Lifestyle

TOPICS:

8/3/05

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

300 | 301 | 302

 ... 944

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

s5

s5

STAFF

San Francisco, CA

AUG 02, 2005 01:53 AM

aktrekker said:
Just because we don't have a total solution, should we do nothing?



often times, doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing. this is clearly the wrong thing. it will do nothing to reduce meth usage, and may even raise crime, if meth becomes more expensive. (more expensive drugs + addicts = more robberies to pay for the same amount of the drug.) or drug users might switch to crack or something else more harmful and more plentiful.

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

AUG 02, 2005 01:57 AM

Ummm, can Oregon make an OTC drug prescription only? It seems to me there a bit of a federal preemption problem, vis a vis the whole FDA thing.

reprobate

reprobate

New Orleans, LA
December 2002

AUG 02, 2005 02:03 AM

aktrekker said:
Guess I'm the first to agree with this.
I just spent 3 years working at a convenience store in a bad neighborhood. I've seen what meth does to people. How it makes them irritable and even violent. How it destroys their body. Most of the people look like the walking dead. Their brains are so fried that they usually don't know where or even who they are.
This may not solve the problem, but at least it's a step in that direction. Just because we don't have a total solution, should we do nothing?



No, there's a rather large gulf between "Nothing" and "Useful" and "Unbelievably stupid".

Cold medicine isn't crank. Its cold medicine. Its not dangerous. Simply because you can use a complex chemical process to make it dangerous is not a reason to restrict a profoundly a useful, harmless and beneficial drug. Gasoline is pretty fucking dangerous when you vaporize and ignite it, are we gonna start issuing gas permits now?

dire_romantic

dire_romantic

Edmonton, AB
May 2004

AUG 02, 2005 02:03 AM

s5 said:

aktrekker said:
Just because we don't have a total solution, should we do nothing?



often times, doing nothing is better than doing the wrong thing. this is clearly the wrong thing. it will do nothing to reduce meth usage, and may even raise crime, if meth becomes more expensive. (more expensive drugs + addicts = more robberies to pay for the same amount of the drug.) or drug users might switch to crack or something else more harmful and more plentiful.



but that's just the kicker - crime prevention in many ways is a double-edged sword. Just from the quote given (If can save just one meth baby....), it seems this legislation may be aimed at keeping the drug from becoming so easily accessable to new users.

i'm not going to presume that you don't know anyone who's been wiped out on meth, s5, but considering what I've seen what it does to people who get addicted, anything that helps to minimize it's impact is in my good books.

crackedhead

crackedhead

San Jose, CA
September 2004

AUG 02, 2005 02:35 AM

Vestril said:
It kind of struck me as a weird state when I passed though. This just confirms it for me.



Seriously, I can't even pump my own gas in Oregon. What the fuck is that?

Aaron

Aaron

Shakopee, MN
July 2004

AUG 02, 2005 02:56 AM

"If we can save one meth baby, it will be worth it."

I think I'm going to make this into a bumper sticker.

DesmondKing

DesmondKing

Nahunta, GA
December 2004

AUG 02, 2005 05:17 AM

What a pain in the ass. I have bad allaergies and take Actifed which is the only drug that works on my allergies. In many states it is available behind the counter only. I was traveling this summer ran out of pills and could not get any because the pharmacy counter was closed. I almost went into an ashtma attack which I had not had in about 20 years. I hate this drug histeria bullshit.

zwiebel

zwiebel

I'm lost
August 2004

AUG 02, 2005 05:34 AM

when i had a really bad headache in france i stepped into the pharmacy and the pharmacy man pulled out about 5 boxes. the strongest one, he explained, worked very well but contained codiene. i thought wow, how convienient, and bought a box.
i can't believe they want to make allergy meds prescription only. how lame.

if anything they can just make it behind the counter. as for people making meth, can't they just order huge amounts over the internet anyway?

Bondgirl

Bondgirl

Aberdeen, SD
February 2004

AUG 02, 2005 06:06 AM

Sick said:
On the one hand, here in MN the Claritin I use has become ridiculously difficult to get. It's behind the counter; to get it I need to give my name, address, driver's license number, and sign for it. We are also limited to 6 mg a month, which works out to be 20 capsules. However, there are usually 30 or 31 days in a month. So I can't get a months' supply without having an accomplice to buy some for me. If it were a prescription drug again I could just go to the doctor, get a prescription, and have it filled at the pharmacy with no problems.

On the other hand, going to the doctor and getting the prescription isn't that easy for many people, so a law like this would prevent people without access to a doctor from obtaining the drug for legitimate purposes.

