Best part is he made 80 million off silk road commissions and still lived in the USA, he clearly is smart, but I mean how dumb can you be to expect to never be caught.
On October 03 2013 09:53 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:18 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:05 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 08:16 beg 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: [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.
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: [quote]
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
I'm not expecting the vast majority of people to do it. Most people don't give a shit. I'm talking to guys like you. Guys who want to believe they're doing the right thing. The right thing is to argue your case, convince the masses certain drugs deserve to be legalized, then watch as they get legalized. The alternative is to sit on your ass smoking joints, bemoaning the state of the nation while doing nothing to actually change it. Not once have I ever seen a truly meaningful debate about drug legalization off the internet. Not once have I ever seen a protest, or an awareness march, or just some sign people out there actually give a shit. I hear all the time about how the internet has given everybody a voice, but that couldn't be further from the truth. So many people talk so much that nothing said around here really matters anymore. The internet is where the People's voice goes to die. So let me repeat: put the joints aside. Grab a few of your friends and tell them why some drugs should be legalized. Ask them to tell their friends. Most of us are part of an idealistic, passionate age group. Starting something is surprisingly easy, you just need to make sure there's a snowball. The alternative is to send your money to, as I have said many times before, murderers and rapists. Making the world worse like that instead of putting in the effort to change it for the better is one of the worst forms of laziness and selfishness. Buy drugs from anyone that isn't a 100% confirmed back-yard grower, and you cannot be said to be anything less than a monster. After all, only a monster is willing to tolerate murder in exchange for a high.
I'm bowing out, by the way. This is only vaguely related to the topic at hand and I don't want to derail even more. Besides, group consensus is a hard thing to fight. If you have even one person taking your side, odds are you'll have trouble being convinced by even the most rock-solid argument. If I haven't convinced you already, you aren't going to be convinced, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
you want me to put my joint aside and fight a giant group consensus? chances are cannabis won't be legalized in the next few decades in germany. and actually i think a joint would help me in that fight.
there's a lot of protests and awareness marchs btw. and i surely explained matters to a lot of my friends. actually it seems that most people of our generation agree anyways. it's the older generations that are stuck in their thinking patterns forged by prohibition.
(you never hear about the protests cause they're not on TV, duuuuuh)
edit: please give me a hint how to convince politicians. their lies are as bold as they could get. angela merkel said that smoking cigarettes or drinking is ok every now and then, but smoking cannabis can make you addicted immediately. HOW THE FUCK AM I GONNA DO SOMETHING AGAINST THAT, LOL
I never said go through the politicians. They're lying, corrupt bastards. I said go through the constituents or deal with the fact that you're a terrible person.
the constituents? you mean the voters? how am i gonna do that? seriously, throw me some ideas . how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
Did you know homosexuals were hated by almost everyone in America just a while ago? Big change to suddenly leap to 50% approval. That swing happened because of an awareness campaign. People's views remained stagnant and conservative because nobody cared. Nobody bothered to educate themselves or debate on the issue. Once people started noticing homosexuals, their views changed very rapidly. Start a snowball among the youth, get them all fired up. The old folks will inevitably notice, then debate will start. People will start educating themselves. Or maybe they won't. Maybe they'll cling to their dated views. Either way, you have no way to know for sure what will happen. Really, the only certain thing is this: a battle you don't fight is a battle you've lost. Change never happened because someone sat on their ass all day and complained about how impossible change is.
On October 03 2013 09:53 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:18 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:05 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 08:16 beg 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.[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.
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: [quote] 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
I'm not expecting the vast majority of people to do it. Most people don't give a shit. I'm talking to guys like you. Guys who want to believe they're doing the right thing. The right thing is to argue your case, convince the masses certain drugs deserve to be legalized, then watch as they get legalized. The alternative is to sit on your ass smoking joints, bemoaning the state of the nation while doing nothing to actually change it. Not once have I ever seen a truly meaningful debate about drug legalization off the internet. Not once have I ever seen a protest, or an awareness march, or just some sign people out there actually give a shit. I hear all the time about how the internet has given everybody a voice, but that couldn't be further from the truth. So many people talk so much that nothing said around here really matters anymore. The internet is where the People's voice goes to die. So let me repeat: put the joints aside. Grab a few of your friends and tell them why some drugs should be legalized. Ask them to tell their friends. Most of us are part of an idealistic, passionate age group. Starting something is surprisingly easy, you just need to make sure there's a snowball. The alternative is to send your money to, as I have said many times before, murderers and rapists. Making the world worse like that instead of putting in the effort to change it for the better is one of the worst forms of laziness and selfishness. Buy drugs from anyone that isn't a 100% confirmed back-yard grower, and you cannot be said to be anything less than a monster. After all, only a monster is willing to tolerate murder in exchange for a high.
