|
On July 30 2013 18:03 Daswollvieh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 15:47 sob3k wrote:On July 30 2013 15:30 Daswollvieh wrote:But you cannot know whether it´s a good guy in his basement, or some criminal organization using this as another way to distribute their product. It´s like the girls on the internet, they are not really into it, but it feels good to think so.  Sure, never can be certain. Still, advocating the solution to organized drug crime is "don't buy drugs" is pretty similar to advocating the solution to STDs is abstinence. In reality on a large scale its completely impractical, and looking back on the entirety of human history i'd say we are about as likely to stop doing drugs as we are to stop fucking. The only way real change in either field has ever been accomplished is to recognize that that the activity is going to occur, and to encourage safer and more mutually beneficial methods of doing it. TLDR: Silkroad is like drug condoms. I agree that outlawing something that is a personal choice makes no sense. However, outlawing stuff that gets you hooked as quickly as it destroys you, basically robbing you of your free will, absolutely makes sense, because it protects the weak, who cannot evaluate the risk. That said, pot being illegal makes absolutely no sense. The comparison to condoms would only fit, if condoms, at any point, were largely supplied by criminal organizations. Right now, you cannot tell if you´re not supporting a system of violence, except you made the stuff yourself. In a way, it would be like trusting a fashion label that they produced their products in fair working conditions, without having independent monitoring. Show nested quote +On July 30 2013 17:03 mothergoose729 wrote:
The problem with this argument is that these unscrupulous groups wouldn't exist if drugs were legal. When someone gets strung out on heroine or meth its very sad and a terrible thing, but you have to wonder if making drugs illegal is actually helping anybody. It certainly doesn't seem to be hurting the supply. That is no argument either. Sure, if the Soviets hadn´t invaded Afghanistan, then the Taliban probably wouldn´t exist. But they do exist and the Soviets retreating did not make the go away. Drug trafficking is so ridiculously big that the legalization of drugs in the whole world would not deal with the problem. I know that the Netherlands have a more relaxed drug policy, and in Prague you can get even hard drugs legally now, but I doubt that dealt with the criminality.
In amerstdam many drugs are legal to sell, and a select few drugs are illegal to sell but not illegal to consume. That is called decriminalizing. I have read that amsterdam has some of the lowest levels of illicit drug use in the world, despite that fact that you can literally smoke crack in the street. Imagine if herion and meth where legal but high regulated. Laws could be enacted: no advertisments, can't be displayed, both users and dealers must register themselves, ect. The addicts then would be out in the open instead of hiding. Money that goes to funding the drug war could be diverted to recovery services and wellfare programs, or hell could pay of the national debt and fuck the addicts, either way it would be better spent. I don't claim to know the answers or whatever, but just about anything seems to be more effective than what we have now. Anybody can get meth or cociane or whatever if they have the money and they ask around with the right people. Criminalizing has done nothing to curb the supply. And there will always be addicts because you can't legislate behavior. We all know this to be true... what then, if anything, is the drug war actually accomplishing?
|
On July 31 2013 02:30 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 02:12 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 02:08 farvacola wrote:On July 31 2013 02:06 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 02:01 farvacola wrote:On July 31 2013 01:58 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 01:54 farvacola wrote:
The Silk Road is not cheap..... Depends on where you live. also, it is getting cheaper as more vendors show up. competition you know. And many would rather pay a bit extra and get it home delivered with feedback on the product before purchase (many of the sellers of LSD gets reviewed and confirmed by experts if the drug is advertised at the given amount and that it doesn't have any other drugs in it. And how do you know that they are "experts"? In fact, how do you know anything being advertised is legit? The answer is you don't, you're buying drugs on the deep web. Vendors get dissected by the community if they are shown to sell bad products, there's always a couple of guys who do testing on products, with photos and proof to back it up. It's by far more information than you are ever going to get on the street when buying drugs. And how would you know this? Are your experiences buying drugs offline varied and involved enough to really say such a thing, or maybe you've only dealt with bad drug dealers? A drug dealer isn't going to be giving you papers showing the product has been tested to only contain the said substance. All I'm sayin is that some definitely do 
Unfortunately that is not a common luxury 
|
On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible.
Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop.
|
Seems to me that the DEA could just find out what is in your package, wait to see if you open it, than bust you. I don't think it's really worth having your dog shot and house searched.
