Bill to strengthen anti-meth laws passes state Senate

A bill to further limit the purchase of ephedrine/pseudoephedrine passed the Indiana Senate Monday.

Senate Bill 496′s goal is to strengthen anti-methamphetamine laws across Indiana. Forty-four state senators voted in favor of the bill, while four voted against.

If signed into law, SB 496 would allow ephedrine and pseudoephedrine to be sold only at retailers participating in the National Precursors Log Exchange database. The database tracks the sale of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, common ingredients in methamphetamine.

It would also prohibit anyone convicted of certain meth-related crimes from possessing the drugs without a prescription for seven years.

Many residents have expressed concern about another tier of the proposed law. SB 496 would limit how much ephedrine or pseudophedrine a person could buy without a prescription in any given year. That limit would be 61.2 grams per year. To put that in perspective, a typical nasal decongestant contains 120 mg of pseudoephedrine per tablet. The limit would equal about 500 tablets per year.

Anyone who buys more than 10 grams of certain methamphetamine ingredients, including ephedrine or pseudoephedrine, to give to someone else to make into meth would also face increased penalties.

State Senator Carlin Yoder, R-Middlebury, initiated the bill. It now moves to the Indiana House.


10 Comments to “Bill to strengthen anti-meth laws passes state Senate”

    Papa said:
    February 11, 2013 at 5:15 PM

    There has to be better way, making it harder on majority to slow down druggies

    Renee said:
    February 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM

    I think its crappy that when you need medicine you have to do so much to get it and then you can only buy so much I have a family when we get sick on top of having sinus allergies it cleans out what I am legally allowed to buy its not right

    Rachel said:
    February 11, 2013 at 6:34 PM

    Come on …what family uses 500 tablets a year. My family gets colds and has allergies too there's no way we use that much. I think the law would be fine. I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't mind all you have to go threw to get it. I bet the same kind of people didn't like it either when they had to get a script for their opiates 100 years ago either.

      John said:
      February 12, 2013 at 9:27 AM

      Oh…I dont know. Lets see here…My wife & I have 5 kids. We all have allergies & get colds. Kids are given pseudoephedrine for acute ear infections too. At 100 tablets per year per person, well thats 700 pills a year. Often we use more than that. We have prescriptions for ours, but sadly, we as a family need more than "500" pills a year. So there goes that theory. Don't judge someone elses needs on your own.

    Trish said:
    February 11, 2013 at 7:21 PM

    With consistent allergies, 500 tablets does not last a year. Throw others in the household that have allergy / colds, there's no way that small amount would last. This is only hurting us legitimate folk. The druggies, can a find a shady doctor to write their scripts…happens all the time!

    Dustin said:
    February 11, 2013 at 7:50 PM

    You know it also requires ammonia to make meth, so why don't they put a registry on that…. You need propane to cook it, so lets put a limit on that…. Where does this end?

      anonymous said:
      February 11, 2013 at 11:56 PM

      It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. You do not need propane and anhydrous to cook meth.

    Mr. BR said:
    February 12, 2013 at 6:41 AM

    How about we have stiffer penalties for the criminals instead of beating up on the lawful citizens?

    mikebudd2012 said:
    February 18, 2013 at 7:17 PM

    Honestly I find it fair to log to NPLEX when you buy ephedrine so that law enforcement people know exactly how many tabs you got in total. It's a good compromise, making it harder for meth cooks to get ephedrine, but still allowing to buy ephedrine with a doctor's prescription, what would be imposing cost and inconvenience to honest patients.

    Apparently drug agents are not *big fans* of NPLEX due to the administrative burden, but I have seen several news saying that it was effective, for instance arrests in Tennessee. Of course the risk is to create a "market" for smurfers paid to purchase ephedrine under their legal limit.

    For me the real game changer is still to come, with this new generation of meth-proof ephedrine: http://ephedrinewheretobuy.com/ephedrine-for-sale