How I got here • Hacker News Board

Re: How I got here

#311

Post by dvektor » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 5:54 PM UTC

nopmike wrote: post #251

It's a little late, so this will get buried, but I had a similar experience. I caught two felonies (both from the same incident) Luckily, I had a good job at the time and it was my first offense, so I was able to get house arrest. After seeing what could have been my life, I completed my BS in CS, online part-time and convinced the state of California to let me move there. I received five years of probation, so even…

Thanks for sharing this.. send me an email if you'd like. preston@unlockedlabs.org

Re: How I got here

#312

Post by hereme888 » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 5:59 PM UTC

verisimi wrote: post #281

qingcharles wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That man gave you your entire life back. It's not just the time you would have served, but it would have ruined so much of the rest of your life too.

He did give him back his life. But how is it possible that his life was at risk at all? Why a 10 year sentence for taking drugs? The government should simply not have that power.

Like the other person said, it was for selling, not taking. Also, I think someone should have the power to keep the public safe, whether government, or a society-sponsored group.

The cops were undercover DEA with previous experience going underground in places like Colombia. They had been in rough places. Their focus was mainly hunting the big guys: suppliers. End-chain young people trying to make a quick buck is low yield, and if anything going after them distracts from the root of the problem and alerts the big guys.

Re: How I got here

#313

Post by hereme888 » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 6:04 PM UTC

skrebbel wrote: post #277

hereme888 wrote: post #213

I could have been that guy, and worse. When I was 19 I got caught selling a bunch of MDMA at a night club. Undercover police caught me, and by God's grace they chose to let me go. MDMA had just begun to carry a minimum 10 yr prison sentence throughout the state. I had no idea what I was doing in my life, like I was asleep and not awake, until I got caught that night. About 15 minutes into the interrogation at the sce…

Offtopic, but minimum sentences are nuts. What's the point of judges and juries etc if we make the law so aggressive that they hardly have a say anymore?

The minimum sentence had been recently enforced at that time because things were getting really out of hand with MDMA flooding the markets. Probably tons of deaths, adulterated compounds, and ruining people's brains.

I say ruining people's brains because, in the world of raves I was involved in, most customers were teens, and I knew quite a bit who kept taking it excessively for self-medication, eventually just to get through the day, and I would see the decline in their cognitive functions over time. It was really sad. I denied selling to those people because they scared me. But...I was selling nonetheless. So unaware of the consequences of my actions...

Re: How I got here

#314

Post by hereme888 » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 6:11 PM UTC

OfSanguineFire wrote: post #282

hereme888 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha I understand your point. But it is a dangerous substance when used without medical supervision. And more importantly, what I was selling was presumably MDMA. I didn't have kits to check the batches for adulteration. What if people died? I was not ready for that responsibility.

I wonder how many people here would agree with your claim "it is a dangerous substance when used without medical supervision". Often in hacker circles soft drugs are viewed as something people can take on their own provided that, as you suggest, purity is guaranteed. And while setting and trusted and savvy companionship is important, the involvement of a medical professional may kill the whole freespirited vibe.

I just posted a response in part of the thread saying "The minimum sentence had been recently enforced at that time", which is part of my explanation for that.

As a teenager I encountered so many people who thought they were experts with drugs because nothing had yet happened to them.

Nowadays, finishing up med school, with tons of real pharmacology and clinical knowledge, having seen lots of things in the psych wards, the ER, and stories from my wife (a physician too), I've come to realize that most people who think they know about these substances and their dangers don't really know.

Anyone can educate themselves, but lots of "drug customers", especially the most susceptible (youth + less educated), don't even have a background to know HOW to educate themselves properly concerning these things. Their knowledge is tainted by "most comments online say..." plus "and my friends who know all about these drugs..." plus "and one study I read" = so all I have to do is X, Y, Z.

Re: How I got here

#315

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 6:19 PM UTC

imafounderlolhi wrote: post #303

JessicaHicklin wrote: post #100

Whether you feel sympathy for Preston or not, the fact of the matter is that 95% of the incarcerated individuals in the US will one day love next to you and me. Wouldn't you rather they be prepared to live there, to have a job and resources? To be self-sufficient (Preston will not need welfare resources when he returns because of this opportunity)? (Disclosure, I am Preston's employer and formerly incarcerated myself…

you're a mentally ill tr4nny who murdered someone during a meth deal. amazing how the few "sweetheart articles" online fail to mention this.

[deleted]

Re: How I got here

#316

Post by hereme888 » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 6:26 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #271

hereme888 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha I understand your point. But it is a dangerous substance when used without medical supervision. And more importantly, what I was selling was presumably MDMA. I didn't have kits to check the batches for adulteration. What if people died? I was not ready for that responsibility.

Isn't that precisely an argument for legalisation? You wouldn't have 19 year kids selling shit, you would have pharmacies and certification processes and etc.

I agree it's one argument. But, my views on legalization at the moment are these:

Alcohol is a drug, and it gets you drunk. Has side-effects, affects long-term health, etc, etc.

Weed is a drug, and in my personal experience it's WAY more "drug" than alcohol, especially how it's used nowadays. Also, across all cultures/races, studies show that the earlier a person starts consuming it, the higher the risk of developing some sort of psychosis later in life (I have my own theories as to "why").

