes

It is the fact that meth is illegal that is bringing about these crimes. Make meth legal, and have it produced in controlled production labs and guess what, the problem of exploding apartments goes away. Make meth legal, and relatively cheap and easy to get, and you won't have these crimes, these violent crimes, that meth addicts commit in order to feed their habit. Make meth legal, and you won't have these undue burdens on law enforcement because these crimes that SUPPORT meth users won't be happening.

As far as the children go, yes, we should continue to do what we do now with those children, take custody away from them and put them into foster homes until the parents clean up their act. Much like we do with alcoholics already. And having meth legal, and out in the open, it will probably be easier to spot and deal with these problem families.

The crimes you speak of aren't committed because of meth, it is because meth is illegal. Legalize it, and you won't have this secondary crime wave.

[WeRQ4U]

131. Legalizing meth will not solve the problem.

Having people addicted to methamphetamines is not LIKE having them smoke pot all day. They are two completely different euphorias and two completely different reactions to their respective euphorias. I know productive pot smokers. Shit, I went to Lewis and Clark law school in Portland, Oregon for Christ's sake. There were more intelligent law students that SMOKED than there were that didn't. But you can do that with Marijuana. You cannot do that with Meth. If meth is legal, it's addicts are jobless, moneyless, homeless and clueless. They will continue to do things that are illegal, like breaking into convenience stores, or stealing from strangers, friends and relatives, in order to provide for their habit....regardless of who's selling the shit. Tweakers will commit crimes to support their drug habit whether it's legal or illegal. I cannot stress this enough.....IT'S NOT FUCKING POT.

And do you really think that OUR governement will fix the problem correctly by legalizing it? Fuck no. I wouldn't trust our government to control this any better than they already have. They'll outsource it's production to a few, greedy manufacturers who will fix prices or convince the government to fix prices at a level HIGHER than it should. Sooner or later, individuals will find a way to make meth CHEAPER by, GASP, Stealing shit to make it. It's not like Meth is expensive to get. I could walk out my office door and buy some in 5 minutes with little effort. And then what do we have? We have a drug that is now legal, with just as many, if not MORE people severly addicted to it, and you STILL have people making it in rural farm houses and apartment basements. Only NOW, you have more billions of dollars being sent from our government to the already irresponsible and greedy drug manufacturers.

[MadHound]

137. Uh, yeah, right, whatever.

First off, I suggest that you go actually talk with some meth addicts, or former meth addicts, and find out just exactly what the percentage is that worked while they were hooked on meth. It is pretty damn high there friend.

Second, I suggest you go check out the success that the US had with the legalization of alcohol, and the success the British had in legalizing heroin. Go look at the reports and see just exactly how many people continued to make alcohol illegally, or who went out and purchased black market heroin over going to their local pharmacist. That number in both cases is very, very low.

While you may like to hyperventilate and over-react to this suggestion of mine, your position isn't backed up by anything approaching reality.

[WeRQ4U]

142. I work in a North Dakota courthouse....

Believe me, I get to see Meth addicts ALL day, every SINGLE day. Do you? What I see every day is a rabble of unproductive, jobless, dangerous SHELLS of people. They usually don't have jobs, and the ones that DO have jobs, work at Walmart, or gas stations, or fast food joints. They don't make enough money to rent their apartment, let alone sustain their addiction. Why do you think they're up there? They write bad checks, steal shit from people, break into buildings, start things on fire. The percentage of them workign while on meth is NOT "pretty damn high" my friend. I'm not entirely sure who you've been talking to, and when you talked to them, but the current batch of meth addicts are not, at all, a motivated, productive group. How's that for something "approaching reality".

And your point on alcohol and heroine brings me to what nobody seems to want to realize...that meth produces reactions and euphorias different than the other drugs you've cited and that, therefore, their treatment or control has to be different.

Methamphetamines generally block dopamine re-uptake mechanisms, or increase dopamine release, both of which lead to increased levels of dopamine in the brain. This produces feelings of alertness and high energy. Increases heart rate, blood pressure, nausea and "jitteriness." This is why people always talk about meth addicts being "on edge" all the time.

Heroine produces euphoria, dreamy drowsiness, and a general sense of well being - the effects have also been called a "whole body orgasm." Additional effects include: nausea, constipation, sweating, depressed breathing and heart rate. This is due to an opiates targeting types of opoid receptors - which are related to the body's natural pain killing NTSs, the endorphins.

Alcohol is a biphasic drug, producing two different types of responses depending on dosage. Low, harmless doses produce excitability due to the sensitazation of glutamate receptors. A High dose, however, inhibits the NMDA receptors and stimulates GABA - which is an inhibitory NTS. This produces drowsiness and CNS suppression.

All these are at the National Institue on Drug Abuse's website. http://www.nida.nih.gov/

Meth produces excitability and irrationality, while alcohol and heroine produce completely different responses. Therefore, the method of "controlling" their use and the degree of criminaltiy each requires has to be treated different. Legalization of Meth cannot be equated with the success of legalizing Heroine, Marijuana, Alcohol, Nicotene etc. They're completely different animals.

Listne, you're not going to convince me otherwise. I'm not going to convince you otherwise either. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[renate]

123. My mom volunteers with Victim Services at her local courthouse

Meth scares her WAY more than any other drug.

It is a bad bad bad bad bad drug for the users and for the people who love them. Her heart just breaks for all the family members who ask her whether their loved one will be okay again someday, because she knows that in all likelihood, that person they love is basically gone.

