Grandma Arrested for buying Cold Medication

[dk3dknight]

http://reason.com/blog/2009/09/28/ho...her-arrested-f

Hoosier Grandmother Arrested for Buying Cold Medication

Radley Balko | September 28, 2009

Last March, Sally Harpold, an Indiana grandmother of triplets, bought two boxes of cold medication in less than a week. Together, the two boxes contained 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, putting her in violation of the state's methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period.

Police came to Harpold's home, arrested and handcuffed her, and booked her in a Vermillion County jail. No one believes Harpold was making meth or aiding anyone who was. But local authorities aren't apologizing for her arrest.

“I don’t want to go there again,” [Vermillion County Prosecutor Nina] Alexander told the Tribune-Star, recalling how the manufacture and abuse of methamphetamine ravaged the tiny county and its families.

While the law was written with the intent of stopping people from purchasing large quantities of drugs to make methamphetamine, the law does not say the purchase must be made with the intent to make meth.

“The law does not make this distinction,” Alexander said...

Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, the prosecutor said.

“I’m simply enforcing the law as it was written,” Alexander said...

It is up to customers to pay attention to their purchase amounts, and to check medication labels, Alexander said.

“If you take these products, you ought to know what’s in them,” she said.

Harpold's photo was put on the front page of the local paper as part of an article about the arrest of 17 people in a "drug sweep." Alexander has generously allowed Harpold to enter a deferral program. If she commits no crimes in the next 30 days, her arrest will be wiped from her record. She'll still have to pay court costs and attorney fees.

I'll leave it to Vigo County Sheriff Jon Marvel to (unintentionally) put an exclamation point on the absurdity.

“Sometimes mistakes happen,” Marvel said. “It’s unfortunate. But for the good of everyone, the law was put into effect.

“I feel for her, but if she could go to one of the area hospitals and see a baby born to a meth-addicted mother …”

Because clearly the best way to prevent meth-addicted babies is to arrest women who buy cold medication for their grandchildren.



Hoosier Grandmother Arrested for Buying Cold Medication
Radley Balko | September 28, 2009

Last March, Sally Harpold, an Indiana grandmother of triplets, bought two boxes of cold medication in less than a week. Together, the two boxes contained 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, putting her in violation of the state's methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period.

Police came to Harpold's home, arrested and handcuffed her, and booked her in a Vermillion County jail. No one believes Harpold was making meth or aiding anyone who was. But local authorities aren't apologizing for her arrest.

“I don’t want to go there again,” [Vermillion County Prosecutor Nina] Alexander told the Tribune-Star, recalling how the manufacture and abuse of methamphetamine ravaged the tiny county and its families.

While the law was written with the intent of stopping people from purchasing large quantities of drugs to make methamphetamine, the law does not say the purchase must be made with the intent to make meth.

“The law does not make this distinction,” Alexander said...

Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, the prosecutor said.

“I’m simply enforcing the law as it was written,” Alexander said...

It is up to customers to pay attention to their purchase amounts, and to check medication labels, Alexander said.

“If you take these products, you ought to know what’s in them,” she said.

Harpold's photo was put on the front page of the local paper as part of an article about the arrest of 17 people in a "drug sweep." Alexander has generously allowed Harpold to enter a deferral program. If she commits no crimes in the next 30 days, her arrest will be wiped from her record. She'll still have to pay court costs and attorney fees.

I'll leave it to Vigo County Sheriff Jon Marvel to (unintentionally) put an exclamation point on the absurdity.

“Sometimes mistakes happen,” Marvel said. “It’s unfortunate. But for the good of everyone, the law was put into effect.

“I feel for her, but if she could go to one of the area hospitals and see a baby born to a meth-addicted mother …”

Because clearly the best way to prevent meth-addicted babies is to arrest women who buy cold medication for their grandchildren.

[mikejet]

That's just wrong. They are strict here in Southern California but I don't think they will arrest you like that here.

[Deadset]

putting her in violation of the state's methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period.

Police came to Harpold's home, arrested and handcuffed her, and booked her in a Vermillion County jail.

[absurdity]Time to get the trash locked up, serves her right. A good use of our nanny laws.[/absurdity]

[Uniquely]

This is what happens when we go too far with the whole "get tough on crime" mentality. Innocent granny just trying to right by her family gets printed on the front page of her paper as a drug criminal, because of some "zero tolerance" drug law. Zero tolerance laws are ALWAYS stupid because they take away the ability to look at things on a case by case basis.

[Batman1980]

Lock her up and throw away the key, I say! How dare a kindly old lady try to do something nice for her family and make a mistake like that!

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Lock her up and throw away the key, I say! How dare a kindly old lady try to do something nice for her family and make a mistake like that!

