I think if you are picking up a reasonable dose for a medicine (say, one month's worth) of an over-the-counter drug, then you should be able to pick it up as before (with no id.) If you are picking up more than that, you shouldn't be allowed. If someone notices you picking up continual supplies, then they should be able to report you and have the police investigate. However, it is a case of the government intruding on people's lives. It is a typical over reaction to the problem. If you have a problem, instead of finding the problem and fixing it by going after the criminals and punishing them, we (you, they <- pick a subject) make up a law that makes us feel safer without providing any actual relief. (I'm not seeing any graphs indicating meth use has gone down.) Actual relief would be increasing budgets to police. But that would cost money.

I think this would be like outlawing knives because they've been proven to hurt children. The problem is the person hurting the children and not the knives. When the knives (the domestic ephedrines) are taken away, the person just buys a different weapon (or drug) or gets a different knife from Mexico (international meth). I'm having some problems finding decreased use of meth due to this law. Perhaps we need a statistician. (Of course, my analogy could be flawed.)
Source(s):
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/etc/cron.html

Asker's Rating:

Permalink | Report