DEA: Anti-pseudofed laws worthless

[CBL4]

That is a slight exageration but:

According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, some 80 percent of illicit meth comes from large-scale Mexican traffickers, who tend to buy pseudoephedrine in bulk rather than a few packs at a time in pharmacies and grocery stores.

http://www.reason.com/0501/ci.js.speed.shtml

So if we totally ban pseudofed, meth quantity will drop by 20% - temporarily. I am sure the large scale traffickers will quickly increase production. But even if they don't, it is still worthless. There have two other attempts to restrict meth precursors and they have failed because there are too many alternative sources:

In October, just after Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski proposed retail-level restrictions on pseudoephedrine, The Oregonian ran a five-part series arguing that tracking sales by foreign manufacturers of the chemical is the only way to seriously curtail the methamphetamine trade. The newspaper cited brief declines in methamphetamine purity that followed previous attempts to block access to precursors. Such effects are short-lived, it said, because traffickers find new sources or shift to alternative production methods. After the precursor phenyl-2-propanone was restricted in 1980, traffickers switched to ephedrine; when large quantities of ephedrine became harder to come by in the late ’90s, they switched to pseudoephedrine.

The Oregonian did not explore the possibility that this pattern will continue if the U.S. government somehow manages to prevent traffickers from buying pseudoephedrine. In addition to the methods involving ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, and phenyl-2-propanone (which itself can be synthesized in a variety of ways), methamphetamine can be made, for example, with methylamine and the amino acid phenylalanine. “There is no doubt that control of precursors will lead to new or old variant syntheses,” says City University of New York pharmacologist John P. Morgan. “If the curtailment of [pseudoephedrine] works, such success will be temporary. Another method of manufacture or other supply will be found.”

http://www.reason.com/0501/ci.js.speed.shtml

So we will sniff and sneeze for no good reason. But think of the children we are pretending to help. The ones without colds that it.

CBL

 

[billydkid]

That is a slight exageration but:
http://www.reason.com/0501/ci.js.speed.shtml

So if we totally ban pseudofed, meth quantity will drop by 20% - temporarily. I am sure the large scale traffickers will quickly increase production. But even if they don't, it is still worthless. There have two other attempts to restrict meth precursors and they have failed because there are too many alternative sources:
http://www.reason.com/0501/ci.js.speed.shtml

So we will sniff and sneeze for no good reason. But think of the children we are pretending to help. The ones without colds that it.

CBL

The drug war and all the corruption and idiocy it has spawned has done far more damage to this society than prohibition of alcohol ever did.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The drug war and all the corruption and idiocy it has spawned has done far more damage to this society than prohibition of alcohol ever did.

Wait until the crusade against pornography hits its stride.

 

[Dancing David]

Methamphetamine has some problems for us as a society that are very devastating but it is probably going to be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. The real solution is to fund substance abuse treatment along with legalization.

The current system promotes drug abuse and incareration, neither of which is very helpful.

The only difference that the new drugs laws will make is that it will make it hard for the small time manufacturers to compete, so we will export the manufactur to another country.

 

[CBL4]

Originally posted by Dancing David
The current system promotes drug abuse and incareration, neither of which is very helpful.

The only difference that the new drugs laws will make is that it will make it hard for the small time manufacturers to compete, so we will export the manufactur to another country.[/quote[What you say is true but it is not the "only" new part. In Oregon, you will no longer be able to buy pseudofed without a doctor's prescription. Oregonians will sniff and sneeze for basically nothing. Meth will still be available but we will be sneezing. Anyone buying a cold medicine is assumed to be a criminal. It's a new absurd step in the already absurd fight to prevent people from enjoying themselves.

CBL

 

[Ryokan]

The only difference that the new drugs laws will make is that it will make it hard for the small time manufacturers to compete, so we will export the manufactur to another country.

No to outsourcing, protect American jobs!

 

[Jon_in_london]

hallo hallo hallo