I'm sensitive to the argument that making it difficult for Meth offenders to get jobs and places to live will probably add to the desire to go back to the kitchen, but at the same time I have to admit that if I were a landlord or a small business owner, I would be loathe to rent to or hire someone that stands a good chance of turning my property into a waste dump or stealing supplies/money from my business. Thoughts? As an aside, meth wastes are one of the critical issues facing public lands managers these days. People dump crap all over the place and the agencies have to clean it up with tax money that could have been spent on other stuff. Every year we have to give training to our seasonal workforce about meth labs, portable meth labs, waste, what to do when you stumble upon this stuff, how to back out of a situation should someone confront you, etc. If we have a wildfire and encounter this stuff, we have to quit fighting the fire and wait for law enforcement or Hazmat folks to respond. With the possible exception of a few National Forests in California who have major issues with booby-trapped pot plantations, meth is by far the most dangerous drug issue on public lands.
Meth and the resulting waste is a major problem caused and exacerbated by the prohibition of drugs. The only people who should be "cooking" meth are licensed, regulated businesses. As long as drugs are illegal, we will have issues like this with meth as well as other drugs. AS far as this database goes, it seems like it would constitute "double jeopardy" or being punished more than once for the same crime. That being said, if I were the owner of property that I was leasing, I would probably want to be able to look up and see who was renting my property, but it seems to me that I could pay for a criminal background check to find the same information. It does strike me as odd that we would allow murderers, burglers, arsonists, and other violent criminals out of jail without being on such a list, but meth "cookers" are placed in the same category as sex offenders and put on a list that can continue to haunt them.
I've always objected to the continued discrimination of ex-cons because it will encourage them to continue in committing crimes. This list will have the same effect, though I don't know if it will be much greater than usual. Most professional apartment management companies will routinely run criminal background checks on all applicants. Most employers also run criminal background checks before hiring. They may be able to save themselves a couple bucks by looking at this database first though I doubt they will. The companies that run the checks will save themselves money by doing that. The mom&pop employers and landlords may be able to discriminate against convicted meth producers with this tool though.
While I think andymoon is crazy for wanting to legalize meth, I would like to point out that the ingredients of a meth lab are hydriodic acid, an ingredient of common household cleaners, red phosphorus the primary substance in matchbook strike pads, and ephadrine a common decongestant. Besides the fact that the process smells strongly of cat urine, the wastes are relatively minor compared to much more voluminous and common industrial wastes. For instance no meth lab has ever caused a river to catch fire. This is just another media scare campaign. Dubous Data Awards WASHINGTON, DC - America’s so-called methamphetamine epidemic was the worst example of media stressing shock over substance in 2005 science journalism, according to the annual “Dubious Data Awards,” issued by the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. 1. Meth Mania - Methamphetamine (known as ‘meth’) was the King Kong of the drug war in 2005 - decried on the nightly news, the newsweekly covers, and the morning news programs . Newsweek called it “America’s Most Dangerous Drug” (and showed gruesome photos of “meth mouth.”). The New York Times reported that it was more difficult to beat than crack. But academic research tells a different story. According to the University of Michigan, meth use among high school students has actually declined 28% in the last five years. And the current number of meth users (583,000) is only slightly greater than the number of crack users (450,000), although the “crack epidemic” is portrayed as a thing of the past. As for the claim that relapse rates are worse among meth addicts than other drug abusers, it’s simply not true. Only six percent of those who have tried methamphetamine also reported using it in the last month. Studies find that methamphetamine addicts recover at the same rate as other drug addicts.
Actually, I would prefer that people who wanted to were able to purchase the same stimulants that the US Air Force currently gives to pilots. I would not like for anyone in the world to use "meth" as it exists on the street today as it is dangerous, mostly because you don't know what you are getting. As far as I am concerned, if someone has been educated as to the effects of a drug, they should have the right to use it until they prove that they cannot use it responsibly. Then, they would need treatment which could be paid for by taxes levied on those drugs.
