20 May 2005
On being pseudofed pseudoreform
Local and state officials and media have been advancing "reforms" for addressing methamphetamine production in the valley at a rapid-fire pace. It is understandable that they, along with all of us who are citizens, would like to curb the abuse of crank and all chemical substances. But do the ends justify the means? Have we learned NOTHING from alcohol prohibition?
The Fresno Bee printed a letter-to-the-editor today from Assemblyman Dave Cogdill about his bill to make it illegal to possess more than a half-pound of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine. Assemblyman Cogdill also referred to the Bee editors' May 4 opinion about Sen. Dianne Feinstein's legislative efforts to limit the availability of these compounds.
What the Bee editors, the Senator, and the Assemblyman ignore -- or don't accept -- is that the illegal status of chemical substances sets up an attractive nuisance for those who want to make really big money with a lot less effort. Making reasonably good money in a free society is not excessively difficult: become reasonably educated and work reasonably hard. Making really big money is not so easy.
Unless, of course, you can find a commodity that is worth its weight in gold and distribute it in a market of high demand. Items with illegal status -- whether chemicals or weapons or sports betting or whatever -- have both these "advantages" to the person who doesn't want to work hard to make really big money. Crank would not be that expensive if it were legal because its ingredients are not very expensive. And its demand would not be as great if it was sold at quantities that were not optimized for creating addiction by its vendors who are looking for easy ways to make really big money.
People looking for easy ways to make really big money are not going to let locked store counters or half-pound possession limits get in the way of making gold -- errr -- meth. These measures may deter some small timers, but that only creates more market share for bigger fish with greater resources -- and greater incentives to defend its operations by all means necessary.
Chemical abuse is a medical problem. It is best treated by medicine, not by incarceration. Throwing really big money into prohibition did not work for alcohol, has not worked for marijuana or cocaine, and will not work for meth.
The Fresno Bee printed a letter-to-the-editor today from Assemblyman Dave Cogdill about his bill to make it illegal to possess more than a half-pound of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine. Assemblyman Cogdill also referred to the Bee editors' May 4 opinion about Sen. Dianne Feinstein's legislative efforts to limit the availability of these compounds.
What the Bee editors, the Senator, and the Assemblyman ignore -- or don't accept -- is that the illegal status of chemical substances sets up an attractive nuisance for those who want to make really big money with a lot less effort. Making reasonably good money in a free society is not excessively difficult: become reasonably educated and work reasonably hard. Making really big money is not so easy.
Unless, of course, you can find a commodity that is worth its weight in gold and distribute it in a market of high demand. Items with illegal status -- whether chemicals or weapons or sports betting or whatever -- have both these "advantages" to the person who doesn't want to work hard to make really big money. Crank would not be that expensive if it were legal because its ingredients are not very expensive. And its demand would not be as great if it was sold at quantities that were not optimized for creating addiction by its vendors who are looking for easy ways to make really big money.
People looking for easy ways to make really big money are not going to let locked store counters or half-pound possession limits get in the way of making gold -- errr -- meth. These measures may deter some small timers, but that only creates more market share for bigger fish with greater resources -- and greater incentives to defend its operations by all means necessary.
Chemical abuse is a medical problem. It is best treated by medicine, not by incarceration. Throwing really big money into prohibition did not work for alcohol, has not worked for marijuana or cocaine, and will not work for meth.
# posted by Rodney Austin @ 12:58 PM 
