Wednesday, July 6th, 2005...3:43 pm
Gee, It’s Worse Than I Thought
Jeff “Slim” Simpson responded to my post about the profile of Kathleen Dunbar in the Arizona Daily Star with some further facts about Dunbar and legislation to fight the meth problems in our state. Jeff pointed out a few things to me:
- She was the only vote on the council against a resolution supporting a state house bill to regulate the sales of pseudoephedrine.
- Dunbar actually travelled to Phoenix to lobby against the bill. She still has floor privleges from her days in the legislature. She did this at the behest of the big retailers, acting as their lobbyist on while being paid by city taxpayers.
- Now that her opponent, Karin Uhlich, has started to make this an issue, Dunbar has been having town hall meetings on meth and her picture taken with police officers.
Okay, there was a reason for me writing these as bullet points. I need you to write letters to the Star and Citizen so that we can make sure to get the word out about this. Some more detail on the arguments can be found on Karin Uhlich’s website.
Anyway, here are the addresses. Remember, be short with your letters. Even if you don’t get it published, the more that get there the more likely they will be to publish a letter that agrees with yours. Include your phone number, address and occupation.
- Arizona Daily Star: letters@azstarnet.com
- Tucson Citizen: letters@tucsoncitizen.com
Below is the letter I sent:
In the July 5th “Know Your Candidates” feature, Councilmember Kathleen Dunbar is quoted as saying: “It is becoming apparent that methamphetamine use leads to significant crime in our community.” I’m glad that she says that it is becoming apparent now, it wasn’t as apparent to her in March.
Back then, she had the chance to vote for a resolution in support of legislation to limit sales of pseudoephedrin, a key ingredient in the illegal manufacture of crystal methamphetamine. She voted no, the only council member to do so. Not only that, she travelled to Phoenix to stand with the big retailers and lobby against the legislation.
Only now that she is starting to feel the heat on this issue does she decide that it “leads to significant crime.” She didn’t know this a couple of months ago?
See you all later, keep up the good work.
5 Comments
July 6th, 2005 at 10:21 pm
I don’t have the bill in front of me, but I think I recall that right now the legal limit on the purchase of sudaphed tablets is 24 grams. That’s probably about 1000 tabs, give or take.
The more restrictive bill would’ve knocked that down to 9 grams of pseudoephridine (am I remembering this right? I just worked a 12-hour shift so I may have to bone up on this later.) Still talking about 300 tablets, a lot of cold medicine, that.
Only a meth lab would purchase that much.
I use the parentheses because there’s no limit if you purchase gel tabs or the liquid (which is a kid friendly) forms of the drug. The tabs are easier to make into crystal, though, so I’m told.
There is just no way, other than meth production, to rationalize such large purchases.
God, I hate meth. It absolutely just kills off your dopamine receptors. Meth addicts are nothing but manipulative drug-eating machines. The stuff steals a persons personality, for god’s sake anything we can do to limit the production of this garbage is OK by me.
I prefer chamomille for colds and runny noses, anyways.
July 7th, 2005 at 5:56 am
This was the point that folks were trying to make in the legislature: it’s hard to justify why a legitimate customer would need to buy a dozen or more boxes at a time. The retailers claimed that such restrictions would kill their buisnesses. In other words, they are dependent on the money from the illegal meth industry.
I guess serving out-of-state retail chains trumps their anti-crime stance.
July 7th, 2005 at 11:26 am
The retailers claimed that such restrictions would kill their buisnesses.
Could this possibly be true? Is meth single-handedly propping up big drugstore chains? Is meth behind the obscene proliferation of Circle-Ks on every corner? Is meth fueling the big-box boom? Wouldn’t it be great if we could kill all these birds with one stone?
Sadly,no. I think we are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that, rather than being some endangered species clinging to life on the edge of extinction, they are just garden-variety lying corporate sacks of shit.
…
You said it, shrimplate. Or as I prefer to put it - There’s nothing like meth to take a perfectly good human being and turn them into a complete asshole.
July 11th, 2005 at 6:14 pm
Here in Oregon we have to talk to a pharmacist and fill out our vitals if we want to obtain any amount of pseudoephridine products. They keep records of who buys what how often. I’m just glad I don’t have allergies.
July 12th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
But at least in Oregon it is tax free….
Leave a Reply