Restricting Cold Medicine sales not helping in "war on meth"

[.Shane.]

Source

I had often wondered if that (restricting sales of OTC medicines used for making meth) was making a difference, now we seem to have some data.

Depending how you read this, it may have made things worse... or better... or no effect. How do you read it?

An Associated Press review of federal data shows that the lure of such easy money has drawn thousands of new people into the methamphetamine underworld over the last few years.
"It's almost like a sub-criminal culture," said Gary Boggs, an agent at the Drug Enforcement Administration. "You'll see them with a GPS unit set up in a van with a list of every single pharmacy or retail outlet. They'll spend the entire week going store to store and buy to the limit."
...

Supporters of tracking say the numbers have spiked because the system makes it easier for police to find people who participate in meth production. But others question whether the tracking has helped make the problem worse by creating a new class of criminals that police must pursue.
In the past, the process of "cooking" meth was often a one-person operation, with producers buying as many cold pills as they needed.
Now, with laws that strictly limit purchases and record buyers' names, meth producers recruit friends, acquaintances, strangers and even their own children to buy pills.
The process, known as "smurfing," is not entirely new, but it has come into wider practice over the last two to three years as states have sought to limit the availability of pseudoephedrine.

 

[amadeus]

It just gives meth producers an added incentive to steal instead of buying it from the store shelves. The great thing about drug enforcement is that it works until it doesn't: drug enforcement agents seize control of some labs, driving up the price of the drug and creating incentives for more people to produce it. As a result, there are more raids and more added incentive to get into the business.

"You can't fight city hall" should be changed to "you can't fight supply and demand." End the prohibition and let the meth-heads kill themselves. We'll all be better off for it all around (save for the meth-heads.)

 

[Zardnaar]

They done that here but the pseudoephedrine is imported from China and smuggled in.

 

[SKILORD]

lollersk8s.

No, you can't fight supply and demand.

 

[asbestos]

Would flooding the market with a cheaper and far less dangerous drug reduce the demand for meth?

 

[SKILORD]

Would flooding the market with a cheaper and far less dangerous drug reduce the demand for meth?

Yes it would, All Day Every Day.

 

[asbestos]

Yes it would, All Day Every Day.

Frankly, then, I don't see why there's a problem here.

 

[Cutlass]

lollersk8s.

No, you can't fight supply and demand.

You can't fight supply. You can fight demand.

But we don't do that. And that's why the war on drugs has been lost.

 

[MobBoss]

I kind of like the idea that restricting sales makes it a pain in the ass for the meth producers to get resources as opposed to the 1 stop they used to have to make. I think anything we can do, no matter how small, to inconvienence them to any extent possible is worthwhile.

 

[mrt144]

I kind of like the idea that restricting sales makes it a pain in the ass for the meth producers to get resources as opposed to the 1 stop they used to have to make. I think anything we can do, no matter how small, to inconvienence them to any extent possible is worthwhile.

That's why your opinion is null and void on the matter.

 

[warpus]

This thread makes me want to watch the new season of Breaking Bad.. NOW

 

[MobBoss]

That's why your opinion is null and void on the matter.

I suggest a bit more effort to indicate why my opinion is somehow less valid than yours and less posturing to that effect. I mean you havent even rendered an opinion either way in this thread in order to post what you just did. Yeah...thats really adding something to the thread there.

You can't fight supply. You can fight demand.

But we don't do that. And that's why the war on drugs has been lost.

You hear that Warpus?

 

[mrt144]

I suggest a bit more effort to indicate why my opinion is somehow less valid than yours and less posturing to that effect. I mean you havent even rendered an opinion either way in this thread in order to post what you just did. Yeah...thats really adding something to the thread there.



You hear that Warpus?

Your whole premise is that spending millions to make it just a tiny bit inconvenient but still highly lucrative is totally worth it. You're burning money to be spiteful with no real impact. This is the most dogmatic thing I think I've ever seen you support.