:scared:

on edit: The reason that she gets this question as a volunteer with Victim Services is that meth users get violent even with people they love, to the point where her services are needed.

[WeRQ4U]

130. Meth is a ridiculous problem.

The criminalization of it is not a problem with me, to an extent. These people need some form of restrictive treatment facility of which completion is mandatory. This crap about letting them "decide" when they want to undergo treatment is idealistic and irresponsible. If they aren't forced to do it, they won't. If they do not complete the program, or continue to use meth after completion, I have no problem with using the threat of jail time as a deterent. I know of no other good options.

You cannot continue to try to rehabilitate meth addicts if they aren't willing to cooperate with the treatment. And you can't let them just hang around, being a drag on society and a danger to other citizens. You have to lock them up. They aren't like pot smokers, even HEAVY pot smokers, because the nature of their addiction is different and the euphoria produces different reactions. Meth addicts get dangerous...pot smokers get hungry.

[Zookeeper]

215. I agree with you, except I don't think getting hungry...

is the most dangerous thing pot smokers do. Just like drinkers, pot smokers have no business driving under the influence. That is the only reason I oppose legalizing pot (even though I don't smoke it).

[WeRQ4U]

249. Yeah, I agree.

I was just making a funny. They shouldn't drive while somking' dope. And they should be punished for it, just as people are for drinking and driving. It's a valid concern, but I don't think the posibility of people driving under the influence of pot is a good argument against decriminalizing it's use. After all, booze is legal. You know?

[Zookeeper]

254. I know....

I just hate to add more dangerous drivers to our highways. And I don't think we're close to another prohibition on alcohol. :shrug:

[jeffrey_X]

132. No one really wants to shine the light on this because of the demographic.

If meth were an inner city or "black" problem this drug would be getting more attention (i.e. crack) and would be facing a lot more sructiny. But because it is effecting mostly white people, nobody wants to make a big deal of it.

[Zookeeper]

217. Perhaps.

Although, I've been hearing a lot more about meth during the last few years than any other drug, despite the fact that the Twin Cities doesn't have as much of a problem with it as some other places.

I think the fact that it's primarily a RURAL problem is what keeps it lower on the media's radar.

[eeyore]

234. It's not only rural anymore

It's all over the west, and moving east.

Check out the map at this link.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/map/

[Zookeeper]

253. Interesting. I just can't figure out why Minnesota is 51+....

and Wisconsin is zero....!?!

[Ron Green]

134. The comparison of meth with alcohol in this thread is misleading

because although alcohol poses perhaps a larger overall problem, meth is not taken casually or socially in the same way. To legalize meth is to sanction a deadly poison that has no useful personal or social value, unlike alcohol which is used responsibly by millions of people every day.

Unless we're willing to not only officially acknowledge but codify the differences among all the psychotropic materials, the "war on drugs" on the one hand and libertarian lunacy on the other will continue.

[fishwax]

138. the responses in that thread seem pretty reasonable to me

overall, anyway. Why is this legislation part of the Patriot Act? Why is it even national legislation, when many states with a problem already have state laws on the books dealing with the problem? I think DUers are right to be skeptical when the federal government tries to officially encode this drugs=terrorism connection that they've been pushing since 9/11. The next time the Patriot Act comes up for extension, they will point to the "success" of the legislation in the war on drugs (when in fact any such success will have been at the state level) as justification for broadening the Patriot Act to include other drugs.

[blm]

139. I'm with you - meth's a rage-inducing drug - just what any society DOESN'T

need.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

140. eeyore, meth isn't like pot or drinking.

I recently became a CASA volunteer and I've gotten to see first hand the different effect various substances have on families. This view is through the eyes of the children that are being effected. Meth is by far the worst drug in our area when it comes to a persons ability to parent and still maintain their habit.

I feel that social conditions play a large part on the rise in use we're seeing in my location. That being said I don't see a decrease in usage anytime soon.

[Sequoia]

141. I see people affected by Meth where I live.

Never saw much of it amoung people when I lived in Southern Cal, but up North they are every where and walk the streets with a forlorn lost glaze. They look physically terrible with eyes that have lost their spark. Very sad all around.

[rman]

143. I am dumbfounded as to where you got the idea that "most"

DU-ers support the use and availability of meth.

Which doesn't mean that most here would want to criminalize the users; the problem with meth is deep and multi-faceted, and any attempt to solve the problem should take that into account.

[eeyore]

144. I never said that anyone supports the use of meth

I said that whenever I bring up the idea of trying to deal with meth I am dismayed by the responses. There is a very vocal group of people that believe that all drugs should be legal, end of story. Another camp is outraged at what they perceive as a threat to their civil liberties - placing pseudoephedrine behind counters and creating registries. Both camps are extremely stubborn and argumentative, and I find it frustrating to deal with.

[rman]

169. I think the original discussion is somewhat confused

Because the OP refers to the patriot act. In that thread i see a lot of responses saying that a crackdown on meth is no reason to support the patriot act.
I see some but not that many responses saying that _in general_ availability of meth related medicine should not be restricted.

Moreover, this solution ignores underlying causes of demand for meth and similar drugs. If meth would be under control, people will find another drug.

[KamaAina]

145. A neglected frontier in the War on Meth: research

Is anyone working on new ways to combat meth addiction, analogous perhaps to methadone treatment, or to naloxone and naltrexone, for heroin addiction? If so, I am not aware of it; the prevailing attitude seems to be that once all the cold and sinus meds are behind the counter, and we click our heels together three times, the problem will just go away.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

153. There was some work being done with a drug called GVG

It had two small trial studies and if I recall both were considered hopeful.

