Shedding light on the dark web • Hacker News Board

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#101

Post by bwanab » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

acctid4325 wrote: post #77

dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

To what extend it is society's job to protect people from themselves? So let's assume that we legalize 'drugs' for everyone: can I now buy pot and meth and acid and heroine and what not complete with shooting accessories from 7-Eleven? Are we seriously proposing that people in masses would be able to responsibly consume these newly available substances. If there is doubt, maybe we add, similar to obtaining a drivers…

At least in Colorado, you can only by pot from licensed shops where they card you when you go in and card you again when you purchase. This is a far cry from 7-Eleven.

Colorado has seen pot smoking go down for kids which is counterintuitive, right? Not really. I've got kids in high school and they tell me that pot is easy to get (I don't live in Colorado). In Colorado, the illegal trade has dried up, thus making it harder, not easier for kids to get it. There's no reason to believe it would be that different for other drugs.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#102

Post by bduerst » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #85

acctid4325 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what extend it is society's job to protect people from themselves? So let's assume that we legalize 'drugs' for everyone: can I now buy pot and meth and acid and heroine and what not complete with shooting accessories from 7-Eleven? Are we seriously proposing that people in masses would be able to responsibly consume these newly available substances. If there is doubt, maybe we add, similar to obtaining a drivers…

So let's assume that we legalize alcohol for everyone: can I now buy beer and whisky and absinthe and whatnot complete with glasses from 7-Eleven? Are we seriously proposing that people in masses would be able to responsibly consume these substances. If ther is doubt, maybe we add, similar to obtaining a drivers license, a class of responsible alcohol use for kids to their high school curriculum. A 12-step program fr…

Alcohol is the fourth largest cause of preventable deaths in the U.S. each year.

Given that it's chemically addicting and steeped in cultural history, I'm all for the Pandora's box approach of scratching it off as a loss and leaving it.

We don't need more dangerous, chemically-addictive substances mass introduced to the public. At some point the priority of an individual's freedom to abuse substances and harm their selves is outweighed the lives they take from those around them in society at large.

And no, Marijuana and MDMA are not chemically addictive.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#103

Post by MichaelGG » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

chc wrote: post #47

ThomPete wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. The answer none of the people who are for the criminalization is why should a victimless action be considered a crime. Why should otherwise law abiding citizens be criminalized for something as innocent as smoking weed. Even harder drugs would be much easier and economically better, dealt with if it was legalized.

Grouping weed in with meth and bath salts doesn't seem like the foundation for a rational argument.

Weed is not grouped in with meth. Methamphetamine is legally prescribed in the US at a federal level. You can buy it at your local grocery store[1]. Hilariously, those same stores will restrict your purchase of cold medicine, so you don't go making unauthorized meth. They'll still sell you the pharma grade stuff though.

Weed is illegal on a federal level in the US. Companies selling weed in states have a hard time operating. Companies selling methamphetamine are treated no differently than any other pharma company.

1: http://www.goodrx.com/methamphetamine?drug-name=methamphetam...

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#104

Post by DanBC » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:38 PM UTC

Torgo wrote: post #54

dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

Any time I read anything about legalizing all drugs I am struck by how that opinion would change if they tried to function with a heroin addiction.

People currently have heroin addiction. They also have considerable problems caused by dirty heroin - the contaminants in heroin make injecting pretty risky. Lack of access to clean needles, and lack of a clean safe space to inject make injecting pretty risky.

Treating opiate addiction as a public health, not criminal justice, issue requires some of the tens of billions spent on the war on drugs to be diverted to health and social care.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#105

Post by joesmo » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:40 PM UTC

jswny wrote: post #39

Cshelton wrote: post #31

Sellers of drugs, will ALWAYS sell drugs, both illegal and legal. Buyers/Users of drugs will ALWAYS buy/use drugs, illegal or legal. It is an interaction between humans of Earth, no government or entity, no system or blocks will ever stop it. Shut down the internet, it will continue. Short of a massive purge of life, drugs will never go away. If you somehow...were able to shut down the "darkweb", it would move into s…

I tend to feel the same way. These types of things are inevitable, you are never going to stop them from happening. However, when debating this point, I have a hard time defending my point when someone else says "so should we just not do anything? Wouldn't that increase the illegal activity? Should we let people buy guns too? Where do you draw the line?" I have to say, I'm not sure what to say about that. If the gove…

"If the government did not actively fight this, successful or not, would it cause the markets and illegal drug users to proliferate?"

No. We have decades of experience on this from places like Portugal, The Netherlands, California, Washington State, etc. In fact, the opposite happens. The problem is that no one bothers to ever check facts before making assumptions about what will happen that fly in the face of the evidence, especially when writing laws.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#106

Post by MichaelGG » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:40 PM UTC

acctid4325 wrote: post #77

dopamean wrote: post #11

Any time I read anything about the illegal drug trade I am struck by how much the industry would change if all drugs were legalized everywhere. So much effort is expended to keep things hidden from law enforcement and other criminals that it adds an incredible amount of friction to the purchasing process for the purchaser and the seller. From the buyer's perspective you now have to go into business with some often un…

To what extend it is society's job to protect people from themselves? So let's assume that we legalize 'drugs' for everyone: can I now buy pot and meth and acid and heroine and what not complete with shooting accessories from 7-Eleven? Are we seriously proposing that people in masses would be able to responsibly consume these newly available substances. If there is doubt, maybe we add, similar to obtaining a drivers…

You can already buy meth at grocery stores[1]. So that doesn't really debunk the argument.

