|
On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES"
Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing.
|
On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:
[quote]
You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying.
If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable.
SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners.
Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing.
again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow".
it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god.
now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though.
|
On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime.
People WON'T wait. His point is that people who bought stuff on SK will NOT stop using drugs, SR goods was allegedly high quality, and now that its gone people will have to deal with shaddy dealers selling cut crap and risk being shot if shit happens.
In that sense, yes, SR made things safer for users.
|
On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
[quote]
I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though.
If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into.
|
It was really interesting when I found out that the guy graduated from the same university that I'm currently attending.
|
On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:
[quote]
damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words.
SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG.
so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on?
DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg
wrip
hbmrt0
gi0´
hu´
wogrhujbü
smhu9q
64hüogrt
j
qßó4tz8i+
hja´
8z´
4thjß´mhu´54z
all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into.
in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared?
worst case scenario is the sources battling each other 
|
On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral.
That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible?
America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years.
Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum.
I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that.
Not when all they have to do is wait a few years.
On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
[quote]
It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other
Will it decrease?
|
On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
[quote]
It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other
I believe there will always be too large a dangerous criminal element in the game to justify allowing the illegal sale of the substance. The anonymity of Silk Road is especially worrying because you don't even really know who your money is going to. This once again comes back to my point that legalization would solve many problems and Silk Road deserved to be shut down for hosting such a vast array of deplorable criminal activity.
|
On October 03 2013 07:28 DDie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. People WON'T wait. His point is that people who bought stuff on SK will NOT stop using drugs, SR goods was allegedly high quality, and now that its gone people will have to deal with shaddy dealers selling cut crap and risk being shot if shit happens. In that sense, yes, SR made things safer for users.
SR was definitely a good and safer way to get drugs for users. Now it's back to the streets, with violence and poor quality substances. Another similar site will be back within a month though, in fact there already are other options.
|
On October 03 2013 07:46 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:
Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy.[quote] In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other I believe there will always be too large a dangerous criminal element in the game to justify allowing the illegal sale of the substance. The anonymity of Silk Road is especially worrying because you don't even really know who your money is going to. This once again comes back to my point that legalization would solve many problems and Silk Road deserved to be shut down for hosting such a vast array of deplorable criminal activity.
money is gonna go to "criminals" no matter what. and i'd rather want my money to go to good criminals like dutch coffeeshops. the amount of drug trades doesnt seem to increase or decrease with prohibition, as can be seen in several european countries legalizing or decriminalizing cannabis.
ok, thanks for the discussion. i think we both made our points clear. i do admit you have good points, but i think they're too theoretical, while the real world shows otherwise 
|
On October 03 2013 07:52 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:46 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
[quote]
Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other I believe there will always be too large a dangerous criminal element in the game to justify allowing the illegal sale of the substance. The anonymity of Silk Road is especially worrying because you don't even really know who your money is going to. This once again comes back to my point that legalization would solve many problems and Silk Road deserved to be shut down for hosting such a vast array of deplorable criminal activity. money is gonna go to "criminals" no matter what. and i'd rather want my money to go to good criminals like dutch coffeeshops. the amount of drug trades doesnt seem to increase or decrease with prohibition, as can be seen in several european countries legalizing or decriminalizing cannabis. ok, thanks for the discussion. i think we both made our points clear. i do admit you have good points, but i think they're too theoretical, while the real world shows otherwise
It was good talking with you, I think I am going to take a break from this thread for a little while and (ironically) play some GTA V, a game about crime.
|
On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible?
America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years.
Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum.
I don't know who here smokes, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that.
Not when all they have to do is wait a few years.
Well that escalated quickly. Sounds like you could use a (prescription) joint yourself mate  also, accurate analogy.
|
On October 03 2013 07:54 Kickboxer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible?
America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years.
Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum.
I don't know who here smokes, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that.
Not when all they have to do is wait a few years.
Well that escalated quickly. Sounds like you could use a (prescription) joint yourself mate also, accurate analogy.
Apologies, I just had that thought occur to me and figured this would be as good a place as any to bring that one out, strong language or not.