I heard of this via a doctor friend of mine that was following the progress.

He said that there are too many people who have already lost their jobs, insurance and other financial resources due to abusing the meth for the pharmas to be able to get their required profit from marketing GVG. Unlike a drug like viagra where it's primary target market are insured and able to buy the at full asking price. Due to this he doesn't expect to see this go much further.

[eeyore]

174. There is currently no equivalent to methadone

Meth addicts at present have to quit cold turkey - no alternative has been found.

Meth floods the brain with dopamine, causing intense euphoria. It also damages the brain's ability to creat dopamine, causing users to experience massive depression when they are not on the drug. That's why it's so hard to kick. It generally takes 9-12 months of being clean for the brain to begin to produce dopamine again.

[Taverner]

147. I'll give you that meth is a dangerous, destructive drug

I've lost friends to it, and I've known those who destroyed their lives because of it.

I've also known friends who killed themselves huffing glue. I have a friend who died from HIV complications. But I don't advocate regulating glue or sex.

If you want to stop drug abuse, the only way you are going to do it is through education. Right now most anti-drug programs are filled with such BS that no one takes them seriously, and ends up throwing caution to the wind.

[Cronus Protagonist]

149. Show me a meth user who quit because there was a law

And show me someone who didn't start meth because of a law. I won't hold my breath.

Restricting sale of cough medicine with nasty ingredients might be a good thing for various reasons, and I don't have an axe to grind about that, but the meth makers will just cross the border to Mexico and get it there, or bring it in in a container or any one of literally hundreds of other methods. What's the point in sponsoring laws that won't and don't work?

The answer to drug abuse is not more laws, but more treatment, more education and more support, not laws and jail. A poor kid who's lost his parent's support because of meth use is most likely not much better off than when one of his parents are in jail for the same meth use.

I voter for treatment, education and support, not more draconian, ineffective laws, and I've never heard anyone advocate doing nothing. Perhaps that's a canard.

Educate Your Local Freepers Today!
Buttons, Stickers, Magnets for brainy people
http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13

[fleabert]

152. anyone who has a family member or friend addicted to meth agrees with you.

I do.

It is sick what that drug does. and the recidivism rate is astronomical.

[nadinbrzezinski]

155. I worked for ten years as a front line EMS worker

when I started I never had the pleaure of seeing a junkie, when I left I treated one of these a week... did I mention I only worked ONE shift?

Now as a front line EMS worker who treated ODs from a multitude of sources, including the first Extasy, and who got shot at on a regular basis by the dealers... I can tell you one thing... legalize the shit and TAX IT HEAVILY... so don't tell me I am unfamiliar with what it does to a society... I have seen it with my two damn eyes... treated many who have been direct and indirect victims... and off the record I know more than one cop and DEA agent that holds the exact same view. The other... well this is war right? lets fight it as if it truly was a war... otherwise, since we don't have what it takes to defoliate half of south america (coke trade) all of afgnaistan (Opium) imprison half or more of America's inner cities, oh and destroy the inner city while we are at it, and oh yes execute ever major fish around that benefits from this... well the other option is to legalize it.

by the way, as long as the CIA is involved in the drug trade in the inner city, GOOD LUCK...

[wordpix2]

171. very interesting post---as a teacher, I am really scared about meth

heading to the E. Coast. The kids are into everything else right now so this will be the "new" thing they'll be curious to try.

[nadinbrzezinski]

191. today it is meth

tomorrow it will be something else. Given the CIA was selling coke in Los Angeles at the height of Iran Contra... perchance some people have figured out that this shit is the way to go for social control? I mean it.... why they have made this such a fake war.

Reality is... many folks ON BOTH SIDES are getting very rich out of our puritanical believes.

[Zookeeper]

218. This is probably a really dumb question...

why did the dealers shoot at you? You'd think they would be glad you were keeping their customers alive to buy again!

[nadinbrzezinski]

291. Because at times we found things that

was enough probable cause for the cops to come busting in... and legally you have to tell....

If you've seen traffic I can even tell you one of those situations that was changed in the movie to protect the guilty... I guess... or the producers I am not sure.

[Zookeeper]

296. I haven't seen Traffic...

but, I understand your explanation.

Thanks!

[Rebelry]

156. I've seen first hand what this drug does to people

Meth houses becoming hazardous waste sites, people's brains permanently damaged by only one use, meth addicts wasting away.

I live in Washington State and it's at epidemic proportions here too.

it is a horribe horrible drug. Thanks for making this post and bringing it to the forefront.

[usregimechange]

158. All illegal drugs are bad for you but meth is very dangerous.

[The Backlash Cometh]

159. And the Dems wonder why we can't get a coherent, alert, dedicated,

reliable force behind their policies. If someone is just here because they want to make drugs legal, maybe that's not enough to justify your presence.

[High Plains]

219. I post here for many reasons.

Does that meet with your approval? If not, you can just fuck off.

[The Backlash Cometh]

238. If you're here just to meet my approval, you're in the wrong place

and already fucked.

[maveric]

162. I've been In and Around the Meth scene for 35 years.

I havent touched "the shit", for some 16 years now, but living in San Diego, which for years was deemed the Meth Capitol of the world, I see the damage it does to the user's, their friends and families, and property. IMHO, Meth is the WORST street drug out there. My ex-girlfriend went back on "the shit', and now looks like a 65 year old, toothless, incoherant, hag. She's only 40. A 47 year old frend of mine dropped dead at work because of extended Meth use. Another friend had his bank account emptied by a tweeker son. He ended up losing his house because of it.
Meth deteriorates your body, poisons your mind and robs you of your soul.
Take it from a former tweeker who learned the hard way.

