- Man transitioning to woman killed herself in Cape City Jail in June; news comes from architect's pitch in Kansas (2/15/18)2
- Cape Girardeau businessman proposes redevelopment project; seeks taxing district to fund improvements (2/17/18)12
- Charges filed in Sunday murder; suspects in custody (2/14/18)2
- University Foundation to honor Talberts as Friends of the University (2/13/18)2
- TJ's Burgers, Wings & Pizza expands with dining area in Fruitland (2/16/18)
- Major case squad activated to investigate shooting death in Cape (2/13/18)
- Lovebirds for 80 years give advice: Trust, patience and 'Tell 'em you love 'em' (2/14/18)2
- Jackson schools to install artificial turf on football, soccer fields (2/14/18)
- Pence gets it right in response to attack on Christian faith (2/17/18)2
- Area restaurants plan for those observing Lent on Valentine's Day (2/12/18)
There is a law in Missouri, passed during the 2009 session of the state legislature, that authorizes a statewide electronic monitoring system for pseudoephedrine-based drugs. These are the drugs in common over-the-counter medications that are used in the manufacture of methamphetamine.
But the electronic monitoring isn't in place yet because the funding for needed computer software hasn't been released. This is one of the programs affected by the state's revenue crunch.
In 2005, the legislature passed a law requiring all purchases of pseudoephedrine medications to be logged. This significantly reduced the sales of these medications and limited meth production.
But meth makers have found how easy it is to avoid detection by going from pharmacy to pharmacy, buying the legal limit of these medications. This is called smurfing.
With an electronic system, access to all purchases of pseudoephedrine would be instantly available rather than relying on paper logs kept by each pharmacy. Meth production is on the rise, and it's likely to continue to grow until there is a better way of fingering those who are buying medications for meth instead of allergies.
The state should consider the funding for the electronic monitoring a high priority. Long-term savings to the state would likely far exceed the cost of this important tool.