The strong language does fit, though. We're part of an idealistic age group, very well known for railing against corporate corruption and all that jazz. Seeing arguments supporting the purchase of illegal substances coming from that same age group is very disconcerting, even if I don't have proof the people in this thread give a flying fuck about say, Chik-Fil-A's anti-gay stance.
|
Never used it, but the concept of SR is of course very attractive to drug users who are concerned about quality.
Then again reading through this, people here make it seem like the only way to get weed apart from SR is to drive to the shadiest place you can possibly imagine to then proceed buying heavily contaminated weed.
I get it with other drugs, but whoever smokes contaminated weed is a tard and is responsible for that himself, weed is piss poor easy to check by yourself without equip, unless all the other drugs. And cmon, who doesnt know a guy, who knows a guy, whos just a regular joe that deals pot. Sure, this might not always know one, but if your not "addicted" you can always take a break till you find the next source like that, and if you keep your eyes/ears open you will.
@AnachronisticAnarchy Also theres no need for moral high ground. Democracy is not the tyranny of the mass. Smoking pot is less shit for you than drinking alcohol, So prohibiting one and allowing the other, for no logical reason is nothing but taking away the FREEDOM to choose for the people who do want to make the choice for pot.
If most people dont give a crap about the right of freedom of choice of a selective group, why would the pot smokers, the selective group, give a shit about those people, and what consequences they indirectly get? Especially since there wouldnt be consequences if they wouldnt have shit on the right of freedom of the other group first.
Also Its a representative democracy at best, not a democracy.
|
On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral. That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible? America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years. Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum. I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that. Not when all they have to do is wait a few years. Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:
Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy.[quote] In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other Will it decrease?
Are you high?
Because someone buys drugs, they are morally culpable for someone further down the line in mexico killing someone. That is your point.
I ask again, are you high?
The reason I ask this is because your first sentence completely contradicts your position. If someone who smokes a joint is morally responsible for what the people who get the money do. By that logic, someone who makes a gun is morally responsible for what the people who get the gun do. I mean jeez dude, you're arguing for a MORAL BUTTERFLY EFFECT.
|
On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral. That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible? America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years. Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum. I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that. Not when all they have to do is wait a few years. Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:
Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy.[quote] In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other Will it decrease?
it might. i dont know. i think it's gonna remain a constant. who knows...
it's hard to judge. there's no easy studies to be done. when you wanna see the development of addiction you can just ask random people on the street. it's not that easy with underground criminals.
i hope you see that your argument about "expecting people to not use drugs for a few years" is just wrong. people have been waiting half a century to smoke cannabis again. you expect them to wait? hahaha oh boy <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
|
On October 03 2013 08:08 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:On October 03 2013 04:45 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
Good thing they caught him and shut down the site, from the sounds of it the site was nothing but a cesspool of criminal activity. You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying. If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable. SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners. Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral. That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible? America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years. Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum. I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that. Not when all they have to do is wait a few years. On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:
[quote]
Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase. how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings. yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other Will it decrease? Are you high? Because someone buys drugs, they are morally culpable for someone further down the line in mexico killing someone. That is your point. I ask again, are you high? The reason I ask this is because your first sentence completely contradicts your position. If someone who smokes a joint is morally responsible for what the people who get the money do. By that logic, someone who makes a gun is morally responsible for what the people who get the gun do. I mean jeez dude, you're arguing for a MORAL BUTTERFLY EFFECT.
I think he raises a fair point. Its like that whole deal with blood diamonds that went on several years ago. Buying a product thats build on the suffering of others.
|
What a shame... Was a really great and well maintained site. Felt much safer than buying from "friends of friends" that could rip me off without me being able to do a thing about it. I'm sure it won't be long before there's another Silk Road.
|
On October 03 2013 08:33 TheRealArtemis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 08:08 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:
[quote]
You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying.
If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable.
SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners.
Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral. That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible? America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years. Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum. I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that. Not when all they have to do is wait a few years. On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:
[quote]
dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase.
how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings.
yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other Will it decrease? Are you high? Because someone buys drugs, they are morally culpable for someone further down the line in mexico killing someone. That is your point. I ask again, are you high? The reason I ask this is because your first sentence completely contradicts your position. If someone who smokes a joint is morally responsible for what the people who get the money do. By that logic, someone who makes a gun is morally responsible for what the people who get the gun do. I mean jeez dude, you're arguing for a MORAL BUTTERFLY EFFECT. I think he raises a fair point. Its like that whole deal with blood diamonds that went on several years ago. Buying a product thats build on the suffering of others. So is Coltan from Congo and that Region, can you say where the coltan in your electronic devices is from? Can he tell you where his is from? If not the point is as hypocritical as it gets.
|
On October 03 2013 08:33 TheRealArtemis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2013 08:08 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 07:45 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On October 03 2013 07:14 Jormundr wrote:On October 03 2013 06:59 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:52 Dazed_Spy wrote:Outside of the [possible] murder, this is stupid. We should be legalizing [not monopolizing or handing out liscensure] things like this. Safe, easy, cheap way to buy drugs? This is improving peoples lives and acting in concert with their desires. The Governments got no place telling people what they can or cant sell, or what they can or cant buy. On October 03 2013 06:48 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 06:42 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 05:03 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 04:52 rasnj wrote:
[quote]
You need to consider the alternative though. If people can't go on SR, then they will try to find a drug dealer locally which can be quite hard. Whoever you come across is very unlikely to be trustworthy, and you have almost no idea what kind of stuff is mixed into what you are buying.
If you must trade illegal drugs, then an exchange with a reliable feedback system and secure communications is by far preferable.
SR was not perfect (not by a long shot), but it was by far better than driving into a "bad" part of town and looking for people on the street corners.
Also while people did buy very hard drugs on SR, I don't know if people who scored the occasional ritalin or adderall for studying, or a small amount of weed for relaxing with some friends are really that despicable. I would rather they have the fear of ``going into a bad part of town`` so that they think twice before trying to buy their illegal substances and services. damn, such a statement can only come from several decades of prohibition. so close-minded. so wrong. i dont even know how to put it in words. SORRY BRO. YOU'RE WRONG. so if someone wants to smoke a joint, he should rather buy from a fucking street corner where people contaminate the cannabis with all kinds of shit? such a person should not be able to buy from a trustworthy source he can rely on? DSFJifgreugtfeugpoda ujg wrip hbmrt0 gi0´ hu´ wogrhujbü smhu9q 64hüogrt j qßó4tz8i+ hja´ 8z´ 4thjß´mhu´54z all that prohibition propaganda fucked you guys up. it's so sad to me. it hurts. i cant even express it. why do people have to be criminalized? the only way to express what i feel is smashing my keyboard like you saw. but i didnt smash it in rage, ok? i kept smashing the buttons because i feel so helpless over this propaganda bullshit. it HURTS. It may surprise you, but I support the legalization of Marijuana, I do not however support people putting money into the hands of dangerous criminals and illegal organizations, so until marijuana is legal and regulated I would like it to be made as hard as possible for people to be putting money into the hands of criminals. In other words, even though you believe its morally acceptable for people to use Pot, you want to make it impossible for them to use pot and punish them for attempting it, because they get it from the only source [literally by definition] that they possibly could get it from. Hypocritical, backasswards logic. Its not hypocritical at all, I would just ask people to wait for proper channels to be opened up for them to purchase their drugs from, regardless of what you want, it is always going to be wrong to giving money to dangerous criminal organizations. The problem comes from the substance being illegal, legalizing it would solve many problems but until then I want people to be punished for funding criminal gangs just for a cheap high. That's moronic. If the moral issue is triggered by the fact that it is illegal, then the people who bear the moral burden would be the people who make it illegal and thus immoral. That's like blaming gun manufacturers for a murder you committed. Somebody else made buying drugs a bad thing. How does that make you buying drugs any less reprehensible? America is a democracy. Every American in here has the ability to directly influence policy, both through voting and bringing your acquaintances around to your point of view. We all have the ability to legalize many drugs and make buying them harmless. It'd only take a few years. Yes, I'm aware I can't expect society at large to hold off on the joints for a few years. I expect you guys to, though. You see, if you can't stay sober for a few years to save someone else's life, you have no right to a moral high ground. You're the worst kind of scum. I don't know who here does drugs, but I know a lot do. I know that there are a few in this thread, right now. Say what you will about SR, say what you will about pot or crack or heroine or whatever the hell else is out there. You can't argue for financing cartels. No matter how hard anyone argues, they can't justify that. Not when all they have to do is wait a few years. On October 03 2013 07:40 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:32 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:26 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:21 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:17 beg wrote:On October 03 2013 07:13 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On October 03 2013 07:04 beg wrote:
[quote]
dude, you are talking fantasy. people WILL take drugs, period. in fact, if you legalize cannabis the amount of regular smokers won't even increase.