I'm bowing out, by the way. This is only vaguely related to the topic at hand and I don't want to derail even more. Besides, group consensus is a hard thing to fight. If you have even one person taking your side, odds are you'll have trouble being convinced by even the most rock-solid argument. If I haven't convinced you already, you aren't going to be convinced, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
you want me to put my joint aside and fight a giant group consensus? chances are cannabis won't be legalized in the next few decades in germany. and actually i think a joint would help me in that fight.
there's a lot of protests and awareness marchs btw. and i surely explained matters to a lot of my friends. actually it seems that most people of our generation agree anyways. it's the older generations that are stuck in their thinking patterns forged by prohibition.
(you never hear about the protests cause they're not on TV, duuuuuh)
edit: please give me a hint how to convince politicians. their lies are as bold as they could get. angela merkel said that smoking cigarettes or drinking is ok every now and then, but smoking cannabis can make you addicted immediately. HOW THE FUCK AM I GONNA DO SOMETHING AGAINST THAT, LOL
I never said go through the politicians. They're lying, corrupt bastards. I said go through the constituents or deal with the fact that you're a terrible person.
the constituents? you mean the voters? how am i gonna do that? seriously, throw me some ideas . how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
Did you know homosexuals were hated by almost everyone in America just a while ago? Big change to suddenly leap to 50% approval. That swing happened because of an awareness campaign. People's views remained stagnant and conservative because nobody cared. Nobody bothered to educate themselves or debate on the issue. Once people started noticing homosexuals, their views changed very rapidly. Start a snowball among the youth, get them all fired up. The old folks will inevitably notice, then debate will start. People will start educating themselves. Or maybe they won't. Maybe they'll cling to their dated views. Either way, you have no way to know for sure what will happen. Really, the only certain thing is this: a battle you don't fight is a battle you've lost. Change never happened because someone sat on their ass all day and complained about how impossible change is.
Action is definitely required for change. Hence why your statement advocating inaction is ludicrous. If nobody smokes pot anymore, who will give enough of a shit to legalize it?
On October 03 2013 09:53 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:18 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:05 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 08:16 beg 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.[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.
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: [quote] 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
I'm not expecting the vast majority of people to do it. Most people don't give a shit. I'm talking to guys like you. Guys who want to believe they're doing the right thing. The right thing is to argue your case, convince the masses certain drugs deserve to be legalized, then watch as they get legalized. The alternative is to sit on your ass smoking joints, bemoaning the state of the nation while doing nothing to actually change it. Not once have I ever seen a truly meaningful debate about drug legalization off the internet. Not once have I ever seen a protest, or an awareness march, or just some sign people out there actually give a shit. I hear all the time about how the internet has given everybody a voice, but that couldn't be further from the truth. So many people talk so much that nothing said around here really matters anymore. The internet is where the People's voice goes to die. So let me repeat: put the joints aside. Grab a few of your friends and tell them why some drugs should be legalized. Ask them to tell their friends. Most of us are part of an idealistic, passionate age group. Starting something is surprisingly easy, you just need to make sure there's a snowball. The alternative is to send your money to, as I have said many times before, murderers and rapists. Making the world worse like that instead of putting in the effort to change it for the better is one of the worst forms of laziness and selfishness. Buy drugs from anyone that isn't a 100% confirmed back-yard grower, and you cannot be said to be anything less than a monster. After all, only a monster is willing to tolerate murder in exchange for a high.
I'm bowing out, by the way. This is only vaguely related to the topic at hand and I don't want to derail even more. Besides, group consensus is a hard thing to fight. If you have even one person taking your side, odds are you'll have trouble being convinced by even the most rock-solid argument. If I haven't convinced you already, you aren't going to be convinced, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
you want me to put my joint aside and fight a giant group consensus? chances are cannabis won't be legalized in the next few decades in germany. and actually i think a joint would help me in that fight.
there's a lot of protests and awareness marchs btw. and i surely explained matters to a lot of my friends. actually it seems that most people of our generation agree anyways. it's the older generations that are stuck in their thinking patterns forged by prohibition.