The U.S. Airforce uses Dexadrine (amphetamine HCL) taken oraly. People on the street use methamphetamine HCL usually administered intraveinously or insulfated. I hope that you understand the difference in the drugs as well as the difference that the route of administration makes.Even under their more benign practices the Air Force had problems with pilots exercising poor judgment. Your belief in the rationality of people borders on a religious faith. Your prescription for allowing people to use methamphetamine until it is proven that they can't handle it is akin to providing children with firearms until they prove they can't use them responsibly. You seem to almost willfiully refuse to understand that significant damage has been done by the time individuals have shown that they need treatment.
They are definitely different drugs, in no small part because of the method of administration. Personally, I would not choose to use any amphetamine at all, but there are people out there who enjoy them. My response: As long as you don't hurt anyone while under the influence, it is none of my business. I have a strong faith in people which has been built up by seeing thousands of people recover from all manner of addictions. That was a bit of hyperbole, but... You cannot deny that there are people out there who are able to use amphetamines responsibly. There are definitely problem users (the ones who get 99% of the press) out there, but the number of people who get addicted to meth is drowned out by the large numbers of people who use it responsibly. For example, an ex-"cooker" I know made his living selling meth in truck stops, where it is estimated that over half of the truckers use stimulants on a daily basis (surprise, surprise). He had dozens of "regulars" who used when they were driving, not for a "rush" or high, but just to stay awake on long hauls. My friend is in recovery, but he tells me that most of his customers have just kept on truckin' with other dealers because it hasn't caused problems for them. They use the drug responsibly where he couldn't, thus he landed in NA and they just keep going. In a regulated system, that need not be the case. The reason so much damage is done prior to treatment these days is mostly due to the users being so heavily criminalized. In a regulated system based on healthcare and education, we could track sales and target treatment options to people who show signs of problem usage.
Meth destroys lives like no other drug. No politician in their right mind would overturn legislation that makes meth usage or trafficking illegal. None. It's a total waste of time and effort to go against that fact. How anyone could minimize meth's *devastating* impacts on users is beyond belief. There is no question that this drug should be illegal and off the streets. Keep it out of kids' hands. Period.
This is what they tell us about Meth Lab safety issues: http://www.iaff.org/safe/content/Methamphetamine/Methamphetamine final.htm
Have you ever read an MSDS before? I went to a database site hosted at Cornell and searched for the first thing that came to mind, glass cleaner. If you phrase it correctly you can make anything sound like it is horribly dangerous. [rquoter] LIGHTHOUSE OF HOUSTON BLIND -- GLASS CLEANER, REGULAR, TYPE 1, CLASS 1 ======================================================= MSDS Safety Information ======================================================= FSC: 7930 NIIN: 01-326-8110 MSDS Date: 02/24/1999 MSDS Num: CLQQS Product ID: GLASS CLEANER, REGULAR, TYPE 1, CLASS 1 MFN: 02 Responsible Party Cage: 0UHH5 Name: LIGHTHOUSE OF HOUSTON BLIND Address: 3530 W DALLAS ST City: HOUSTON TX 77019 Info Phone Number: UNKNOWN Emergency Phone Number: 800-255-3924 Preparer's Name: ERNEST CARTER Chemtrec IND/Phone: (800)424-9300 Review Ind: Y Published: Y ======================================================= Contractor Summary ======================================================= Cage: 0UHH5 Name: LIGHTHOUSE OF HOUSTON BLIND Address: 3530 W DALLAS ST City: HOUSTON TX 77019 Phone: UNKNOWN ======================================================= Item Description Information ======================================================= Item