Robert
Really nice Guy
- Mar 21, 2011
- 1,496
- 192
- 48
The Meth Epidemic - Video | FRONTLINE | PBS
Oregon has apparently had some measurable success controlling meth addiction by putting Sudafed and products like it behind a prescription label, effectively killing the supply side by denying small kitchen labs the main ingredient. The statistics also owe a measure of success stemming from the good luck of the Oregon law happening at the same time the Mexican Government effectively put the Mexican factory labs out of business by banning the import of pseudoephedrine.
It looks like meth availability and use can be dramatically altered in America by how tightly We, The People control the sale of pseudoephedrine.
The political question I can't decide in my own mind is this: The Socialist horror of lives destroyed by Crystal Methadone and the fall out society pays for it -vs- the Liberal free enterprise sale of anything a consenting adult wants, including Sudafed - idiots too stupid to walk away from meth be damned, and Conserving the status quo Pharma-billion$ that go bye-bye if Congress decides to force America to get a 'scrip for cold medicine?
With the exception of not having any love-lost for the pharmaceutical lobby on the Conservative side, I really am not sure how I feel about this one?
The problem is the addiction and resulting cost and crime that effects everyone. As a society we can not IMO justify allowing a segment of our population to harm themselves and everyone around them simply because they have an addiction problem.
The cost of supporting these people is horrendous they have no means to pay for anything so we as a society end up footing the bill.
The resulting crime is also paid for by society and that cost is beyond horrendous.
I had a real eye opener if you ever get to Canada go to Vancouver in the city theirs an entire block where the druggies congregate watch for a while. How is something like that allow in a civilized nation.