Also, who smokes weed the most? When I did clinical rotations in New York it was the poor and the less educated that smoked weed all day. I would even see black mothers in ghetto areas who took their children to the park and just sit in the benches smoking weed, not paying attention to or interacting with their children, which to me is a very bad example and perpetuating a negative cycle.

The more educated did it occasionally, and with self control. So unrestricted access to weed for those with less self-control and goal-oriented behavior is more likely to ruin their lives; the very people who instead need to cultivate more self control and goal-oriented behavior.

I'm glad that weed is now available legally, because it guarantees users a clean product, as opposed to nowadays in KY where I'm at lots of illicit weed is laced with fentanyl-like compounds. I consume THC + CBD every once in a blue moon, and I don't dare touch street products for various reasons.

MDMA legal...well, I haven't seen anyone die from weed. But MDMA is quite dangerous. And who screens beforehand if that person has a cardiovascular issue they may not even be aware of? Alcohol and weed don't have much of a short-term effect on the heart. MDMA is an amphetamine-like compound.

These are my thoughts at the moment.

Re: How I got here

#317

Post by _heimdall » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 7:33 PM UTC

polygamous_bat wrote: post #289

_heimdall wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that work exactly? How does one end up with a tint amount for personal consumption if someone else couldn't legally allowed to have enough to sell? Seems really strange that the government would have bothered decriminalizing consumption if the supply itself is illegal.

Why is that weird? You can have food, you can make food for yourself and your friend, but if you’re selling cooked food to strangers you need to have minimum standards of cleanliness etc.

There are legal avenues to buy food though. My confusion is just that its illegal to sell but legal to own, it seems that still makes it functionally illegal to own since you shouldn't be able to buy it anywhere

Re: How I got here

#318

Post by _heimdall » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 7:34 PM UTC

cstrahan wrote: post #309

_heimdall wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that work exactly? How does one end up with a tint amount for personal consumption if someone else couldn't legally allowed to have enough to sell? Seems really strange that the government would have bothered decriminalizing consumption if the supply itself is illegal.

> How does that work exactly? How does one end up with a tint amount for personal consumption if someone else couldn't legally allowed to have enough to sell? Same way people acquire guns illegally in US states that prohibit gun ownership: involved parties choose to break the law. > Seems really strange that the government would have bothered decriminalizing consumption if the supply itself is illegal. These governme…

> Same way people acquire guns illegally in US states that prohibit gun ownership: involved parties choose to break the law.

There are legal avenues to buy guns in the US though, that's the confusion for me. Why bother saying I can own it if the law also says no one can legally sell it to me?

Re: How I got here

#319

Post by morgante » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 7:50 PM UTC

frob wrote: post #302

morgante wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can stop them from doing it again by locking them up in comfort for 10 years instead of discomfort for 20, then that is what we should do. You're never going to stop many of them from reoffending. Even the "best" rehabilitation programs have crime rates far above the general population. The additional 10 years is 10 more years where they can't hurt innocent people. The justice system exists for the benefit o…

If locking large numbers of people up for inordinately long times prevented crime, the United States would be the safest place in the world. We have 5% of the world's population but 25% of the world's prison population. We are one of a dwindling number of countries that will lock up a child for life (there was a SCOTUS case baring automatic life sentences for minors, but it leaves a loophole wide enough for a semi to…

> If locking large numbers of people up for inordinately long times prevented crime, the United States would be the safest place in the world.

Comparing between countries with massively different demographics is pointless. The US simply has far more criminality than other wealthy nations.

> We've tried highly punitive mass incarceration for decades and it's failing horribly.

That's not my take-away. We had a massive and growing crime problem in the US in the 60s and 70s and pursued a policy of mass incarceration as a solution.

It worked. Crime went down a lot since we started mass incarceration.

Over the last decade, and particularly since 2020, we've been reversing that policy and seeing the impact: spiking violent crime and unsafe cities.

I don't know how you can possibly look at this and think it "doesn't work." I'm sure criminals prefer a policy of catch and release, but I'd rather bring back mass incarceration.

Re: How I got here

#320

Post by bboles » Sun, Nov 12, 2023, 7:54 PM UTC

frob wrote: post #84

arbuge wrote: post #63

>> the success of the Maine model of corrections should highlight the absolutely embarrassing lack of opportunities in the rest of the system Very well said. And I am glad we have a model now, if one was ever needed. I hope other prison systems take note.

As someone actively working in this space, I can tell you they are. Maine is following the so-called Scandinavian Model. It essentially comes down to giving incarcerated people a chance to practice normal daily activities and social interactions. The facilities feel more like highly secure dorms than jails. The way a head of a different DoC said still sticks with me: We send people away for years, tell them exactly w…

We send people away for years, tell them exactly what to do every day and they get to make exacrly one choice every day: do you obey or not? That's the only choice you get to make. Then, after 3, 5, 10 years, we send them out into society and tell them, "Make better choices." But we haven't prepared them for that at all. We have given them almost no chances to make decisions and learn how to make good ones. We just tell them the decision to make and they do it. There's no space for practicing good decisions in traditional prison settings.

This really puts things in perspective. Thank you for sharing!