It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Patriot Act Takes Aim At Those With Allergies.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
df1

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   
The patriot act which was/is sold to the public as the means of fighting terrorism is labeling a new group as terrorists, those that suffer from allergies. In order to make easier to track these people, "One person would be limited to buying 300 30-milligram pills in a month, or 120 such pills in a day." This is a bipartisan addition to the patriot act co-sponsered by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Jim Talent, R-Mo.
 



seattletimes.nwsource.com
Suffer from springtime allergies? You could be among the first affected by the USA Patriot Act poised for final congressional passage this week.

Besides terrorism, the bill takes aim at the production of methamphetamine, an illegal drug that cannot be made without a key ingredient of everyday cold and allergy medicines. The bill would impose new limits next month for how much relief a person can buy over the counter.

And beginning Sept. 30, a would-be purchaser will have to show identification to buy the medication.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Will they be able to label someone as an "enemy combatant" for buying too much allergy medications?

The real goal here is to stigmatize those that self medicate themselves to encourage these peope to purchase the more expensive remedies sold by the pharmaceutical companies lest they be labeled as supporters of terrorism. This part of an assault being conducted on those that choose to treat themselves with alternative medical treatment.



Related News Links:
www.chron.com
starbulletin.com

[edit on 19-3-2006 by asala]




posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
This should be labeled ( at best ) an Op/Ed piece.

way WAY to much conjecture and bias in the posters comments to be anything near a news story.

- One Man Short



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   
You know I hate this measure, too, and I didn't know it was part of the Patriot Act. It doesn't matter, because Albuquerque and maybe the state already have such a measure. Thankfully, my old standby NyQuil, is exempt because it is virtually impossible to extract pseudoephedrine from all that syrup. What annoys me about such legislation is that, just like gun control, it is a measure that puts the real burden on the law-abiding, rather than the crooks.

Still, I fully understand the problem of methamphetamine and the danger it poses to anyone who uses it or is anywhere near its manufacture and because there are alternatives to pseudoephedrine, it should not be overly burdensome to most. Besides, the amount allowed by the law to buy in a given period is more than enough for any allergy sufferer. My major complaint was having to visit WalMart during pharmacy hours to buy the stuff. I prefer to shop after midnight.

But more to the point, it is outrageous to claim that allergy sufferers are being labeled as terrorists. There is not one mention of such in the article nor in any of the arguments supporting the Patriot Act. That is a sheer fabrication. You should read your own source.


[edit on 2006/3/8 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I know some friends that their only way to deal with everyday allergies is popping pills all day, to me they are so use to them that they are not helping anymore.

But many can not afford to go to the doctor and either buy prescription allergy remedies.

Funny how usually the ones to be targeted is the regular American.

Drugs maker will always find a way to get their stuff.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   
The advantage of pseudoephedrine is that it does not cause drowsiness, as does diphenhydramine. There are other OTC meds that do relieve allergies without causing drowsiness. I have one on my desk now. It's called phenylephrine.. It's available everywhere in generic form and it is inexpensive, as medicines go. For those who need to take allergy medication at bedtime, diphenhydramine is a good alternative because it does cause drowsiness.

So this is not a plot to stigmatize allergy sufferers and it is not a plot to force people to buy expensive medications. It is an attempt to control the manufacture of methamphetamine.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I don't know what meth has to do with terrorism, but I guess I expect too much coherent thought on the part of our government.

That being said, who the Hell needs more than 300 allergy pills a month?

That being said, the fewer laws, the better. The legal system is already a briar patch of tremendous size, I can't think of any good reason to add to the existing chaos. What lawmakers SHOULD be doing is weeding, pruning, constantly trimming and cutting back to promote the health of the entire system.

I agree with Grady that this is no conspiracy. Most people don't suffer from allergies, and most allergy sufferers don't need any pills, nevermind 300 a month, or 120 a day.

Meth is a dangerous, artificial drug. Although, now that meth production is down in America, imports are up more than enough to compensate for the loss of the homegrown operations. The imported Mexican meth is much more potent.

So, once again, good intentions backfire.


df1

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   

GradyPhilpott
So this is not a plot ...

It is an attempt to control the manufacture of methamphetamine.

Absolutely it is a plot, otherwise it would not have been necessary to sneak it in as part of the "patriot act". This in effect neutralizes any opposition because opponents are forced to fight the "patriot act" rather than being able argue against the prohibition based on the merits.

I can't believe anyone would actually argue in favor of a sneaky and deceitful government



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:46 PM
link   
I hate to mess up a warm and fuzzy moment, Wyrde, but I don't agree that the good intentions have backfired. Meth abuse is only one aspect of the problem. The most serious aspect is the labs that contaminate the environment and sicken those who come in contact with the chemicals. If we're going to have meth on the street, which I'd prefer that we didn't, I'd just as soon that Mexico provided it than the guy who lives next door to me. There have been three meth lab busts in my apartment complex in just a couple of years.