(you never hear about the protests cause they're not on TV, duuuuuh)
edit: please give me a hint how to convince politicians. their lies are as bold as they could get. angela merkel said that smoking cigarettes or drinking is ok every now and then, but smoking cannabis can make you addicted immediately. HOW THE FUCK AM I GONNA DO SOMETHING AGAINST THAT, LOL
I never said go through the politicians. They're lying, corrupt bastards. I said go through the constituents or deal with the fact that you're a terrible person.
the constituents? you mean the voters? how am i gonna do that? seriously, throw me some ideas . how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
Did you know homosexuals were hated by almost everyone in America just a while ago? Big change to suddenly leap to 50% approval. That swing happened because of an awareness campaign. People's views remained stagnant and conservative because nobody cared. Nobody bothered to educate themselves or debate on the issue. Once people started noticing homosexuals, their views changed very rapidly. Start a snowball among the youth, get them all fired up. The old folks will inevitably notice, then debate will start. People will start educating themselves. Or maybe they won't. Maybe they'll cling to their dated views. Either way, you have no way to know for sure what will happen. Really, the only certain thing is this: a battle you don't fight is a battle you've lost. Change never happened because someone sat on their ass all day and complained about how impossible change is.
oh yea, great plan to convince young people that cannabis isn't bad. will get the old generations to finally reconsider. haha. think about what you're saying :D
even if that was a good plan... how would you do it?
On October 03 2013 10:17 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:57 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:53 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:18 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:05 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 08:16 beg 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: [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.
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: [quote]
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
I'm not expecting the vast majority of people to do it. Most people don't give a shit. I'm talking to guys like you. Guys who want to believe they're doing the right thing. The right thing is to argue your case, convince the masses certain drugs deserve to be legalized, then watch as they get legalized. The alternative is to sit on your ass smoking joints, bemoaning the state of the nation while doing nothing to actually change it. Not once have I ever seen a truly meaningful debate about drug legalization off the internet. Not once have I ever seen a protest, or an awareness march, or just some sign people out there actually give a shit. I hear all the time about how the internet has given everybody a voice, but that couldn't be further from the truth. So many people talk so much that nothing said around here really matters anymore. The internet is where the People's voice goes to die. So let me repeat: put the joints aside. Grab a few of your friends and tell them why some drugs should be legalized. Ask them to tell their friends. Most of us are part of an idealistic, passionate age group. Starting something is surprisingly easy, you just need to make sure there's a snowball. The alternative is to send your money to, as I have said many times before, murderers and rapists. Making the world worse like that instead of putting in the effort to change it for the better is one of the worst forms of laziness and selfishness. Buy drugs from anyone that isn't a 100% confirmed back-yard grower, and you cannot be said to be anything less than a monster. After all, only a monster is willing to tolerate murder in exchange for a high.
I'm bowing out, by the way. This is only vaguely related to the topic at hand and I don't want to derail even more. Besides, group consensus is a hard thing to fight. If you have even one person taking your side, odds are you'll have trouble being convinced by even the most rock-solid argument. If I haven't convinced you already, you aren't going to be convinced, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
you want me to put my joint aside and fight a giant group consensus? chances are cannabis won't be legalized in the next few decades in germany. and actually i think a joint would help me in that fight.
there's a lot of protests and awareness marchs btw. and i surely explained matters to a lot of my friends. actually it seems that most people of our generation agree anyways. it's the older generations that are stuck in their thinking patterns forged by prohibition.
(you never hear about the protests cause they're not on TV, duuuuuh)
edit: please give me a hint how to convince politicians. their lies are as bold as they could get. angela merkel said that smoking cigarettes or drinking is ok every now and then, but smoking cannabis can make you addicted immediately. HOW THE FUCK AM I GONNA DO SOMETHING AGAINST THAT, LOL
I never said go through the politicians. They're lying, corrupt bastards. I said go through the constituents or deal with the fact that you're a terrible person.
the constituents? you mean the voters? how am i gonna do that? seriously, throw me some ideas . how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
Did you know homosexuals were hated by almost everyone in America just a while ago? Big change to suddenly leap to 50% approval. That swing happened because of an awareness campaign. People's views remained stagnant and conservative because nobody cared. Nobody bothered to educate themselves or debate on the issue. Once people started noticing homosexuals, their views changed very rapidly. Start a snowball among the youth, get them all fired up. The old folks will inevitably notice, then debate will start. People will start educating themselves. Or maybe they won't. Maybe they'll cling to their dated views. Either way, you have no way to know for sure what will happen. Really, the only certain thing is this: a battle you don't fight is a battle you've lost. Change never happened because someone sat on their ass all day and complained about how impossible change is.