I bet we will see a surge of agitprop about silkroad in the coming years. It will be filled with lies about how "perfect," straight A "kids," got "dope" and how it "changed" them. There will be testimonials from former alcoholics and gambling addicts about how the ease of getting drugs online caused them to ruin their "perfect" life. The fact that they had previously abused other things will be completely ignored. As a result of the propaganda campaign, the government will pass all kinds of laws and restrictions. You will need to input all kinds of personal information when sending mail.
The whole war on drugs is a gigantic joke. In what universe is it the purpose of the government to determine consumption?
The original push to ban drugs was strongly associated with eugenics and racism. Even the idea of sobriety being "clean" is straight out of the eugenics movement.
|
On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop.
Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh)
get real.
|
On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real.
No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact.
+ Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now
It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert.
|
On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert.
The thing is not only the vendors post on these sites. You as a customer can post too, and even if there are some false reviews (I'm sure plenty of vendors have tried that), the lack of a huge amount of negative feedback from a vendor with decent volume indicates that the customers are generally happy with the service.
You can compare it to the Amazon platform. No matter what the seller writes in the product description and a few faked 5 star review, if you see 90% 1 star reviews talking about the product being intercepted by customs, having no effect or a bad effect, then you are not going to risk it.
No silkroads is not perfect and there is potential for scams and being caught, in particular when working with new vendors, or when ordering across the borders of a country which has a very strict checking of incoming mail (I have had packages from legal natural supplement vendors like iherb opened and examined when ordering online). However for most people in most countries if you are careful who you do business with, then the risk is very minor and many orders of magnitude smaller than with the traditional way of obtaining illegal substances.
|
Pretty good service for the costumer. I remember some time ago they fucked a seller in Australia. But these kind of negative events don't happen often. I guess the costs for putting the sellers infront of a court are considered too high, chasing the street dealers seems to be the better investment.
I would encourage the use of SR for people who consume just from timte to time and don't have good real life contacts.
|
On July 31 2013 05:18 rasnj wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert. The thing is not only the vendors post on these sites. You as a customer can post too, and even if there are some false reviews (I'm sure plenty of vendors have tried that), the lack of a huge amount of negative feedback from a vendor with decent volume indicates that the customers are generally happy with the service. You can compare it to the Amazon platform. No matter what the seller writes in the product description and a few faked 5 star review, if you see 90% 1 star reviews talking about the product being intercepted by customs, having no effect or a bad effect, then you are not going to risk it. No silkroads is not perfect and there is potential for scams and being caught, in particular when working with new vendors, or when ordering across the borders of a country which has a very strict checking of incoming mail (I have had packages from legal natural supplement vendors like iherb opened and examined when ordering online). However for most people in most countries if you are careful who you do business with, then the risk is very minor and many orders of magnitude smaller than with the traditional way of obtaining illegal substances.
I understand how the system works and certainly, for small quantities, of course the chances of getting caught are slim. That's not at all what I'm arguing. I just find it laughable that the OP actually believes what these "experts" are feeding him when there is a very clear conflict of interest as to why they would want to portray the information in a certain way. To say that it's nearly impossible to detect is just not true. To say that it's not worth it to invest in the detection equipment required to screen most mail is a different matter. But don't say impossible when it's actually relatively simple.
|
On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs. Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so. Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert.
I never said it was impossible to catch the letters, I did however say that your idea that you can get a high rate letters getting caught without massive costs and delay in the postal system is not supported by anything. Australia has the strongest customs in the world right now and people are reporting 80-90% delivery rates into the country, some vendors have 100% success.
What is your response to that? They just haven't bothered enough? They haven't received sufficient money? The idea you presented tried to make yourself out to be some kind of genius problem solver, however, this has been going on in high volumes for years, even prior to Silk Road. They will never get enough resources to open so many letters without vast cost increases in shipping and longer delivery times. Even employees at USPS and other places writing in the silk road forums talking about this attitude among their coworkers, essentially in theory you could catch many letters, but it isn't possible to implement. Each letter confiscated requires huge amounts of paperwork as well, do they have time for that each time someone orders a gram of coke and a few grams of weed?
