Silk road controversy - Page 2

On July 30 2013 18:03 Daswollvieh wrote:




That is no argument either. Sure, if the Soviets hadn´t invaded Afghanistan, then the Taliban probably wouldn´t exist. But they do exist and the Soviets retreating did not make the go away. Drug trafficking is so ridiculously big that the legalization of drugs in the whole world would not deal with the problem. I know that the Netherlands have a more relaxed drug policy, and in Prague you can get even hard drugs legally now, but I doubt that dealt with the criminality.

On July 30 2013 23:09 Race is Terran wrote:
lol. that's how all drugs go through the mail, not just from silk road. YOu ever see a lb of weed, its just a huge brick. also lol, getting 8 grams from silk road isn't a lot. Usually they sell in 14/28g sizes

On July 30 2013 23:52 FryBender wrote:
This certainly won't break the system as the OP suggests. If this actually becomes an issue (the volume increases to where the Feds take notice) then it is so easy to stop. I'd imagine most dogs can probably easily sniff it out but even if it's so well vacuumed sealed that they can't (highly unlikely) then just off the top of my head I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to easily (and quite honestly relatively cheaply) screen the mail to detect the drugs.

On July 31 2013 00:05 MarklarMarklarr wrote:


Yeah, now apply that to all domestic mail in the united states and imagine the cost and time that is needed. Sorry man, but even customs doesn't have a chance at taking even a fraction of the drugs going through the mail. And domestic? not a chance, must be terribly packaged if so.

On July 31 2013 00:18 FryBender wrote:


Most mail already goes through different types of screenings and sortings it wouldn't change any of the processes to add another screener in there. As far as cost goes like I said a DART MS (a chemical analysis insturment) is not that expensive that I can't see the Feds not being able to put it into the major sorting hubs. And you don't have to get all of them. If they can even intercept 50% of them then the price of the drugs just doubled (not to mention the fact that they now have evidence on both the sender and the receiver). This is silly to sink it's some sort of drug delivery revolution

Internationally this is already done. That's why you're not getting bomb and ricin packages from Al-Quida

On July 31 2013 00:30 MarklarMarklarr wrote:


Sweden/Norway/Australia has the most tough customs in the world, even there, where Australia scans most packages they estimate a 80-90% rate of going through, the 10-20% not getting through being badly packaged..

I'm sorry but you live in a fairy tale world, reading the silk road forums you will find postal workers around the globe telling of their drug screening procedure, it's always described as pathetic and insufficient. If they were to apply your method the cost of all mail would at least double if not more, and the amount of workers and time of delivery would increase exponential amount.

On July 31 2013 00:57 FryBender wrote:


The only reason right now why it's not done is that they don't care. Some kid stealing his moms credit card to buy an ounce of anything is useless to the DEA. They also don't care about some 2-bit dealer licking stamps all day long. If the cartels would start using this (which they never would because they're not stupid enough to give over the possesion of their product in mass amounts to the people who are actively searching for them) then the DEA would pay for the screening machines. As I said in the post above it would not increase mail delivery by one bit since it's already automated for sorting. Screening something that's the thickness of 2 coins is easy anyways since most bills and such is much thinner. Chemically speaking it is extremely easy to separate out if there is only paper inside an envelope or something else (as I said before I can think of three things of the top of my head while actually doing zero research into this because I'm an analytical chemist and that's what I do for a living). And if it is something else it can then go for a second round of screening to actually see if there are any drugs in there. I just thought of a system in less then 5 minutes that is feasible, does not slow down the process, and is relatively cheap (the whole thing would probably cost 50-100K depending on the technology you use). Now you seriously think that spending 10-20 million (out of a yearly budget of 2.8 billion dollars for the DEA) would be a big deal in order to not only completely shut this whole thing down but also get easily traceable evidence that would lead to both the supplier and the customer? If the cartels are involved that's chump change for the DEA when compared to the money they spend on actual operations that yield way less results. So no this doesn't change anything.

And the most ironic thing about your post is that I'm the one who is looking at this with real world experience while you rely on all the mail carriers who are posting on the forums that actively promote this thing for your "facts" and I'm the one living in a fairy tale word.

On July 31 2013 01:54 farvacola wrote:
The Silk Road is not cheap.....

On July 31 2013 02:01 farvacola wrote:

And how do you know that they are "experts"? In fact, how do you know anything being advertised is legit? The answer is you don't, you're buying drugs on the deep web.

On July 31 2013 02:08 farvacola wrote:

And how would you know this? Are your experiences buying drugs offline varied and involved enough to really say such a thing, or maybe you've only dealt with bad drug dealers?