Action is definitely required for change. Hence why your statement advocating inaction is ludicrous. If nobody smokes pot anymore, who will give enough of a shit to legalize it?
I want to legalize it, I personally would never and have not ever used it and always admonish my friends who do, but I believe it is a matter of personal freedom and would also reduce crime. Reduction in crime is a very strong position to run off in my opinion.
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.
If people need to go to the shady parts of town to score drugs and something bad happens to them, well that's darwinism for you.
On October 03 2013 10:05 zacharyIRL wrote: Best part is he made 80 million off silk road commissions and still lived in the USA, he clearly is smart, but I mean how dumb can you be to expect to never be caught.
other foreign authorities similar to the fbi would catch him if he was somewhere else. No country in the world condones the activities taking place in silk road
On October 03 2013 10:31 Kevin_Sorbo wrote: People keep saying SR offered better drugs.
What about the prices?? I mean how much was 3.5 grams of marijuana?
was it in the 20-25$ ballpark?
eh. I have a feeling the drugs on Silk Road weren't marijuana seeing how easy (and relatively safe) it is to get marijuana. I could definitely be wrong tho.
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.
If people need to go to the shady parts of town to score drugs and something bad happens to them, well that's darwinism for you.
I can go to the pharmacy in the nice part of town and get just as equally fucked up on "drugs".
On October 03 2013 02:56 monkh wrote: Did the owner do anything wrong? its just a listing service? its like pirate bay creating a service shouldn't be illegal. if you applied same logic to firearms U.S would be fucked.
I don't want to be an ass, but is this a serious post? I linked the criminal complaint in the second post I made (which also contained the solicitation of a hit on "FriendlyChemist" by the owner "DPR") that lists the specific charges the FBI are bringing against him.
Initially before I posted I hadn't read the PDF only the snippet you posted and it confused me. I've read it a bit more but it still doesnt make sense. This friendlychemist told DPR that he had a big debt and he needed the money. DPR said he wanted to speak to the guy he owed to. So friendlychemist passed him to the user readandwhite. Then DPR asks this user to murder friendlychemist. It makes absolutely no sense.
I think you honestly need to take a breath then reread what I posted about fifty times because your reading comprehension is utterly atrocious. There is no mention of 95% of what you think was said, FriendlyChemist was threatening to release the identity of thousands of SR users so DPR put a hit out on him and looks like he was scammed out of 150k of bit coins because the police in his area have no record of a murder taking place in that area at that time and date.
You can't even trust hitmen these days. What has the world come to...
On October 03 2013 10:17 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:57 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:53 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:18 beg wrote:
On October 03 2013 09:05 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:
On October 03 2013 08:16 beg 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: [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.
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: [quote]
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
I'm not expecting the vast majority of people to do it. Most people don't give a shit. I'm talking to guys like you. Guys who want to believe they're doing the right thing. The right thing is to argue your case, convince the masses certain drugs deserve to be legalized, then watch as they get legalized. The alternative is to sit on your ass smoking joints, bemoaning the state of the nation while doing nothing to actually change it. Not once have I ever seen a truly meaningful debate about drug legalization off the internet. Not once have I ever seen a protest, or an awareness march, or just some sign people out there actually give a shit. I hear all the time about how the internet has given everybody a voice, but that couldn't be further from the truth. So many people talk so much that nothing said around here really matters anymore. The internet is where the People's voice goes to die. So let me repeat: put the joints aside. Grab a few of your friends and tell them why some drugs should be legalized. Ask them to tell their friends. Most of us are part of an idealistic, passionate age group. Starting something is surprisingly easy, you just need to make sure there's a snowball. The alternative is to send your money to, as I have said many times before, murderers and rapists. Making the world worse like that instead of putting in the effort to change it for the better is one of the worst forms of laziness and selfishness. Buy drugs from anyone that isn't a 100% confirmed back-yard grower, and you cannot be said to be anything less than a monster. After all, only a monster is willing to tolerate murder in exchange for a high.
