|
Opinion
Snow Days Bring Worries for Adults
What Is Real Purpose of Animal Law?
Let's Get State Police Out on the Road Again
It's Time To Fork Over All that Unspent Pork
Kudos and Thanks for Quick Response
Edgewood Parade Turned Out Nicely
AYP Status Doesn't Tell Whole Story
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Editorial: Hibbs Has Done Job of 2 Mayors
Editorial: Law Revised for Problem Animals
More
Opinion
|
Thursday, January 22, 2004
Letters to the Editor
Cut Meth Labs By Curbing Ephedrine
THE RECENT INCREASE in meth labs in our community causes grave concern. Such labs lead to a rise in crime rates, create drug addicts, turn normal lives into nightmares and present an enormous public safety hazard.
According to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, methamphetamine is the fastest growing abused drug in rural America and is the only controlled substance that can be produced by someone without chemical expertise. In 2003, the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department uncovered 28 meth labs, which resulted in 17 arrests. It's clear to me, given our experience in Bernalillo County, that this problem has reached epidemic proportions statewide.
In 1999, as (an Albuquerque) city councilor, I introduced legislation limiting the amount of ephedrine that can be sold over-the-counter to a consumer. Ephedrine is the key component in the illegal manufacture of methamphetamine and can be obtained from various over-the-counter products such as decongestants. The passage of this bill allowed vendors to sell no more than three packages of any product containing ephedrine during one transaction.
Meth labs are easily set up in residences, vehicles, apartments and hotels and only require common household appliances, glassware and chemicals and over-the-counter drugs to produce. The one factor that can be controlled is the availability of the drug central to making the methamphetamine, and that is ephedrine.
I strongly support legislators addressing this issue in the current session. It is critical to regulate the sale of ephedrine, discourage the growth of meth labs and stiffen penalties for possession of meth ingredients and for manufacturing this lethal drug around children. Meth labs and the consumption of drugs produced create a dangerous and serious threat to the health and safety of our communities and the environment.
MICHAEL BRASHER
Bernalillo County Commissioner
Otero Reasoning Depends on Day
AS I READ Col. Henry Andrews' Jan. 8 Guest View article, I could not help but feel that the public was being subjected to a military maneuver that I like to call Operation Shifting Sands.
The initial motive emphasized was that the fence was needed to fight terrorism. That tack was, apparently, de-emphasized when it came to light that the proposed new fence will have eight-foot gaps for wildlife pass-throughs and of various other sizes to accommodate terrain. These gaps, combined with the rugged, inaccessible terrain that the boundary lies on, will render a fence of zero effectiveness when it comes to protecting the base from terrorists.
It will, however, fence out forever a law-abiding public that has grown accustomed to accessing the extensive trail system that has developed in the fringe areas of the withdrawal over the past few decades of military disuse. It will also prevent access to areas that aren't even close to Otero Canyon proper. For example, there are National Forest lands that aren't even within the withdrawal boundaries— approximately five square miles that are bordered on the west by private lands in Carnuel, on the north by Interstate 40, and to the east by Tijeras Land Grant lands that will be entirely landlocked by strict adherence to withdrawal boundaries.
Now the sands have shifted. Now it's protecting the public from so-called unexploded ordnance (UXO) that's taken center stage. Call it a strange coincidence, but it just so happens that the existence of this UXO precludes the possibility for any compromise on the location of the proposed new fence. How convenient for KAFB.
In light of this newly-emphasized motive, it is strange that during the hastily assembled Public Comment Meeting that Rep. Heather Wilson convinced KAFB officials to hold last summer in Albuquerque, they cited the uniqueness of the terrain as a training area for troops. Not only that, but if security goals are to be met, soldiers will have to be tasked with performing security patrols along whatever portions of the new fence line that will remain accessible.
Finally, let's not forget about those Forest Service employees and contractors who will no doubt be continuing their work on forest thinning projects and prescribed burns, as they did this past summer and fall and as they have been doing for the years prior to this one. Is it really true that all of these folks have been, and will continue to be, put in harm's way?
Given the timing of all of the strange coincidences that are occurring, and the lack of one instance in a decades-length timeframe where UXO was encountered in the withdrawal, I have my doubts.
One thing seems clear: KAFB officials made up their minds long before they were coerced into holding a Public Comment Meeting, and they are going to build their fence along the withdrawal boundary no matter how much it defies common sense and logic.
What I'd like to know is why hasn't there been any attempt on the part of KAFB's transient representatives to compromise with those of us who live here permanently? At the very least, they could address our concerns about being railroaded by enlisting a qualified, independent third party to establish and document the locations of UXO in the various areas within the withdrawal.
There is still time to modify their plans. There are compromises which will allow them to build a fence that achieves their primary goals, that minimizes the environmental mess they'll create in its construction, and that accommodates the area's permanent residents who want to retain access to this pristine terrain for hiking, biking, and horseback riding.
JOHN RED-HORSE
Tijeras
|
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
