Just following up on what I was saying this morning on the dangers of anti-terrorism laws being applied to situations that do not involve terrorism, Eugene Volokh provides an example of the way in which too broadly worded anti-terrorism laws can be misused. A prosecuter in North Carolina has charged someone who has been manufacturing methamphetamine with two counts of "manufacturing a nuclear or chemical weapon", because the definition of chemical weapons under the law is

any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury and . . . is or contains toxic or poisonous chemicals or their immediate precursors

and methamphetamines can clearly be described that way. Because the accused is being prosecuted under the anti-terrorism law, the penalties are harsher (and he may have less legal protection - I am not sure of the details of that particular law) than he would have if he were charged with a normal drugs offence.

I suppose we can observe that this is another example of the general way in which people's rights and liberties tend to get brushed aside as part of the war on drugs, too.