Agreed.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by robinandtami

This is what happens when we go too far with the whole "get tough on crime" mentality. Innocent granny just trying to right by her family gets printed on the front page of her paper as a drug criminal, because of some "zero tolerance" drug law. Zero tolerance laws are ALWAYS stupid because they take away the ability to look at things on a case by case basis.

Amen.

[Psychonaut]

Ugh. I feel for our children...

[Teufel Hunden]

Did anyone read about the kid who brought a knife to school to cut his birthday cake for the class?

The teacher used the knife to cut the cake, the class ate the cake...

then the teacher reported the kid and he was expelled.




I feel like we should be fighting a war here against the govt. rather than Iraqistan.

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

One could break the law and not even know it.

Originally Posted by robinandtami

This is what happens when we go too far with the whole "get tough on crime" mentality. Innocent granny just trying to right by her family gets printed on the front page of her paper as a drug criminal, because of some "zero tolerance" drug law. Zero tolerance laws are ALWAYS stupid because they take away the ability to look at things on a case by case basis.

+1

It's great when we lock up the 'other guy', no matter how absurd and great the cost of the legal battle is to the taxpayer. We can never be too safe in paranoid and risk adverse society. But if it's one of our kids that gets into trouble, it's amazing how our thoughts on the matter do a complete 180. It's also good to know that the outcome might just depend on how deep your pockets are. The hippacracy is mind numbing.

The Whipping Boy
Posts like this are very informative. She made a mistake and is paying a price and I got to learn something new about the rules on cold meds. It's a tragedy Zero Tollerance means an unlucky persion gets to be branded a scofflaw on a fine legal point so the rest of us will be in the know and won't fall into the same trap. I Will think twice before stocking up on that jumbo wrap from Costco. Never thought of it before.

Originally Posted by dk3dknight

Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.

[Steve]

It's good to know they got another dangerous criminal off the streets in Indiana. I'll sleep a little better tonight knowing they've dealt with such a menace to their citizens up there. A fine example of tax dollars well spent. I also love how they won't even apologize for it as if what they've done is right.

[toef]

I have no problem with them checking in on her, but handcuffing/arresting her was probably going a bit too far.

You never know if she had a crazy grandson that was faking an illness, and needed it for his secret meth lab.

Most fire-alarms are false-alarms. So should firefighters just stop responding, because they assume everything is fine? No, when the alarm goes off, go check on it, and if it's nothing to be worried about, then go back to the station. In this case, the granny set off the meth-lab alarm, and it proved to be a false-alarm, but I'm glad they checked.

[DeathByAsh'aman]

I feel less safe with zero tolerance laws

[toef]

Originally Posted by DeathByAsh'aman

I feel less safe with zero tolerance laws

Simple rule: don't do anything illegal, and you'll be fine.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by toefer

Simple rule: don't do anything illegal, and you'll be fine.

I'm sure you meant your comment as a joke, since there are a lot of arcane laws on the books, and they vary from state to state. One could break the law and not even know it.

If you read the first paragraph of the item from the first post, you'd have noticed this, "Last March, Sally Harpold, an Indiana grandmother of triplets, bought two boxes of cold medication in less than a week. Together, the two boxes contained 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, putting her in violation of the state's methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period."

I wonder how many citizens of Indiana are even aware that that rather overzealous law even exists? It's a ridiculous and poorly thought out law, and shouldn't be on the books. No wonder it lead to an innocent person getting arrested.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by DeathByAsh'aman

I feel less safe with zero tolerance laws

I feel the same way.

[Anthony P]

I agree with the insanity of such activity (and also agree with the guy that said nothing wrong with them checking it out, you never know who she is buying it for, but once you know that it is not for making illegal drugs, why continue with the charade) but doesn't anyone else worry about the grand kids, how much medicine is she giving them? even for 3 kids it sounds like it could be a lot (not that I am a pharmacist or anything, nor do we know what was given)

[P@t_Mtl]

Not sure what the big deal is, these kids will be in the streets doing drugs anyway in a few years, just giving them a head start probably.

[Ex Accountant]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

I'm sure you meant your comment as a joke, since there are a lot of arcane laws on the books, and they vary from state to state. One could break the law and not even know it.

If you read the first paragraph of the item from the first post, you'd have noticed this, "Last March, Sally Harpold, an Indiana grandmother of triplets, bought two boxes of cold medication in less than a week. Together, the two boxes contained 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, putting her in violation of the state's methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period."

I wonder how many citizens of Indiana are even aware that that rather overzealous law even exists? It's a ridiculous and poorly thought out law, and shouldn't be on the books. No wonder it lead to an innocent person getting arrested.

It sounds as though she isn't innocent. She appears to be guilty of violating a poorly thought out law (innocent until proven guilty aside). There is a difference.

[Ex Accountant]

Originally Posted by DeathByAsh'aman

I feel less safe with zero tolerance laws

Originally Posted by fireman325

I feel the same way.

I think some zero tolerance laws are probably beneficial. This one? I don't think so.