I received this comment earlier today.
I’m now a student at the University of Oklahoma. I couldn’t believe it when I had to sign a logbook just to buy 12 doses of a decongestant at the pharmacy here on campus. Wouldn’t it be easier to “flag” sales of the drug when someone buys more than 36 doses at once? The last time I visited Northfield, it was really nice to buy 48 doses at Target without giving them my name, address and phone number. There’s gotta be a better way… doesn’t there?
What the person is referring to is proposed legislation that would require people purchasing psuedo-ephedrine to sign a log. I posted information about this a while back. A big part of the process is getting the psuedo-ephedrine (main ingredient to make meth) off the open shelf and under control. A lot of the drug is stolen off the shelf: not purchased at all. Having it under control will hopefully limit access to it. The process has been effective in other states. Most proposals include language that specify only those medications with psuedo-ephedrine in them. It should not impact other cold or allergy medications.
It may be a bit of an inconvenience but the information that would be required is generally on your personal check, or your account if you have a prescription at the store. Hopefully limiting access to the drug will slow down the manufacture of meth in the state. Minnesota already requires the registration of purchase of certain chemicals that are used in conjunction with the manufacture of meth.
It will be interesting to see how the discussion plays out in the legislature this session.