You can research the extent of those dangers here:

www.google.com



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Well I live in allergy country and we all have problems with allergy here in GA, actually in test done to me the only thing that I didn't come positive at was penicillin.

But I was on allergies shots once a week two at a time after a few years I am almost allergy free but still depend once in a while on prescribe medication.

My children also has the allergy problems and almost anybody I know around me.

Also we have a problem with drug labs in the woods and a year ago it was a home for rent in our neighborhood that was raid and a drug lab was found.

Incredible nobody knew and nobody was even suspicious we live in a nice area.

So allergies are a problem believe it or not.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Sudafed and the generic forms of the little red pill have all changed their ingridients so it does not contain that ingridient. I dont know if the new ingredient works as well for colds.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Patriot act?

nah... just a list of wants and needs of our gubmint...

Some I agree with, some i dont...

this one is nutty to add to the patriot act, but SOMETHING had to be done.

Dentists were going to be the next mega rich proffession. Firefighters were spending more time burning crank labs, than fighting fires...

Kids of meth users are often the most neglected of any addicts children.
Meth Kills in so many ways... some slowly, and some fast, but it kills all...

lots of better (and kinder to your neighbors) methods of killing yourself, so users need to look into those



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Grady


I don't agree that the good intentions have backfired. Meth abuse is only one aspect of the problem. The most serious aspect is the labs that contaminate the environment and sicken those who come in contact with the chemicals. If we're going to have meth on the street, which I'd prefer that we didn't, I'd just as soon that Mexico provided it than the guy who lives next door to me. There have been three meth lab busts in my apartment complex in just a couple of years.


I understand the full range of threats posed by locally produced meth, sorry you misunderstood the reason for my comment. My point was simply that we've squeezed the balloon with one hand. If we had squeezed with two, success would have been possible.

Nobody wants a meth lab exploding next door, believe me, I understand that.

But now the Mexican gangsters have ANOTHER huge source of income, all they have to do is throw another few bags in the trunk/hold, and they've increased their market share significantly, along with their profits and their influence/footprint on local communities.

I used to live less than a block from an underground garage used by the Mexican mafia, and while these guys were reasonably professional and discreet, they were also packing enough hardware to demolish the local PD. The cops didn't even get out of their cars in my neighborhood, for fear of being robbed or beaned in the head with a D cell.

Curbing domestic meth production is wonderful, no doubt, but giving violent, heavily-armed, foreign gangsters more money and power in exchange is not a reasonable trade.

Attacking the supply in one way or another is really quite pointless I think. Better to confront and mitigate the factors that drive market conditions, namely, the demand side of things. An example might be the gas sniffers in Alaska and Australia and a number of other places (including Newfoundland, which this article talks about)

Do you deal with that situation by attacking the supply of gasoline? Of course not! You attack the demand by dealing with the social conditions that foster this sort of behavior.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Leave it to the media to blow something out of proportion.

This is nothing more then Anti Drug legislation that is attached to the Patriot act, it has nothing to do with the patriot act at all it is meant to stop the use of drugs.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Well, the Patriot Act would be very happy that the folks in Arizona started hiding their Sudafed about a year ago when i lived there.

Arizona, love it or leave it...So i left.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   
This proposed law will only affect law abiding citizens in my opinion. I don't believe they will have a 5 day waiting period as well will they? With identity theft gaining in popularity among those who don't obey the law, these people can learn new methods to obtaining as much as they want IMO. It's the law abiding people who have to go through all the extra hassles to get the medicine they need. Perhaps if people were paid for tips for reporting possible meth labs and some police officers were devoted just to finding these labs, we might not have as much of a problem. I really think if we need new laws it should go towards public safety by requiring motels, hotels, etc. and other places where people live or sleep in that the owner is required to adequately clean up after a meth lab is found or notify any potential future owners/renters of that space of the potential hazard before they rent or allow the use of the room or house etc.

I haven't studied what dangers are involved with meth, but I certainly do not like the idea that someone in a hotel or rental unit can contaminate a room or rental property with a meth lab and then I might suffer if I happen to stay in that same room in the future. Currently clean up requirements required by law may be lax and the owner doesn't need to notify any future renters I believe I heard on the news. Instead of creating new laws for OTC substances, I think new laws are needed for clean up requirements and public notification for future renters if someone contaminated a hotel, apartment, etc.

After thinking about this law for a moment, maybe it will not be so bad if it significantly cuts down on meth labs here in the US. I suppose if the production is made in Mexico, it will hopefully reduce the hazard here in the US. This just goes to show that a few bad apples make life harder for everyone else.

