Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–128 of 128 posts

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#121

Post by 0xdeadb00f »

bjo590 wrote: post #7
seibelj wrote: post #6

A victimless crime - unless you think we should be locking up all of the alcohol sellers? Alcohol addiction is a sad, sad affair. I would rather someone be addicted to pharmaceutical grade opioids than street heroin laced with fentanyl and other junk.

> I would rather someone be addicted to pharmaceutical grade opioids than street heroin laced with fentanyl and other junk. The two addictions are more or less the same. Someone addicted to street heroin can substitute pharmaceutical grade opioids. Someone addicted to pharmaceutical grade opioids can substitute street heroin. This is largely a class discrepancy, as the higher tolerance a person has the more expensive…

> The two addictions are more or less the same.

Except pharmaceutical grade opiods are less likely to be cut with deadly shit like fentanyl.

If someone expects heroin but is then given heroin mixed with another chemical, they can overdose quite easily, especially with fentanyl and carfentanyl

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#122

Post by nkrisc »

akadruid1 wrote: post #120
nkrisc wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most countries will not extradite their citizens to other countries for act that aren't crimes in their own country. This was a crime in both Costa Rica and the United States.

The US attempted to extradite a British citizen for copyright infringement that wasn't an offence in the UK. The British government approved the extradition, although he finally reached an agreement that allowed the US to fine him and remotely monitor him. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_O%27Dwyer

"Most"

Of course there are always exceptions.

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#123

Post by Fjolsvith »

arcticbull wrote: post #114
Fjolsvith wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And... that ties nicely in with the defund the police narrative.

This has nothing to do with the "defund the police" narrative, Portugal did this 20 years ago.

> then it’s also true that our current enforcement mechanisms are probably incredibly counterproductive.

Fits nicely to me.

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#124

Post by arcticbull »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #123
arcticbull wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with the "defund the police" narrative, Portugal did this 20 years ago.

> then it’s also true that our current enforcement mechanisms are probably incredibly counterproductive. Fits nicely to me.

Ah, I see what you meant, I read it as implying that the "defund the police" people were driving the narrative I was referencing, not that the narrative I was referencing happened to fit the "defund the police" one.

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#125

Post by schwartzworld »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #108
schwartzworld wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a side effect of prohibition.

People commit crimes to acquire all kinds of legal things, why wouldn't an addict do so to acquire legalized drugs?

If you are an addict and want to get clean, there are very few resources at your disposal (unless you are wealthy). Many addicts start out being prescribed drugs by a legitimate doctor, but are left without resources to break their addictions when the prescription runs out. Most if not all addicts do not want to be addicted. While there may be some small group of people who commit crime for fun to go buy drugs, typically it is an act of desperation. Nobody ever says "I want to be a junkie when I grow up".

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#126

Post by cgriswald »

KMag wrote: post #86
cgriswald wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You both reject any responsibility for swaying others to your way of thinking and put up road blocks for anyone who might otherwise have a change of heart and join your cause. You show no compassion or empathy to those who disagree with you so your compassion towards those suffering due to the war on drugs rings false. I’m pro-legalization and have been for decades; but I’d prefer to live in a world where we don’t bu…

> I’d prefer to live in a world where we don’t build guillotines and dare each other to use them. Beautifully put. I regret I have but one upvote to give. DuckDuckGo can't find other uses of this sentence. Is it original? May I quote you?

Thanks. Yes to both questions.

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#127

Post by 3131s »

m0zg wrote: post #115
popeathlete wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The drug that kills tens of thousands of people who don't know any better and choke on their vomit because nobody told them to lay on their side. People who overdose because they got dope laced with fent. People who overdosed because they didn't know how much h they got. People who got addicted, because the safest option was to shoot. Surely controlled selling of the substance wouldn't fix any of these problems.

This is the same level of magical thinking as "abolishing police", in that it completely ignores the deadly realities on the ground and the people who suffer the consequences do not intersect in the venn diagram with those proposing the thing. In fact those who suffer the consequences tend to be overwhelmingly against the proposal.

You have no clue what you're talking about.

Re: American darknet vendor and Costa Rican pharmacist charged

#128

Post by Implicated »

remarkEon wrote: post #66
Implicated wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we've tried this experiment in some US cities and it's not resulted in anything anyone could describe as a success. We have? Can we get a citation on that?

Portland, Oakland, Seattle for starters. Maybe you have a different definition of decriminalization.

Ehh, I lived in Portland - where do you see anything about a decriminalization of all drugs there? I must have missed it.
Post reply on HN