Manager: GSA Item Name: GLASS CLEANER Specification Number: A-A-40 Type/Grade/Class: TYPE 1, CLASS 1 Unit of Issue: DZ UI Container Qty: 1 ======================================================= Ingredients ======================================================= Cas: 1336-21-6 RTECS #: BQ9625000 Name: AQUA AMMONIA Percent by Wt: .25 EPA Rpt Qty: 1000 LBS DOT Rpt Qty: 1000 LBS ------------------------------ Name: ISOPROPANOL Percent by Wt: 4.5 ----------------------------- Name: ETHYLENE GLYCOL MONOBUTYL ETHER Percent by Wt: 5.5 ======================================================= Health Hazards Data ======================================================= Route Of Entry Inds - Inhalation: YES Skin: YES Ingestion: YES Effects of Exposure: EYES: MAY CAUSE IRRITATION AND CORNEAL INJURY. SKIN: EXPOSURE DURING NORMAL USE MAY CAUSE SKIN IRRITATION AND POSSIBLE CONTACT DERMATITS. INHALATION: MAY CAUSE DIZZINESS, HEADACHE, AND VOMITING. INGE STION: MAY RESULT IN NAUSEA, VOMITING, AND DIARRHEA. First Aid: EYES: FLUSH WITH WATER FOR 15 MINUTES. SKIN: PROLONGED CONTACT MAY CAUSE DERMATITIS. INGESTION: DRINK TWO GLASSES AND INDUCE VOMITING. CONTACT PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY. INHALATION: IF SYMPTOMS OCCUR, DIS CONTINUE USE AND CONTACT PHYSICIAN IMMEDIATELY. ======================================================= Handling and Disposal ======================================================= Spill Release Procedures: WEAR CHEMICAL PROTECTIVE GLOVES, APRON, GOGGLES, RUBBER BOOTS TO AVOID OVER EXPOSURE. CONTAIN SPILL AND AVOID CONTAMINATION OF NATURAL WATER RESOURCES. MOP UP SPILL AND DISPOSE ACCORDING TO FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GUIDELINES. Waste Disposal Methods: FOLLOW ALL APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL GUIDELINES. Handling And Storage Precautions: KEEP FROM FREEZING. ======================================================= Fire and Explosion Hazard Information ======================================================= Flash Point: =51.7C, 125.F Extinguishing Media: WATER FOG, CO2, CHEMICAL EXTINGUISHER, FOAM. Fire Fighting Procedures: SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS AND TURN-OUT GEAR. ======================================================= Control Measures ======================================================= Respiratory Protection: USE CHEMICAL TYPE RESPIRATOR TO KEEP LEVEL BELOW TLV. Protective Gloves: RUBBER OR VINYL GLOVES RECOMMENDED TO AVOID SKIN IRRITATION. Eye Protection: CHEMICAL SPLASH TYPE GOGGLES TO AVOID EYE CONTACT. Other Protective Equipment: BODY PROTECTION: USE RUBBER APRON TO AVOID OVER EXPOSURE. ======================================================= Physical/Chemical Properties ======================================================= Boiling Point: =82.2C, 180.F PH: 9-11 Evaporation Rate & Reference: 1CC/60 HOURS (77F) Solubility in Water: INFINITELY Appearance and Odor: LIQUID. MILD ALCOHOL ODOR, BLUE TINT. ======================================================= Reactivity Data ======================================================= Stability Indicator: YES Stability Condition To Avoid: KEEP FROM FREEZING. Materials To Avoid: STRONG OXIDIZING AGENTS. Hazardous Decomposition Products: CARBON DIOXIDE, CARBON MONOXIDE, OTHER HYDROCARBONS. ======================================================= HAZCOM Label ======================================================= Product ID: GLASS CLEANER, REGULAR, TYPE 1, CLASS 1 Cage: 0UHH5 Company Name: LIGHTHOUSE OF HOUSTON BLIND Street: 3530 W DALLAS ST City: HOUSTON TX Zipcode: 77019 Health Emergency Phone: 800-255-3924 Label Required IND: Y Date Of Label Review: 11/16/2001 Status Code: A Origination Code: G Hazard And Precautions: EYES: MAY CAUSE IRRITATION AND CORNEAL INJURY. SKIN: EXPOSURE DURING NORMAL USE MAY CAUSE SKIN IRRITATION AND POSSIBLE CONTACT DERMATITS. INHALATION: MAY CAUSE DIZZINESS, HEADACHE, AND VOMITING. INGE STION: MAY RESULT IN NAUSEA, VOMITING, AND DIARRHEA. ======================================================= Disclaimer (provided with this information by the compiling agencies): This information is formulated for use by elements of the Department of Defense. The