[edit on 8-3-2006 by orionthehunter]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Leave it to the media to blow something out of proportion.

This is nothing more then Anti Drug legislation that is attached to the Patriot act, it has nothing to do with the patriot act at all it is meant to stop the use of drugs.


Out of proportion? Not even a little......

It's a backhanded tactic......the passing of the Patriot Act was, for the most part, a given. Adding on a domestic social stipulation that is pretty much out of context is crap.

The Patriot Act is in responce to 9/11.....obvious. Using a hard-hitting terrorist occasion to support domestic agendas is bad logic..........and quite convenient for them. I disagree 100% with this addendum......despite my opposition to the issue. Everything on its own merits......otherwise, how can we expect others to have rational coherent thought processes?

Once you dilute the associations, you have people who are agreeing to red apples because of the seven dwarves......



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I have to agree that if there were no demand, the supply would be irrelevant, but psychoactive substances are self-reinforcing so supply is necessary to maintain demand. The result is a flooding of the market by suppliers to insure demand.

Law enforcement confiscates a certain percentage that has the result of diminsihing supply, which results in a higher price for the drugs and a higher profit for dealers. It's a reciprocal relationship that requires efforts on both ends.

It's easy to see why our enemies want to flood our streets with drugs. Drugs put us at war with ourselves. We can only hope that gasoline "huffing" never becomes so widespread that we would need a prescription and an ID to buy it.

There are some who will not be denied a high no matter what. In the Gallup area of New Mexico, there is a rampant problem with the Navajo who drink a mixture of hairspray and water, called "ocean water." The practice started because alcohol is not available on Sundays in the area, so Sunday was "ocean day." The problem has mushroomed to the point that Sunday sales of alcohol are being considered to get a grip on the "ocean" problem. A description can be found at this link.

wellbriety-nci.org


[edit on 2006/3/8 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Well, if it wasn't for large quantities of "red-phosphorous" becoming illegal, then we wouldn't have to worry about all this sudafed nonsense.

I for one couldn't care less as the dope made from sudafed is much dirtier, and I don't think that having all those bath tub chemists off the market would really be a bad thing.

Besides, why is everyone acting soo surprised? We all know that the patriot act has nothing to do with terrorism in the first place. Why else have more than half of all convictions under the act revolved around low level immigration offences?
www.aclu.org...



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I agree that adding an irrelavent rider to the already awful Patriot Act was downright sneaky and an insult to the intelligence of the average American.

However, sometimes I wonder why the lawmakers are so narrow minded. I mean, I don't know a whole lot about methamphetamine, except that it is some sort of "speed", and the apparent "problem" and danger of the home-labs is due to hazardous, explosive, etc... chemicals being left out to endanger others and the environment. That must be a given.

But, I haven't seen anyone on any drug that has acted in worse ways than a person can on alcohol.

Back in the 20's, they had prohibition. That caused a whole bunch of people to make "moonshine". From what I've heard, many of them were using wooden barrels during some part of the process, and unbeknownst to them at the time, the mixing of ethyl alcohol with wood changes it into the deadly methyl alcohol. Or "Methanol", which will cause one to go blind, if they haven't died from the poison first.

And, if they weren't trying to produce their own moonshine, they were getting arrested by smuggling alcohol in from elsewhere. Sounds much like the situation going on today with meth.

But, when they repealled prohibition, there was no more black market for alcohol. Gangs/mafia were no longer involved. It was made (wherever it's made) factories, I guess. Under proper, safe conditions so that what consumers were then buying legally in the liquor stores was certain to be the ethyl alcohol.

Sure, alcohol is still a problem.......sort of. But only because of the fact that it is addicting to some, some become very loud, violent, irresponsible, drive drunk, etc.... But the main concerns of prohibition are gone, and the same would be of the current meth concerns (or those of any "street drug") if they were taken off the black market, produced in the proper environment by trained chemists/scientists, and sold in stores such as liquor stores to people of age.

I don't know, sounds like too simple of a solution. The government could even tax it the way it taxes alcohol.

My 2 cents



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Since when is 300 pills a month not enough? That is 10 pills a day!!!! Who other than a meth manufacturer would ever need more than that? Maybe someone who supplies meth manufacturers with raw materials. I don't see how anyone not using meth or making it would care about this.

The patriot act (lower case intentional) is a problem though. When we allow a total stranger to subject us to a pat down or strip search while on a domestic flight we have lost the war against terror. The whole purpose of terror is just that. To bad so many of us are cowards. The first time I watched a strange man fondle my wife in airport line and I let him do it - I became a coward too. We all deserve whatever is to come. Don't we? How many of you have called your Congress Persons to object? Thats what I thought. Everyone just hangs out here and bitches accomplishing nothing.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join