[JPZenger]

167. 1/2 of all children removed from their families

There was a recent study in rural Iowa that found that half of all kids that needed to be removed from their families occurred because of meth addiction by a parent.

This drug is particularly hard on kids.

[eeyore]

186. It's the same in Oregon

Family services are in crisis here, and it's only getting worse.

[LuckyLib]

231. Teachers deal with meth kids every day. Sleep deprived,

hungry, angry, and way more focused on anything but what's going on in class. They are raising themselves and at a very early age they figure it out.

[Harald Ragnarsson]

177. Fine. Let's just put anyone connected with it in jail

Regardless of whether they committed some crime, just for possession. I'm sure it will work.

Prohibitions always work. Drugs are a distant memory thanks to the war on drugs. Everyone in the country can read now that we had a war on illiteracy. No more poor in the USA thanks the to the war on poverty.

So now let's specially call out a war on crank. I'm sure it will have just as catastrophically sucessful of results as all our other "wars" have. Terrorists are on the run, you know. "Wars" work. That's why it's our only response to any problem.

:sarcasm:

If people want to look nasty and be toothless, fine by me. It's not my place to tell them how to live. If they neglect their kids, take their kids away, but don't throw everyone else that does the same drug they do into jail like they committed some offense as well.

I'll believe all this "poor, poor meth addicts have to be helped whether they want it or not" crap when I quit seeing WINOS panhandling in every city I've ever been to.

Unless people commit a CRIME, ie, theft, injury, rape, murder etc, then I don't believe anyone else has any business sticking their nose into their life.

It's that whole Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness thing. Check it out.

[eeyore]

182. You didn't even read my post, did you?

That's exactly the problem I'm having here. I said nothing about the war on drugs, criminalization, or putting anyone in jail. You just looked at my post and immediately jumped to that conclusion.

Thanks for playing.

[Harald Ragnarsson]

187. You're the one playing, without a doubt

What's the game is my question.

How many threads have you started on this now? Last time I checked, Meth was illegal. WOuld you like to make it Super-Illegal?

Are you saying decriminalize? What, pray tell, would be the great difference between de-criminalizing or legalizing? Seriously? People would still do meth if it was de-criminalized, yes? What about it being LEGAL then makes you tear your hair out and cry out about it?

I've read your posts- what I get: Meth bad. Meth users Bad. Anyone that doesn't think Meth and Meth users should be ?????????? is crazy and out of control.

Well, count me as crazy and out of control, because no matter how many hysterical posts you make on the subject, I will still have the opinion that unless someone is actually committing some sort of CRIME, no one has any business sticking their nose into their life and telling them how they MUST live. Or else.

[dogday]

195. Take all the cold drugs off the shelf

still did not help... What would or could be the protocol to help these people would be my question.. Can we help?

[Harald Ragnarsson]

288. Stop making them criminals, number 1

It is just another wedge being used to seperate us as a people.

Really that's what 99% of these things are, IMO, issues used to divide us and keep us fighting each other rather than notice the giant criminals running the whole show and what their plans are.

[Nutmegger]

188. We do need solutions

It pisses me off that I have to show ID now whenever I purchase freaking cold medicine.

[leftofthedial]

189. legalizing drugs is not a panacea,

but it is a good first step

[RevolutionStartsNow]

193. I'm with you, eeyore

I've also seen the ravages of this drug, first hand.

Years ago I was way into coke, but eventually it stopped working, and someone offered me meth -- of course I loved it. Fortunately I hit bottom pretty quickly after that, before I got too far into the meth. I've been clean for almost 15 years now.

The problem with this drug is that a little goes a long way, and it's inexpensive and easy to make. And it takes people down very very quickly.

Legalizing is not the answer. Education and treatment are what we need.

[High Plains]

220. Should we have thrown you in jail?

[RevolutionStartsNow]

223. No, I'm not advocating that

I think the war on drugs has been a huge failure, and it doesn't work to jail drug abusers.

However, this doesn't mean I favor legalization either.

I don't have the answers, but I don't think many people realize how brutal of a drug this is, particularly for someone already inclined to addiction.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

200. I'm with you

I don't support legalizing drugs, but I can see the arguments for marijuana and I wouldn't go nuts if they did legalize it. But meth is just a whole other ball of wax. It's essentially a long term suicide pill with no value, and a lot of innocent folks get taken out in results of it.

I've been training to work as a police dispatcher, and as part of the job I have to keep an eye on anyone kept in a holding cell. All the cops I've talked to have been telling me is that the meth heads are the saddest and weirdest cases to look after, because you have no sense from one minute to another what they are going to try and do to themselves. And they are starting to outweigh the average drunk who gets brought in to sleep it off 2 to 1.

[patcox2]

203. I feel no need to protect people from themselves.

That being said, there are two sides to the libertarian argument. There are a few "survival of the fittest, social darwinist" libertarians around, but they don't tend to be progressive libertarians.

There are, as I said, two sides. First, all but the most dangerous recreational drugs should be legal. Second, drug addiction and abuse is a medical problem and medical treatment for it should be freely available to those who wish to save themselves.

For those who don't wish to save or better themselves, sorry, their misery is entirely of their own making. The government need not get involved.

[chefgirl]

264. THANK YOU

I've been sitting here reading this thread and getting more and more angry . There seem to be only two trains of thought in this thread.