 

[Traitorfish]

 

[MobBoss]

Your whole premise is that spending millions to make it just a tiny bit inconvenient but still highly lucrative is totally worth it. You're burning money to be spiteful with no real impact. This is the most dogmatic thing I think I've ever seen you support.

Now wait a second.

How is restricting sales of cold medicines to prevent bulk purchase 'spending millions'?

Please explain.

Also, I think it makes it more than a 'tiny bit' inconvienent, dont you? In fact, it sounds like it makes meth makers go to a hell of a lot of trouble in order to make those purchases they used to make at a single stop. The story in the OP indicates it could take them an entire week to get enough where previously they could do so at a single stop.

So, explain to me how this is 'burning money'?

 

[ParkCungHee]

"You can't fight city hall" should be changed to "you can't fight supply and demand." End the prohibition and let the meth-heads kill themselves. We'll all be better off for it all around (save for the meth-heads.)

And the people who can't call emergency services because the meth-heads stole the telephone cables for scrap copper.

 

[mrt144]

Now wait a second.

How is restricting sales of cold medicines to prevent bulk purchase 'spending millions'?

Please explain.

Also, I think it makes it more than a 'tiny bit' inconvienent, dont you? In fact, it sounds like it makes meth makers go to a hell of a lot of trouble in order to make those purchases they used to make at a single stop. The story in the OP indicates it could take them an entire week to get enough where previously they could do so at a single stop.

So, explain to me how this is 'burning money'?

You don't think government regulation costs any money? I'll have to book mark this thread for later use. Also, how much tax revenue is being lost from theft? Who is keep tabs on this purchase tracking system?

It doesn't sound a tiny bit inconvenient because they are recruiting people to buy it for them. You're getting more people involved in the drug trade through this kind of hampering. How is meth any less lucrative than it is now?

Meth is still being made and now more people are committing crimes to do it. That's what I call burning money.

 

[warpus]

You hear that Warpus?

Sure you can fight demand, it's just not possible to make a big enough dent in it to take down the cartels.

You can fight a bear with a plastic fork too.

 

[MobBoss]

You don't think government regulation costs any money?

No, I am sure it does, but come on, simply regulating the amount of cold products sold per person isnt going to require 'millions of dollars' cost to the taxpayer.

Do you make any offer of proof to indicate it has as you allege?

I'll have to book mark this thread for later use. Also, how much tax revenue is being lost from theft? Who is keep tabs on this purchase tracking system?

Since very, very, VERY, few people actually bought hundreds of dollars of cold medicine at once, probably no impact at all upon said tax revenue. Such purchases by the average user are immediate impact only, and minimal. Restricting the amount sold didnt affect the average person buying cold medicine one whit.

It doesn't sound a tiny bit inconvenient because they are recruiting people to buy it for them.

Getting a whole crew of people to do what formally took one sounds pretty inconvienent to me. Add in the fact that 3 can keep a secret if 2 are dead means more potential for law enforcement to get wind of and catch said perpetrators.

Meth is still being made and now more people are committing crimes to do it. That's what I call burning money.

Well, since you are unable to prove your earlier allegation of it 'costing millions' I can see why you would shift your goalposts to this metric.

 

[mrt144]

If I can find any info on the cost of tracking the sales of cold medicine by government agencies you'll be the first to know.

Also, what is your metric of success? Obviously it isn't reducing the amount of meth made because if it was, you wouldn't be smug and self satisfied with merely making it inconvenient instead of actual reductions in the amount produced or the incentives to make it.

Electronic systems that track sales of the cold medicine used to make methamphetamine have failed to curb the drug trade and instead created a vast, highly lucrative market for profiteers to buy over-the-counter pills and sell them to meth producers at a huge markup.

Success by Mobboss.

Prove to me that the system doesn't cost money and fails at it's stated goal of reducing meth production.