Your thick skull must be one of the most absurd i've come across in a while, you have little practical knowledge of anything related to the postal system and silk road and only fall back on your supposed scientific background, trying to appear an expert, well guess what, your thinking is vintage and it still hasn't been implemented for a reason.
|
On July 31 2013 05:29 FryBender wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 05:18 rasnj wrote:On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so.
Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert. The thing is not only the vendors post on these sites. You as a customer can post too, and even if there are some false reviews (I'm sure plenty of vendors have tried that), the lack of a huge amount of negative feedback from a vendor with decent volume indicates that the customers are generally happy with the service. You can compare it to the Amazon platform. No matter what the seller writes in the product description and a few faked 5 star review, if you see 90% 1 star reviews talking about the product being intercepted by customs, having no effect or a bad effect, then you are not going to risk it. No silkroads is not perfect and there is potential for scams and being caught, in particular when working with new vendors, or when ordering across the borders of a country which has a very strict checking of incoming mail (I have had packages from legal natural supplement vendors like iherb opened and examined when ordering online). However for most people in most countries if you are careful who you do business with, then the risk is very minor and many orders of magnitude smaller than with the traditional way of obtaining illegal substances. I understand how the system works and certainly, for small quantities, of course the chances of getting caught are slim. That's not at all what I'm arguing. I just find it laughable that the OP actually believes what these "experts" are feeding him when there is a very clear conflict of interest as to why they would want to portray the information in a certain way. To say that it's nearly impossible to detect is just not true. To say that it's not worth it to invest in the detection equipment required to screen most mail is a different matter. But don't say impossible when it's actually relatively simple.
Wow your insanity is beyond a doubt, there's even threads on the forums over there where they have an actual drug dog performing sniff tests on various of packages with various of packaging methods. These people know what they are doing, they are vendors on this site and have made it their living in researching methods around the world used to detect drugs in the mail, and you think I'm talking shit? Go there yourself, if you are able to google yourself the knowledge how to get their and enter their forums you can see for yourself.
Wow I really can't stand people like you, I have admitted many times there are methods of detection, but not PRACTICAL METHODS OF DETECTION capable of being used on millions upon millions of letters and packages EVERY SINGLE DAY.
|
On July 31 2013 05:46 MarklarMarklarr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 05:29 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 05:18 rasnj wrote:On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:
[quote]
Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution
Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged.. I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert. The thing is not only the vendors post on these sites. You as a customer can post too, and even if there are some false reviews (I'm sure plenty of vendors have tried that), the lack of a huge amount of negative feedback from a vendor with decent volume indicates that the customers are generally happy with the service. You can compare it to the Amazon platform. No matter what the seller writes in the product description and a few faked 5 star review, if you see 90% 1 star reviews talking about the product being intercepted by customs, having no effect or a bad effect, then you are not going to risk it. No silkroads is not perfect and there is potential for scams and being caught, in particular when working with new vendors, or when ordering across the borders of a country which has a very strict checking of incoming mail (I have had packages from legal natural supplement vendors like iherb opened and examined when ordering online). However for most people in most countries if you are careful who you do business with, then the risk is very minor and many orders of magnitude smaller than with the traditional way of obtaining illegal substances. I understand how the system works and certainly, for small quantities, of course the chances of getting caught are slim. That's not at all what I'm arguing. I just find it laughable that the OP actually believes what these "experts" are feeding him when there is a very clear conflict of interest as to why they would want to portray the information in a certain way. To say that it's nearly impossible to detect is just not true. To say that it's not worth it to invest in the detection equipment required to screen most mail is a different matter. But don't say impossible when it's actually relatively simple.
Wow your insanity is beyond a doubt, there's even threads on the forums over there where they have an actual drug dog performing sniff tests on various of packages with various of packaging methods. These people know what they are doing, they are vendors on this site and have made it their living in researching methods around the world used to detect drugs in the mail, and you think I'm talking shit? Go there yourself, if you are able to google yourself the knowledge how to get their and enter their forums you can see for yourself. Wow I really can't stand people like you, I have admitted many times there are methods of detection, but not PRACTICAL METHODS OF DETECTION capable of being used on millions upon millions of letters and packages
i doubt him being insane.
|
On July 31 2013 05:48 Race is Terran wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2013 05:46 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 05:29 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 05:18 rasnj wrote:On July 31 2013 05:03 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 04:17 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 03:45 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 01:37 MarklarMarklarr wrote:On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:
[quote]
Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged..