So, basically, the cookers are making things difficult for everyone.

[Edited on Aug 01, 2005 by Sick]


Everything that you said was made that much better by your sign in name. biggrin

gutterman

gutterman

Austin, TX
August 2003

AUG 02, 2005 07:12 AM

MistressMissy said:
so why not let the drug kill off all the people stupid enough to use it?



I'm so glad my mom didn't die. That's why.

TBSheets

TBSheets

I'm lost
December 2004

AUG 02, 2005 09:07 AM

I'm looking at the meth problem and seeing it as way more troublesome than the crack problem. One reason is that while they are both dangerously addictive, the logistics of getting crack to the users is more difficult than gettting meth. Cocaine is a foreign commodity that must be brought into the country. The ingredients for meth are already here. The distribution problems associated with crack meant it didn't really make the inroads into the rural areas that it did in the cities. The opposite is true for meth. It is starting in the rural areas and migrating to the cities. I think this means that the coming meth problem is going to have a much greater effect on law enforcement, medicine, social services. In turn, this will affect 'us' a great deal more than being able to buy cold pills. Just imagine if meth was as availible as pot and alcohol when you were in high school.

zwiebel

zwiebel

I'm lost
August 2004

AUG 02, 2005 01:53 PM

TBSheets said:
Just imagine if meth was as availible as pot and alcohol when you were in high school.



It was.

MistressMissy

mistressmissy

Grand Rapids, MI
March 2003

AUG 02, 2005 01:56 PM

Cigarette said:

MistressMissy said:

s5 said:

But if we're going to wage war on any drug, meth seems like a good one. This drug is an utter destroyer of life, and leaves only misery in its wake.



all the more reason to not wage war on meth. the more harmful a drug, the more ridiculous and destructive crap the government will do to keep it under "control". and here we see it in action.



so why not let the drug kill off all the people stupid enough to use it?


Missy, I'm surprised at you. That's like saying, "Let's repeal the drunk driving laws to kill off all of the people who're stupid enough to drink and drive."



im sorry if my sarcasm was not visible. biggrin

Cigarette

Cigarette

Cleveland, OH
April 2004

AUG 02, 2005 02:08 PM

MistressMissy said:

Cigarette said:

MistressMissy said:

s5 said:

But if we're going to wage war on any drug, meth seems like a good one. This drug is an utter destroyer of life, and leaves only misery in its wake.



all the more reason to not wage war on meth. the more harmful a drug, the more ridiculous and destructive crap the government will do to keep it under "control". and here we see it in action.



so why not let the drug kill off all the people stupid enough to use it?


Missy, I'm surprised at you. That's like saying, "Let's repeal the drunk driving laws to kill off all of the people who're stupid enough to drink and drive."



im sorry if my sarcasm was not visible. biggrin


Oh, alright. Not so surprised, then. smile

TBSheets

TBSheets

I'm lost
December 2004

AUG 02, 2005 03:36 PM

zwiebel said:

TBSheets said:
Just imagine if meth was as availible as pot and alcohol when you were in high school.



It was.


Call me Cassandra.
Cold pills for everyone!

Joe_B_Ruthless

Joe_B_Ruthless

Union, NJ
January 2005

AUG 02, 2005 03:38 PM

Its always nice to know that our politicians have their priorities in check

Cyric

Cyric

I'm lost
October 2003

AUG 03, 2005 03:16 AM

I don't know about allergy medicine, but I swear cold medicine dosn't work. I think we only buy it cause we have a cold and we want it to go away. but you just have to wait it out. they should just sell sugar pills for cold medicine and not tell us.

zwiebel

zwiebel

I'm lost
August 2004

AUG 04, 2005 02:38 AM

TBSheets said:

zwiebel said:

TBSheets said:
Just imagine if meth was as availible as pot and alcohol when you were in high school.



It was.


Call me Cassandra.
Cold pills for everyone!



What does that mean?
I'm just saying.. it WAS just as available as pot, and I went to high school in the early 90's.. a pretty nice school too. Wasn't ghetto or anything. From what I hear, it's even more available now.

[Edited on Aug 04, 2005 by zwiebel]

GramNegative

GramNegative

I'm lost
October 2004

AUG 04, 2005 06:20 AM

Sick said:
If it were a prescription drug again I could just go to the doctor, get a prescription, and have it filled at the pharmacy with no problems.


FYI - you can get a prescription for non-prescription drugs - people do it all the time. The main reason is so that insurance pays for it, but it would solve your problem as well.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next