1) Make meth MORE illegal than other drugs, presumably because making drugs illegal has stopped people from doing them in other cases
OR
2) Supply more treatment to people who have CHOSEN to pick up the drugs and ingest them of their own free will.

I've also read an awful lot of "anyone who has ever had a family member or friend involved or been involved with meth themselves would understand why its such a horrible drug".

I AM one of those people who have had one family member go to prison for ten years for robbing a bank to get money to buy meth, another family member severely addicted but chose to go to rehab and make it work for him, a friend who recognized he was well on his way to addiction and found it within himself to quit, and another friend who never could make herself quit and ended up dying from massive organ failure as a direct result of extended meth usage.
In the eighties even I was a 'crankster', but realized that it was a shit drug, did bad things to your body, your mind, your soul, and I decided not to do anymore of it.

Having said all that, I still CANNOT agree that any drug is inherently evil. Meth is nothing more than a chemical. Its the people who abuse it that are the problem, and no matter what anyone says about the ravages of being a meth addict (which are completely true) the fact remains, every person picks up a drug and puts it into their body the first time, without being pulled by an addiction to it.
Admittedly, this does not address the issue of gateway drugs which lead to other drugs, but the premise remains the same.

I do think there should be MUCH more treatment available for those who choose it, and that throwing drug addicts in prison does nothing to stop the addiction.
I also believe, and always will, regardless of the amount of 'personal' experience I've had with this drug, that its not the drug thats responsible for a persons addiction, but the person who decides to do the drug in the first place.

-chef-

[tjwash]

205. Why don't we just use the meth boogyman to push the Patriot Act through?

Oh, sorry. It turns out that's exactly what they did. They used the fear of wild eyed crystal junkies running rampant in our neighborhoods to push that act right through.

Don't you just feel a whole lot safer now?

Or did you think it was just a coincidence that we have been flooded in the last 6 months with meth-this, and meth-that crap from every media outlet?

[Charlie Brown]

262. I couldn't believe that crap

Now anyone who opposes the Partiot Act clearly supports Meth use (not). What a cheap gimmick to pull.

[bloom]

213. "insane self-serving Libertarians"

Actually there are quite a few of those types who post here.


I agree with you.

[Lolivia]

216. I think you are under a few false impressions

You appear to think that

1)people favor legalization of meth because they don't realize how bad it is
2)People who favor legalization want to do nothing about drugs


I have watched the PBS documentary, I am from the midwest, and I am perfectly aware of how dangerous meth is. I still favor legalizing drugs - NOT because I think it has "redeeming value" or because I think it isn't dangerous - but because I don't think the legal system is the right institution to deal with the problem.

I'll illustrate my point: I believe suicide should be legal. I do not believe the legal system should regulate what people do with their own bodies. I think the legal system should primarily function to protect people's rights from invasion by others and protect access to resources.

You do not need to tell me about the horrors of suicide - that's pretty obvious to everyone. You do not need to recite what it does to a person - it, uh, kills them. It is not the case that if you could just describe how harmful it is, I would be on board for criminalizing it. I do not think that is the job of the legal system to regulate what a person does with their own body, nor is the legal system the best way to deal with people that choose harmful behaviors.

That does NOT mean I approve of/encourage/don't care about it. It does NOT mean I favor doing nothing about suicide. It's just that threatening to put people in jail for it does nothing to alleviate the underlying causes. I favor diagnosis and treatment of depression and other mental illnesses that can lead to suicide. I favor providing social support in whatever way so people do not reach that point, etc.

And the last point: there is no way you can convince me that if suicide were legal, everyone would be trying it out.

THe same goes for meth. I understand the horror, but I don't believe the legal system is the proper channel for dealing with it. I do not think that legalization equals approval of a behavior. I think that the funds spent on enforcing criminal prohibitions on drugs can be better spent through education and treatment options. Locking up the precursor drugs does nothing about the demand for the drug - it does nothing to alleviate the underlying causes.

I also think that if the knowledge of what meth does to a person does not stop people from using it, the knowledge that they may go to jail is not going to stop them from using it.

[radio4progressives]

221. WTF?

This is the very first post I've seen on this subject.

Your subject header is way off base, completely exgerarated, distorted and way paranoid.

hmm...

[eeyore]

225. Read my original post.

I link to an LBN thread from last night. The attitudes in that thread are revolting. If you can read that thread and tell me that those are rational responses, then I'm not sure we'll get anywhere. I agree that the referenced bill doesn't belong in the Patriot Act, but the bill itself is a reasonable and creative idea to at least attempt to curb meth cooking.

[SPKrazy]

227. Personally I Hate The Scrutiny And Feeling Like You Are Some

Kind of criminal because you buy Claritin D.

It really is a pain in the ass.

I think that restricting the amount you can buy is sufficient.

It is easier to get a prescription for a narcotic than it is to buy Claritin D.
Meaning you don't have to show your ID, or sign a book, or give them your name and address, or answer questions about when the last time you bought Claritin D.
So if I were getting Oxycontin, I could just pick up my script, no questions asked.


Now something isn't right.

[autorank]

232. Meth leads to psychosis, at party levels. DXM does also, it's legal.

There is no debate at all about the problems caused by significant meth abuse. Over a period of weeks or months, chronic meth abuse will lead to a psychotic episode. If the user has an underlying psychotic disorder or bipolar disorder, excessive meth use will also bring on a psychotic episode. It's a disaster. I'm not talking about pharmaceutical psycho stimulants (although those can cause psychosis and mania among those with the conditions or a strong pre-disposition). I'm talking about street grade meth.