I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount. The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything. And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word. Mylar is being used by many these days and it protects the package from scanning. (australia for example scans a lot of the mail for organic material, but it has been shown to not be possible to scan even close to all mail) Note, your concept presented here has been refuted all over the silk road forums with thousands upon thousands of members, so I'm not buying it. Go try sell this idea if you believe in it so much. And no drug cartels won't use this system as its not a good method to move large amounts. Small time criminals yes, not the big dogs. Edit: Also, there's enormous amounts of legal organic material being shipped, such as Tea, spices and so on. Due to this, the system is even less feasible. Cellulose (stuff that paper is made out of) and Mylar ( a type of polyester) are both organic materials so what you're saying makes no sense since most things that check for organic material check for specific organic materials and can easily tell the difference between a plastic a spice and LSD, but that's besides the point. If you agree that this will not dramatically change the way that drugs are distributed (as in smuggling the drugs by the big boys) then I certainly concede that on the small scale this is very difficult to stop. Of course I'm not talking about all organic material, but your pseudo knowledge is ridiculous, get torbrowser and read the threads on that site, there's plenty of experts on the topic (and postal/fbi/DEA insiders) who know what they are talking about, unlike you, who come into this thread as an expert who can solve all drugs sent through the postal service (makes me laugh) get real. No matter how many times you say "organic material" it won't make you sound any smarter or more correct. Simple analytical tools exist for looking into thin flat envelopes. That's a fact. + Show Spoiler +if you really wan to go into the details then look up ion mobility mass specs. That's the thing they use in airports when they wipe your bag and look for traces of explosives. That is just one of the four instruments that came to mind if someone wanted to look for drugs in a sealed envelope. Another one would be a DART injection into a regular Mass Spec or maybe a high intensity NIR (either FT or a narrow-band-filter dispersive) would probably be able to do the job as well. Like I said I'm sure there are more if you actually needed a specific solution and not what's available off the shelf right now It doesn't matter what the "experts" on these fundamentally secretive forums actually say. If you're naive enough to believe annonymous people on the internet who are trying to sell you illegal stuff and then assuring you how they are experts and how it's impossible for you to be traced or discovered then I have an (illegal) bridge to sell you that I guarantee will be a real bridge because, you know, I'm a bridge expert. The thing is not only the vendors post on these sites. You as a customer can post too, and even if there are some false reviews (I'm sure plenty of vendors have tried that), the lack of a huge amount of negative feedback from a vendor with decent volume indicates that the customers are generally happy with the service. You can compare it to the Amazon platform. No matter what the seller writes in the product description and a few faked 5 star review, if you see 90% 1 star reviews talking about the product being intercepted by customs, having no effect or a bad effect, then you are not going to risk it. No silkroads is not perfect and there is potential for scams and being caught, in particular when working with new vendors, or when ordering across the borders of a country which has a very strict checking of incoming mail (I have had packages from legal natural supplement vendors like iherb opened and examined when ordering online). However for most people in most countries if you are careful who you do business with, then the risk is very minor and many orders of magnitude smaller than with the traditional way of obtaining illegal substances. I understand how the system works and certainly, for small quantities, of course the chances of getting caught are slim. That's not at all what I'm arguing. I just find it laughable that the OP actually believes what these "experts" are feeding him when there is a very clear conflict of interest as to why they would want to portray the information in a certain way. To say that it's nearly impossible to detect is just not true. To say that it's not worth it to invest in the detection equipment required to screen most mail is a different matter. But don't say impossible when it's actually relatively simple.
Wow your insanity is beyond a doubt, there's even threads on the forums over there where they have an actual drug dog performing sniff tests on various of packages with various of packaging methods. These people know what they are doing, they are vendors on this site and have made it their living in researching methods around the world used to detect drugs in the mail, and you think I'm talking shit? Go there yourself, if you are able to google yourself the knowledge how to get their and enter their forums you can see for yourself. Wow I really can't stand people like you, I have admitted many times there are methods of detection, but not PRACTICAL METHODS OF DETECTION capable of being used on millions upon millions of letters and packages i doubt him being insane.
Very funny, he's an ignorant charlatan with no knowledge of the postal system making gigantic claims that are flawed
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