United States of America in no manner whatsoever expressly or implied warrants, states, or intends said information to have any application, use or viability by or to any person or persons outside the Department of Defense nor any person or persons contracting with any instrumentality of the United States of America and disclaims all liability for such use. Any person utilizing this instruction who is not a military or civilian employee of the United States of America should seek competent professional advice to verify and assume responsibility for the suitability of this information to their particular situation regardless of similarity to a corresponding Department of Defense or other government situation. [/rquoter] This is listed under distilled water! [rquoter] Medical Conditions Aggravated by Exposure: PRE-EXISTING SKIN SENSITIVITIES. [/rquoter] Burnt Toast is carcinogenic! Again, the ingredients for making the stuff are all found somewhere in a decently lived in home. It is my understanding that wherever possible the method described as red phosphorus is used. Under the list of substitution chemicals they make it sound as if all of those are used for every substitution. Most of the items exist as theoretical options but are only there for the shock value that the name provides. I am amused by the inclusion of the names "Biker", "Nazi", and "Mexican National". These are not terms that I have ever heard of before and I've read quite a bit of the information on the synthesis process. I can only conclude that it was done for the negative conotations that the words might convey. The inclusion of the name "Nazi" wherever possible seems to be a relatively new technique. I've seen it glommed onto any drugs created by the Nazis. Yes many chemical syntheses were discovered by the Nazi's. I don't see anybody talking about our Nazi method of getting to the Moon even though in 1969 all of the propulsion technologies were created by Werner von Braun, a somewhat famous former Nazi. Anybody who has taken basic college level Organic Chemestry has done far more dangerous things. If you come over to my house I can do several things more dangerous with the stuff in my backyard, like a thermite reaction. I think crystal meth is evil and should be unequivocally banned from the face of the earth. I don't think, however, that lying or excessively exaggerating does any good. The reasons for this are covered in the works of somewhat famous Greek author. If you tell everybody that smoking pot makes your palms hirsute and they look around and don’t see it, then when you tell them that it turns you into a drooling moron they will have already learned that your claims are untrustworthy.
It is statements like this that prove that you are ignorant when it comes to drugs. Heroin is a FAR worse drug than meth, no matter how much the meth "epidemic" is touted on TV. Accurate statement. Politicians will not do it and I would not make "meth" legal either. I would prefer that people had the ability to get pharmaceutical quality stimulants should they choose to use them. Point out anywhere that I or anyone else "minimize[d]" the impact of meth. And, as pointed out above, you are overestimating meth's impacts on users. Unfortunately, these two statements are squarely at odds with each other. As long as stimulants are illegal, kids will have ready access to meth made by outlaws.
Is andymoon defending meth and meth cookers? Meth is worse than any drug IMO. The meth epidemic is real, I know from experience. Lost a few good friends.
That's the most important thing -- keep it away from kids. Positions like andymoon's seem to encourage its use and minimize its impact. That is simply not the right message to send.
If anyone has ever seen a baby born a meth addict, you'll never think meth is a good thing or should be legalized. It is bad, bad, bad.
No. In your opinion it may be worse, but based on facts and measurable data, heroin is far more addictive and destructive. The meth "epidemic" is real because you lost some friends? The reasoning seems a little specious, particularly considering that meth use, particularly among young people, is statistically down over the last decade.