I'm bowing out, by the way. This is only vaguely related to the topic at hand and I don't want to derail even more. Besides, group consensus is a hard thing to fight. If you have even one person taking your side, odds are you'll have trouble being convinced by even the most rock-solid argument. If I haven't convinced you already, you aren't going to be convinced, and we'll just have to agree to disagree.
you want me to put my joint aside and fight a giant group consensus? chances are cannabis won't be legalized in the next few decades in germany. and actually i think a joint would help me in that fight.
there's a lot of protests and awareness marchs btw. and i surely explained matters to a lot of my friends. actually it seems that most people of our generation agree anyways. it's the older generations that are stuck in their thinking patterns forged by prohibition.
(you never hear about the protests cause they're not on TV, duuuuuh)
edit: please give me a hint how to convince politicians. their lies are as bold as they could get. angela merkel said that smoking cigarettes or drinking is ok every now and then, but smoking cannabis can make you addicted immediately. HOW THE FUCK AM I GONNA DO SOMETHING AGAINST THAT, LOL
I never said go through the politicians. They're lying, corrupt bastards. I said go through the constituents or deal with the fact that you're a terrible person.
the constituents? you mean the voters? how am i gonna do that? seriously, throw me some ideas . how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
Did you know homosexuals were hated by almost everyone in America just a while ago? Big change to suddenly leap to 50% approval. That swing happened because of an awareness campaign. People's views remained stagnant and conservative because nobody cared. Nobody bothered to educate themselves or debate on the issue. Once people started noticing homosexuals, their views changed very rapidly. Start a snowball among the youth, get them all fired up. The old folks will inevitably notice, then debate will start. People will start educating themselves. Or maybe they won't. Maybe they'll cling to their dated views. Either way, you have no way to know for sure what will happen. Really, the only certain thing is this: a battle you don't fight is a battle you've lost. Change never happened because someone sat on their ass all day and complained about how impossible change is.
Action is definitely required for change. Hence why your statement advocating inaction is ludicrous. If nobody smokes pot anymore, who will give enough of a shit to legalize it?
Nevermind the immorality of acquiescing to unjustified violence and intimidation. Immoral laws impose a moral duty on us to break and subvert them whenever possible.
On October 03 2013 10:31 Kevin_Sorbo wrote: People keep saying SR offered better drugs.
What about the prices?? I mean how much was 3.5 grams of marijuana?
was it in the 20-25$ ballpark?
No definitely not... but there was a large demand for MJ so it's understandable that prices were higher. Not everyone is lucky enough to live in California or Canada where great weed is relatively easy to get for cheap. If I lived in Kansas/Idaho/some random state or country with meh weed I might pay $70 for an eighth of dank medicinal. The convenience of receiving in a few days via mail in addition to the fact that good weed in certain geographical locations can be hard to come by is enough for many people to pay that "premium."
In addition, prices took into account SR commission fees and shipping costs, so it's not hard to imagine the prices not being the BEST best.
Hope that is somewhat informative or helpful or interesting.
EDIT: $70 is just a random guess that might be slightly on the high side but I really don't recall seeing any great prices for weed in less than bulk purchases.
Just like our US Government "almost put an exploit" to Stuxnet either, eh?
I do believe the fake Canadian ID story which called his downfall. He did very well and kept his privacy well for in the United States for over two years and made lots of currency.
On October 03 2013 10:31 Kevin_Sorbo wrote: People keep saying SR offered better drugs.
What about the prices?? I mean how much was 3.5 grams of marijuana?
was it in the 20-25$ ballpark?
No definitely not... but there was a large demand for MJ so it's understandable that prices were higher. Not everyone is lucky enough to live in California or Canada where great weed is relatively easy to get for cheap. If I lived in Kansas/Idaho/some random state or country with meh weed I might pay $70 for an eighth of dank medicinal. The convenience of receiving in a few days via mail in addition to the fact that good weed in certain geographical locations can be hard to come by is enough for many people to pay that "premium."
In addition, prices took into account SR commission fees and shipping costs, so it's not hard to imagine the prices not being the BEST best.
Hope that is somewhat informative or helpful or interesting.
EDIT: $70 is just a random guess that might be slightly on the high side but I really don't recall seeing any great prices for weed in less than bulk purchases.
You could definitely get at least 5 grams for less than 70$, not just 3.5 Depends on the vendor but it was there.
EPT
. how to make something snowball when you fight a big group consensus?