Any enamourment with meth can be quickly dispelled by taking a look at "Requiem for a Dream" or "Salton Sea", great meth exemplars.

DXM, active in Coricidin and Robotusin, is equally vile AND IT'S LEGAL. Kids can go in and buy it at their drug store or grocery store. This is the nastiest of "highs" creating all sorts of problems, including seizures. IT'S LEGAL, yet well known as an easy alternative for younger teens seeking a nasty high.

Drug laws should not be punitive for users, however certain drugs should remain illegal. Meth is one. Certain drugs should become illegal, DXM is one of them.

Great post!

[Trillo]

233. It's SIMPLY NOT TRUE that it can be purchased with an ID

from behind the counter at all pharmacies where it used to be available.

The last time I tried to buy pseudoephedrine I couldn't find it. When I spoke to the pharmacist at the Costco pharmacy, the pharmacist said all the cold meds had been reformulated with a replacement and that there was no pseudoephedrine available anymore at any Costco (they're just a 'mom and pop' size retailer--sarcasm). Something was said about "corporate" making the decision.

The Original poster and some others have claimed multiple times in this thread that all one needs to do is show some ID and psuedoephedrine will be bestowed upon a legal, legitimate purchaser. Simply that it's now "behind the counter" and is just as available as it used to be for legitimate uses is SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Perhaps a FEW pharmacies have placed it behind the counter, but not the one I shop at.

[eeyore]

236. Costco must have made a decision to stop selling it.

Perhaps they were tired of dealing with all of the tweakers coming in to buy it in bulk. Costco is a very Democratic leaning company, and it wouldn't surprise me if they felt that they were doing the world a favor by selling a different product.

As more companies make that decision perhaps the drug manufacturers will catch a clue. It's all about the bottom line for them, and they have refused to do anything at all. Hit them at the bottom line and perhaps they will research and mass market an alternative that really works.

[Trillo]

239. I doubt they had tweakers coming in to buy it.

I never saw any that appeared with the pock-marked skin, darting eyes, etc. I believe that about 10- or 15-years ago Costco limited the amount that could be purchased to two packages, at least in California, but that's from memory.

A later post of yours or another's on this topic mentioned that it was a manufacturer in India selling bulk quantities that has caused the DEA to rule as they did, which then caused Costco's corporate to decide they way they did. If it's true the mass quantities of pseudo sold to meth cooks was from India, then the wrong people are being punished by the lack of its availability at stores like Costco!

Hit them at the bottom line and perhaps they will research and mass market an alternative that really works.

Drug Companies already had a drug that patents had expired on that was being mass marketed to many! Corporate always passes on costs to the purchaser, it's a basic truism of capitalism. This has hit me, with my allergies, in my health and/or pocketbook. I'm sick of being held responsible for the actions of others. It destroys responsibility! Why be responsible when you're going to be punished for other's actions no matter what you do?

[w4rma]

256. Good forCostco. They sell in bulk and seeing as how the folks who run meth

labs would be their best customers on bulk buys of this type, they probably pulled it off of the shelf to prevent local labs from having such a easy source of this chemical.

Note that just because someone mixes Meth for money doesn't mean they use it. There is *massive* amounts of wealth to be made on the blackmarket for a meth producer who knows how not to get caught.

[McCamy Taylor]

241. Allergic rhinitis, sinusitis and asthma are major health problems, too.

Just like methamphetamine abuse. Get off your high horse, stop thinking in black and white and think about practical solutions to taking care of what really ails us.

Drug addiction is not just about access to drugs. It is about growing up in poverty, despair, broken or violent homes, income disparity, depression, apathy. It is a societal ill.

Legalization of drugs isnt just about weaning individuals from drugs, it is about stopping the illicit sale of drugs which leads to organized crime, violence, and secondary crime.

Putting pseudephrine behind a counter will not stop anyone from making meth. It just means all their buddies will buy it and pool it and make it together. Or they can get it across the border. And the price will get higher. And there will be more crime to pay for it. And the people who are in despair will continue to spiral down.

Your solution to meth abuse is like saying "Let's cure breast cancer by giving women prophylactic mastectomies."

The only medication which controls my allergic rhinitis is going to be phased out so that our government can pretend that it is doing something about the meth problem. My migraine headaches will probably spiral out of control again. And the fix wont do a damn thing. This is public health insanity at its worst.

[eeyore]

244. No high horse here...

I agree with everything you say. I never proposed that this would be an end all be all solution. My rant comes from the frustration I have when trying to have discourse with people on this issue. My sincere hope is that by limiting the bulk purchase of the ingredients of meth we can begin to make it more difficult to cook. I don't think that this will solve the meth problem, but I think it is probably a good part of a broader strategy.

I don't wish for you to have no access to the drugs that help you with your illness. I can't really see how it would cause that much of a problem, however, for you to be required to ask for it rather than just pull it off of the shelf. I also don't see how it's an infringement on anyone's civil liberties to have stores that sell the drugs keep a log of who is buying it. I know it's not the end all be all solution, but to me it's a hell of a lot better than doing nothing at all. People who are opposed to this don't ever seem to come up with any positive alternatives, just reasons that it's a bad idea. Do you have any better ideas?

[CountAllVotes]

293. Have you tried Allegra?

See my post on it on this thread. It has been a life saver for me. I've had allergies my entire life and I swear by Allegra. A day without it is sheer hell for me. It is a nonaddictive drug and it just came out in a generic form. From my understanding it will soon be sold over-the-counter. :loveya: Allegra! :)

:kick:

[Swamp Rat]

242. Stop the manufacture of pseudoephedrine

That's one solution.