how long do you want to make people wait? decades? centuries? i'm sorry, we don't live that long as human beings.
yes, everyone realizes that legalization solves problems. but in the majority of countries it's not gonna happen in our lifetimes. Yes I expect them to wait. The other option is allowing people to get their drugs from whoever, which can and very often is unsavory sources. I am not willing to accept that it is or ever will be okay for people to be giving money to criminals and as such people must be punished for funding crime. buying from whoever means that the guy with the best quality will win. i remember just 5 years ago a lot of(!) european countries would be selling cannabis contaminated with extremely fine sand/glass to make it heavier. again, you "expect them to wait". dude. no. THEY DONT WAIT. period. it's fact. it's reality. it's like the governments saying "we expect you to not use drugs". that's literally what the german government says. "oh, all your cannabis is sickly contaminted with bullshit? well, dont smoke, BITCHES" Fine then, If they don't wait then they will be charged with a crime then, that is how it works. We cannot make it allowable to fund crime regardless of how much people desire the product the criminals are providing. again, this is where you drift into fantasy. "we cannot allow". it IS happening. no matter what you want or dont want. it's happening, period. at least you agree that legalization is the best way. thank god. now assuming that it's happening no matter what, would you rather want people to buy from actual criminals who cut the substances with meth and fine sand or would you want them to be able to buy from "reasonable criminals who care about quality"? cause SR apparently was a reliable source. i never tried it though. If the cartels are losing business because other sources are beating out their quality they will likely increase their quality to compete, they already have a massive profit margin to work with due to the "illegal substance premium" on what they are selling. On the same note, just because a source sells "good weed" doesn't mean they conduct good business in the real world, someone selling good weed could still be part of a gang responsible for reprehensible crimes. As such my problem is less with the selling of the product and more with who people are giving their money to. The anonymity of Silk Road also would cause some worry to me because it is rather difficult to know whose hands your money is making its way into. in your example the overall quality of drugs increases. so far so good. does the gang bullshit also increase? really? think your own example through to the end. will the super criminal shit increase just because a quality source appeared? worst case scenario is the sources battling each other Will it decrease? Are you high? Because someone buys drugs, they are morally culpable for someone further down the line in mexico killing someone. That is your point. I ask again, are you high? The reason I ask this is because your first sentence completely contradicts your position. If someone who smokes a joint is morally responsible for what the people who get the money do. By that logic, someone who makes a gun is morally responsible for what the people who get the gun do. I mean jeez dude, you're arguing for a MORAL BUTTERFLY EFFECT. I think he raises a fair point. Its like that whole deal with blood diamonds that went on several years ago. Buying a product thats build on the suffering of others.
Bahaha, what a hilariously bad example that again, proves my point that the government is the one that will have to fix it. People didn't stop buying diamonds because of that. They didn't even stop buying the blood diamonds, they just started asking "Is this a blood diamond?" to which the obvious answer any salesman gives is "No, no of course not!". Want to know why you don't hear about it anymore? It's not because the consumers wised up and saved all the poor african chillerins getting their heads chopped off in the diamond mine. It's because Clinton and then Bush banned import of diamonds from Sierra Leone and Liberia respectively. It's because we introduced a U.S. law in line with the UN's KPCS. The whole thing was a media stunt on the same level as this gay marriage bullshit.
Anyway, guess who wasn't guilty of anything at the end of it all:
YOU GOT IT RIGHT!
THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT CONFLICT DIAMONDS!
Guess who didn't do anything about the conflict diamonds?
THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT CONFLICT DIAMONDS!
And who was responsible for fixing the problem?
The United States Government.
And finally, why are cartel drugs different than blood diamonds?
Because the U.S. Government started the whole problem in the first place!
P.S. most of the wonderfully low priced goods we enjoy in the first world are produced through the inhuman treatment of those in the third.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
