I made the post you responded to before he edited his post to say “The war on drugs is a load of bullshit.” I wasn’t asking about that bit. And I agree with that bit.
I was asking “how so?” about his statement that “this is actually good news.”
But I don’t really see how this pardon is any move to weaken or end the war on drugs.
When I have more time, I might see about responding to OP’s “sigh” post in this thread with more.
Honestly, I think people should be able to buy pharmaceuticals from wherever they want. They should be able to seek help from a medical professional on why/why not to take X, Y, Z – but that would at least open up competition to lower drug prices.
Drug needs, even those for addicts are a medical need.
By restricting their needs legally you create incentives to exploit the lack of competition trough illegal trade (maffia) and loopholes (big pharma)
The scientific result has long be in and its devastating.
The war on drugs:
Directly fueled the power and profitd of organized crime who’s leaders are often protected by bureaucracy. (Kinda similar to health insurance ceos)
Created incentives for law enforcement to crack down on the weakest victims of abuse first to maximize their perceived need for more funding and its much easier/less dangerous then going after cartels.
Paved the way for the opioid pandemic to happen.
Stiffed scientific progress of proper medicine by putting heavy restrictions on barely understood natural substance on the literal basis of fear.
I get and agree with most of what you’re saying here about everything bad about the war on drugs, but is Ulbricht really part of the solution rather than part of the problem?
Yes, Silk Road was (and probably successors of Silk Road still are) a way to get drugs.
But it’s clear you don’t think organized crime is a good thing, and this guy seems a lot more organized crime than not-organized crime. Basically it seems like Ulbricht embodies exactly all the things wrong with the war on drugs rather than being some sort of champion in opposition to the war on drugs.
If Trump had pardoned a literal mafia boss who sold drugs and was tied to 6 attempted assassinations, would you approve of that?
If Trump had pardoned a former big pharma CEO who peddled opioids illegally and was tied to 6 attempted assassinations, would you approve of that?
Ah! Ok. I responded with “how so” before OP edited their post to even include the second line there. I didn’t notice the post had been edited until after responding to your response. Maybe allowing editing posts is a bad idea. Lol.
This is actually good news.
The war on drugs is a load of bullshit.
Silk Road wasn’t just drugs.
It was almost exclusively drugs. There were guns and “concentually harvested organs”, but pretty much everyone went there for its main product drugs.
Didn’t this guy try to murder people?
I think he only got to the planning stage.
Oh, well that’s just fine, then.
How so?
Because it disproportionately targets minorities and the poor…being the big obvious one.
I made the post you responded to before he edited his post to say “The war on drugs is a load of bullshit.” I wasn’t asking about that bit. And I agree with that bit.
I was asking “how so?” about his statement that “this is actually good news.”
But I don’t really see how this pardon is any move to weaken or end the war on drugs.
When I have more time, I might see about responding to OP’s “sigh” post in this thread with more.
Honestly, I think people should be able to buy pharmaceuticals from wherever they want. They should be able to seek help from a medical professional on why/why not to take X, Y, Z – but that would at least open up competition to lower drug prices.
whelp and since health care is not a right people should be able to do anything they can for themselves.
sigh
Drug needs, even those for addicts are a medical need.
By restricting their needs legally you create incentives to exploit the lack of competition trough illegal trade (maffia) and loopholes (big pharma)
The scientific result has long be in and its devastating.
The war on drugs:
Directly fueled the power and profitd of organized crime who’s leaders are often protected by bureaucracy. (Kinda similar to health insurance ceos)
Created incentives for law enforcement to crack down on the weakest victims of abuse first to maximize their perceived need for more funding and its much easier/less dangerous then going after cartels.
Paved the way for the opioid pandemic to happen.
Stiffed scientific progress of proper medicine by putting heavy restrictions on barely understood natural substance on the literal basis of fear.
I get and agree with most of what you’re saying here about everything bad about the war on drugs, but is Ulbricht really part of the solution rather than part of the problem?
Yes, Silk Road was (and probably successors of Silk Road still are) a way to get drugs.
But it’s clear you don’t think organized crime is a good thing, and this guy seems a lot more organized crime than not-organized crime. Basically it seems like Ulbricht embodies exactly all the things wrong with the war on drugs rather than being some sort of champion in opposition to the war on drugs.
If Trump had pardoned a literal mafia boss who sold drugs and was tied to 6 attempted assassinations, would you approve of that?
If Trump had pardoned a former big pharma CEO who peddled opioids illegally and was tied to 6 attempted assassinations, would you approve of that?
Oh, i was not actually expressing any opinion on silk road or the people behind it.
Looking back to the comment you replied i see the confusion. My bad, I should have been more specific i was talking about the second part.
I don’t know their specific case but it does smell like more organized crime indeed. They probably tried to get rich on it.
Ah! Ok. I responded with “how so” before OP edited their post to even include the second line there. I didn’t notice the post had been edited until after responding to your response. Maybe allowing editing posts is a bad idea. Lol.