Alcohol is far worse yet advertised liberally and treated near-mandatory in some social situations.

There's no issue restricting things based on age. That's already done for many things. So I think you're straw-manning here.

1: http://www.goodrx.com/methamphetamine?drug-name=methamphetam...

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#107

Post by fucking_tragedy » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:43 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #80

Torgo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is it any different than trying to function with an alcohol addiction? pretty different! Both the addiction, how easy it is to get addicted. I've got a challenge for you, start using heroin, then decide to stop, like a casual drinker. Report back your experience!

FYI, withdrawal from alcohol is among the worst of any drug. It is one of the few drugs where withdrawal can actually be lethal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens

It takes sustained periods of constant or binge drinking to first enter withdrawal territory with alcohol. I know people who binge on the weekends, are definitely psychologically addicted to alcohol, but experience no withdrawal symptoms.

First time you do heroin, dose once everyday for 3-7 days and you've got yourself a very painful withdrawal ahead of you. Once you're no longer heroin naive, it could take only 2 doses in a week's time to send you back into withdrawals.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#108

Post by colemickens » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:45 PM UTC

skylark wrote: post #53

mistermann wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's really a shitty experience for everyone involved. However, it creates many thousands of very well paid jobs for police, lawyers, prison employees, etc. - you know, the people that create the laws. Long ago I might have considered that there might be some justification for these laws (or anywhere there's rules really), but nowadays when you wonder why "the way something is" is, it's easier to just assume someon…

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? Politicians voting on laws and drafting new ones must ultimately answer to their constituents. While the vast majority of things fly under the radar, "pro-drug" support is enough of a charge…

And many Americans believe that drugs being illegal means that: they're harder to get, they're used less than they would be if they were legal, and that the public is being saved from DANGEROUS HORRIBLE drugs.

All of which is false, but is perpetuated by those in powers - both by outright propaganda, and by (selective) enforcement of these laws.

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#109

Post by MichaelGG » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:45 PM UTC

skylark wrote: post #53

mistermann wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's really a shitty experience for everyone involved. However, it creates many thousands of very well paid jobs for police, lawyers, prison employees, etc. - you know, the people that create the laws. Long ago I might have considered that there might be some justification for these laws (or anywhere there's rules really), but nowadays when you wonder why "the way something is" is, it's easier to just assume someon…

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? Politicians voting on laws and drafting new ones must ultimately answer to their constituents. While the vast majority of things fly under the radar, "pro-drug" support is enough of a charge…

The US's war on drugs really pounds "developing" countries though. Guatemala, for instance, has basically no drug problem. People don't buy, they don't consume, addiction isn't really an issue. (Alcoholism, macho-ness, incompetence OTOH...)

Yet Guatemala pays with blood. It enforces ridiculous money laws. It has to do all this and it's a total net negative for the country. They get no benefit, other than appeasing the US. Is this a conspiracy? Either way it massively benefits the US, which gets a way to keep these countries preoccupied with false issues, keep them rife with violence, an so on, preventing them from becoming a credible threat or competition.

I'm willing to bet many other countries are in a similar position. Mexico would probably get cleaned up overnight if they gave Monsanto an exclusive license for pot and opium cultivation. (I'd bet on Monsanto corpsec over cartels any day.) Hell, these countries could even nationalize production if they weren't to bad at everything they do.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/19/otto-molina-wa...

Re: Shedding light on the dark web

#110

Post by at-fates-hands » Thu, Jul 14, 2016, 8:45 PM UTC

themartorana wrote: post #69

skylark wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? Politicians voting on laws and drafting new ones must ultimately answer to their constituents. While the vast majority of things fly under the radar, "pro-drug" support is enough of a charge…

A majority of Americans support marijuana legalization: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/suppo... The original banning of marijuana is ridiculous and riddled with racism and xenophobia: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is... This is just marijuana. Drug legality and policy is mired in racism and money politics. It is just as conspiracy-theory as it sounds.

>> This is just marijuana.

I would hasten to say this. I totally support a lot of the legalization for medicinal purposes but there's still way too much of this happening:

Driving while high on marijuana causing spike in fatal accidents - http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-cau...

Police: Driver Was High Before Crash That Killed Massachusetts State Trooper - http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/DA-Massachusetts-State-...

Driver was high on marijuana when he killed NE Portland cyclist, police say - http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/12/driver_...

Driver accused of crashing into marijuana dispensary while high on marijuana - http://www.oregonlive.com/happy-valley/index.ssf/2016/06/dri...

Teen driver admits to smoking marijuana before crash killing 3 - http://www.kiro7.com/news/teen-driver-admits-smoking-marijua...

Sorry but that old adage that people who smoke weed just sit on the couch and eat potato chips and people who smoke don't hurt anybody is a load of BS. These are not simple accidents, these are people getting high, driving and killing people, and its happening a LOT more frequently.

I do believe in legalization for medical purposes and feel there are huge benefits for people who need it - but clearly there are still issues that need to be worked out. And save your "Drunk drivers kill more people very year" and "Alcohol is way worse. . " arguments. Just because we already have one dangerous legal drug, does not make it right to legalize another one. Heroin and Cocaine are also schedule I and II drugs. Are they any less dangerous than weed?