Runny Noses Help Fight Meth

Yesterday, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski signed legislation that will require Oregonians to get a prescription for cold medicines containing pseudoephedrine. In other words, when your family comes down with a cold, you're going to have to pay for each of your kids to visit a doctor to have him diagnose them with a common cold so you can get a prescription for medicine that has been on the shelves for decades. Very nice. The theory behind this is that it will prevent criminals from using pseudoephedrine in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamines, thus striking another shocking blow to the bad guys in the war on drugs.
But why? Most of the methamphetamines for sale in this state and others are in fact imported methamphetamines, not ones cooked up in your friendly neighborhood trailer. Countless news sources admit that the bulk of methamphetamines in the U. S. come from Mexico. And more than that---most of the pseudoephedrine used in preparing meth is smuggled in from other countries. Very few successful meth cookers are stumbling into the 24-hour drugstore and dumping 50 packages of Sudafed on the counter. Most states (Oregon included) already have (or are on their way to) laws restricting the sale of pseudoephedrine products. These laws require an ID, signature, and perhaps some additional information. Sometimes these laws are used in conjunction with a limit on the number of pseudoephedrine products you may purchase. Laws like this have supposedly reduced the numbers of meth labs in these states (like Oklahoma) by as much as 80%. Of course, this doesn't make a dent in the actual use and sale of meth, because only a small percentage of street meth is homemade.
So what's the point of this legislation? That's what I'd like to know. If requiring logs, IDs, and behind-the-counter sales already reduces meth labs by 80%, why do we need to put law-abiding citizens through the wringer and deny them access to legal medicines that are perfectly safe? It seems like the politicians are embarrassed and ignorant. They're embarrassed that their states are falling prey to drugs and criminal activity, and they are ignorant to the facts of why and how it's actually happening. Or at least willing to ignore those facts. Legislation like this is to garner favor in the public eye and perhaps line the ermine pockets of doctors and pharmaceutical companies (if access is decreased, the medicine prices will have to rise to make up the profits. Or we can buy the new, undoubtedly more expensive "replacement" medicines).
The media has been saturated with meth coverage; listening to them, you'd think it's armageddon, the drug Antichrist, and if it is not smote with all powers of the universe, we will surely become a nation of scabby 'meth-mouths'. But no matter how horrible meth use and addiction is, this step isn't the one to take, because it won't accomplish anything! Correction: it will accomplish something. It will mean that decent, lawful people will have to drive further, pay more, waste more time, and feel sicker just so a few congressmen and governors can pat each other on the back and tell their constituents that they're working on the problems of the community. When really all they are doing is forcing families to spend money that they don't have to get medicines they need to work to actually contribute more to their communities!
It's sick, it's manipulative, and most of the country is falling for it. The papers are calling the Oregon law the new "anti-meth" law, and touting it as a gutsy and heroic move---just what the politicians had in mind. (Note that Governor Ted admits that meth-lab meth only accounts for 20-25% of the meth in Oregon---and factor in that probably only 5% of that is produced using any store-bought pseudoephedrine.) It's not an anti-meth law. It's an anti-pseudeoephedrine law, and the only thing it's going to change is the way you can soothe your runny nose. Governor Ted insisted that there were plenty of cold medicines that didn't use pseudoephedrine---but if any of those worked (or worked as well), how come people still use the pseudoephedrine products? I can tell you why I do: they often work when others don't. A substitute is not the same thing for Sudafed. Maybe after it's made prescription-only, the lawmakers will see what they've done as streetcorner Actifed hustlers appear. Or maybe before the entire country buys this particular brand of bullshit madness, they'll remember that no one is making crack, heroin, or powder cocaine out of over-the-counter drugs, and if I'm not mistaken, it's pretty easy for users to find and dealers to sell. "But it's the labs, those pesky, explosive meth labs!" you cry. Hm. Really? What percentage of the population is suffering from the effects of meth in the meth labs---and what percentage of those aren't the cooks (who really deserve whatever effects they get, if you ask me). Right. Think about that, and cry labs again.
You have rights, and they are worth protecting. As you sit back and let the politicians remove those rights, make sure you're aware of what's happening. Because after we take this slap in the face and smile, there will only be more coming our way. We're suckers, we're falling for it, so why not? What's next? Maybe plastic baggies. I think it's clear that those plastic baggies provide an unmatched method for transporting drugs. If we didn't have them, I'm certain the country would be clean and sober.