[eeyore]

245. Or just place limits on how it can be purchased

That's what has been proposed that tends to get people incredibly outraged. There were people on the thread that I linked to calling out Democratic lawmakers who support this sort of legislation. It's beyond bizarre to me.

[benEzra]

283. How would you stop the major meth producers--not even located in the US--

from smuggling meth (or just pseudoephedrine, as if it were really necessary to the process) into the USA disguised as a routine cocaine shipment?

If you haven't noticed, cocaine, heroin, and pot are already banned in this country. Didn't stop the trade.

[savemefromdumbya]

248. Meth is scary

[cynatnite]

251. Meth lab across the street from us...

when we lived in Idaho we found out neighbors had one on their bathroom. When they were arrested, the fire department, ambulance and other vehichles were there. That's when I learned how dangerous making the stuff can be.

Not all drugs should be legalized and this is definitely one of them.

[Dhampir Kampf]

257. I really doubt anyone defends the usage, and production of meth. nt

[kineneb]

258. drug abuse can be self-medication

and until people accept this and treat the underlying causes, drug abuse will continue to be a problem. There is a movement in the mental health communities to recognize what is known as "dual diagnosis": drug abuse/addiction used to self-medicate for mental illnesses. Dual diagnosis is common especially in those dealing with bipolar disorder, and also clinical depression.

I even know a reformed speed freak who now realizes that she abused drugs to deal with undiagnosed ADHD. She did not realize this until her son started having problems in school and was diagnosed with ADHD (and he really was suffering from a brain problem, not a disipline problem).

I just thank luck that I never got into any drugs; I felt I was already so crazy that the drugs would probably push me over the edge. I was probably right. I was diagnosed later with clinical depression and now am on proper medications to deal with my issues.

[flaminbats]

259. those darn speed freaks!!

why do those freakin truck drivers work all night anyway? :crazy:

time to hang them all, why shouldn't Doctors have a monopoly on drug pushing anyway? :puffpiece:

[eridani]

270. Here I sit with a broken heart

Popped six pills and my truck won't start!

My husband saw that in 1974 at a truck stop restroom somewhere in Arizona. Underneath, someone else had written

If your pills were worth a fuck
You'd get out and HAUL that truck!

[Charlie Brown]

260. meth production is a big public safety problem

I have no problem legalizing drugs that cause no harm to third parties, but meth and its production need to be outlawed due to the danger it puts on bystanders and residents.

That said, I'm not a fan of the laws that restrict the sale of Sudafed and other cold medicines. The meth gurus will just find ways around these laws anyway.

[eridani]

265. What we need to realize is that different drugs, are, well--

--DIFFERENT from each other. Switzerland has shown that government heroin under medical supervision works well. Pot should be decriminalized, probably cocaine as well. We could use much stronger laws against drunk driving. Meth is clearly a different kind of animal, but I'm wondering if the problem with it goes in cycles. Speed was pretty horrible in the late 60s and early 70s, but if fell out of fashion and didn't come back until crack use fell off. What I want to know is why did it just go out of fashion then, and can any of those reasons be applied to the present situation.

[eeyore]

279. Addiction goes in cycles with the purity of it.

The documentary linked here http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/ talks about how the problem gets worse with the purity of the ingredients that are available. That's one of the major reasons many people believe that getting pseudoephedrine out of the hands of people who are using it to cook meth will help.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

294. That's why they are wrong! The home cooked stuff is LESS pure.

The stuff from the big labs in MX is much stronger.

[K-W]

267. I just love threads scolding DUrs.

Legalization is far from a hazy fantasy but as long as people think it is, it might as well be. Regardless, if you think calling meth users criminals and putting them in prison does anything to solve the meth problem or that the existance of the substance meth is the primary cause of the POVERTY problem, I want a little of whatever you are smoking.

Its easy to scapegoat drugs for the problems in our society, its alot harder to solve them. You want to stop the meth epidemic? Its damn easy, give people in rural america a better quality of life and better opportunities. Let them go to college and pick up bongs instead and problem solved. Give them jobs that provide the resources and free time to support healthy families.

Just because not everyone agrees with you on the right way to solve the meth epidemic doesnt mean others are ignoring it.

[Batgirl]

276. it's even better when the scolding is compounded

by thinly veiled threats:
"I just don't get where DUers are coming from on this. But wait your turn, because it will affect you at some point, then maybe you'll get it." Which is like telling a death penalty opponent "you just wait. when someone you care about is murdered then you'll change your tune about capital punishment." Not that they're wishing you ill or anything.

One would think from the thread title that "most DUrs" have adopted an attitude of "meth problem? what meth problem?" Except of course for the really deranged ones who are actively baking meth cupcakes for the neighborhood children. Obviously that's not the case. The thing that's so "horrifying" is that there are several here who feel that business as usual -- the war on drugs that's been failing for how many years now -- isn't going to solve this problem either.

[eeyore]

285. I never called meth users criminals

I said that there is no way in hell that meth should be legalized. I don't believe in jailing drug addicts, I believe in treating them.

I'm not scapegoading anything or anyone, what I've been trying to do is talk about ways to solve the massive problem we have with meth in Oregon. We just happen to be the meth capital of the country.

What sets me off is that every time I try to talk to people about ways to help all of the fucked up people in my state, I am met with a flurry of posts like yours, filled with insinuations about things that I didn't address.

I agree that people in rural areas should have better opportunities than cleaning up puke at the local Wal Mart. However, meth is a very urban problem on the west coast. It hasn't yet reached the east coast in large numbers, and that's part of the problem there is with having a decent national discussion about meth.

This map shows that you, being in Brooklyn, and I, being in Oregon, are living in two completely separate worlds. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/map/

I'm not trying to scold anyone, I'm expressing my frustration at posts like yours that choose to stay in the intellectual and theoretical realm. What we need are some concrete actions that can be taken now to save thousands of people where I live.

Even if legalizing meth were a good idea, which I can tell you it very much is not, it would be an impossible uphill battle to get to that point right now. What we need to do right now is limit the amount of this shit that is being made in urban and rural neighborhood homes. Those homes are being contaminated and endageri the people who don't even realize that they live next to a house that is toxic and highly flammable. We need to find a way to solve the fact our social services are being flooded with children whose parents literally don't take care of them because they are so fucked up on meth.

Imagine insanely active and criminally-inclined crackheads, and you might scratch the surface of what it's like.

Not interested in scolding, but I'll do whatever it takes to wake people up.

[LostinVA]

273. I think meth should be illegal, but I think Sudafed should be

freely available -- because the bulk of meth that comes into this country is via Mexico, and these people don't go buying allergy medicine at the local CVS.

I think every other drug should be legalized, or at least decriminalized (a statement MANY -- even MOST -- cops agree with), and all of that time, resources, and money used to crack down on this.

Question: why the anti-pot commercials, but not anti-meth ads??? Show a few "before and after" photos.... for real. Leave weed alone.

[eeyore]

280. I agree about the pot commercials

I hear them every day on the radio, and I live in the state with the worst meth problem - Oregon. I find those anti-pot commercials laughable, all the dramatic music warning parents to keep their kids off marijuana. Yeah, a lot of people smoke weed here, but I don't see them removing all the wire and pipes from construction sites to sell as scrap metal to pay for more weed.

And, yes, the pharmacies were having terrible problems with tweakers buying/stealing all of the Sudafed from their shelves.

Watch this documentary, it was produced here in Oregon, and talks a lot about access to ingredients. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/

[Viva_La_Revolution]

297. as of last year, 65% came from Mexico

learned that by listening to the House debate this morning.

[pat_k]

275. Like methadone, harm reduction by dispensing and monitoring Desoxyn

. . . would alleviate a lot of suffering and pave the road to sanity for many. Meth is a powerful addiction and just saying no doesn't cut it.

But, in the United States, with the current attitudes, that is probably a utopian fantasy too.

[SmokingJacket]

284. I think meth is a horrible drug, but will making sudafed hard to get

fix the problem, or just outsource it to Mexico where it will become MUCH harder to solve?? From what I've read, the latter is more likely. If research proves me wrong, I'll change my opinion.

Please don't judge people negatively just because they have a different point of view. I think the meth problem needs to be solved by helping the addicts FIRST. Prohibition has a long history of failure in this country.

[eeyore]

286. Limiting access to pseudoephedrine will hopefully curb cooking

I've talked to landlords here in Portland who accidentally rented to meth cooks. Once a lab is discovered, if it hasn't blown up, the entire house is condemned as toxic, and remains uninhabitable until all furniture, flooring, drywall, carpet, and anything else that can absorb is torn out and taken to a hazardous materials dump. The landlord is responsible for that cleanup and renovation, and just try getting insurance to cover damage done by a meth lab. I talked to one guy who had to come up with $40,000 out of pocket to make his house rentable again.

Of course addicts need access to treatment, and that's being improved here as well. Prohibition sucks, but with this drug the alternative is way worse.

[porphyrian]

287. Middle Class White Peoples' Crack Problem

If only a fraction of this outrage and call to action could've been mustered during the 80's when it was perceived as a poor Black problem and largely ignored, except perhaps to make harsher laws with mandatory minimum sentences...

There aren't more meth addicts than crack addicts, just a few demographic differences, and I'm disgusted with the hypocrisy, classism and racism of this trend of outrage.

[eeyore]

290. I agree that it's criminal how crack was ignored

Hopefully it won't make it's way too heavily into the black communities. It is, however, a huge Hispanic problem, and only getting worse.

I don't know how to address the issue of crack being ignore, other than to say you are right.

[jeffrey_X]

295. Completely agree.

I tried saying something similar above...but you nailed it.

[iconoclastNYC]

289. EDUCATION, TREATMENT, EDUCATION, TREATMENT

Educate people so they know the danger and don't try it.

Educuate people so the know the warning signs of addiction.

Educate society -- drug abuse is a medical problem not a moral failing -- reduce the stigma so people will seek help instead of living in shame without treatment

Make treatment widely available and free so people can get the assistance that will help them kick the habit

Give or sell at low cost addicts the drug so they don't have to break the law to aquire it.

This is how you win the "drug war."

[azurnoir]

300. Agreed meth is terrible stuff

and if limiting the sale of sudafed helps shut down labs so be it, however this does not belong in the Patriot Act.
One thing not mentioned by other posters is how meth can affect a persons health, from what I've read one of the ways the present problem came to light was people were turning up with diseases that were generally AIDS related, but they did not have AIDS and were not HIV positive, turns out Meth can knock down your immune system to the point that HIV or AIDS does.

[BBradley]

303. I find it hilarious that you think this will do anything.

Besides inconvenience people with colds.

[harpo]

307. How do you know my attitude, I haven't expressed it?