Silk Road founder/operator sentenced to life in prison

  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

Ross Ulbricht, the man behind illegal online drug emporium Silk Road, was sentenced to life in prison on Friday by Judge Katherine Forrest of Manhattan’s US district court for the southern district of New York.

Before the sentencing the parents of the victims of drug overdoses addressed the court. Ulbricht broke down in tears. “I never wanted that to happen,” he said. “I wish I could go back and convince myself to take a different path.”

The 31-year-old physics graduate and former boy scout was handed five sentences: one for 20 years, one for 15 years, one for five and two for life. All are to be served concurrently with no chance of parole.

The judge handed out the most severe sentence available to the man US authorities identified as “Dread Pirate Roberts”, pseudonymous founder of an Amazon-like online market for illegal goods.

...

Vicky B, whose 16-year-old son died after taking a powerful synthetic at a party and jumping from a second-story roof, said that the time since her son’s death had been unbearable. “This is the photo of the last kiss from my son,” she said, holding up a photo of herself with her son Preston before the school ball where he died.

“We keep Preston’s ashes at home,” she said, her voice breaking. “Sometimes I just hold them. Sometimes I get under a blanket with them and try to get warm.”

moar: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/29/silk-road-ross-ulbricht-sentenced

The story behind it is absolutely nuts. Dude did seem like a huge prick. Directly blaming him for some dumb ass jumping off a roof is stupid as hell though.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

how about those goddamn spammers who just attacked the GD? they deserve death better.

join the fight against them jerks,don't show any sign of mercy

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts

I've heard about the Silk Road for a long time but never tried it. Not surprised they're trying to hit him with any charge they can scrape up. Probably just going to make an example of the dude.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#5 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

People choose to take drugs of their own free will. Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them.

Avatar image for GazaAli
GazaAli

25216

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 GazaAli
Member since 2007 • 25216 Posts

We all know the cure-all: legalize all drugs!

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#7 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts
@foxhound_fox said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

People choose to take drugs of their own free will. Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them.

Sure but making it easier for people by running what's essentially a giant money laundering scheme is what caused his downfall. There's also the bit about how Silk Road also sold fake driver’s licences, passports, social security cards, utility bills, credit card statements and car insurance records.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#8 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

@Aljosa23 said:
@foxhound_fox said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

People choose to take drugs of their own free will. Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them.

Sure but making it easier for people by running what's essentially a giant money laundering scheme is what caused his downfall. There's also the bit about how Silk Road also sold fake driver’s licences, passports, social security cards, utility bills, credit card statements and car insurance records.

Well, and there was rampant drug use before the Silk Road and there will be rampant drug use after it. In fact, the single most commonly abused drugs in the US right now are prescription drugs. Perfectly legal drugs being used illegally. Ironic.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#9 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:
@Aljosa23 said:
@foxhound_fox said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

People choose to take drugs of their own free will. Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them.

Sure but making it easier for people by running what's essentially a giant money laundering scheme is what caused his downfall. There's also the bit about how Silk Road also sold fake driver’s licences, passports, social security cards, utility bills, credit card statements and car insurance records.

Well, and there was rampant drug use before the Silk Road and there will be rampant drug use after it. In fact, the single most commonly abused drugs in the US right now are prescription drugs. Perfectly legal drugs being used illegally. Ironic.

Isn't it contradictory to say "Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them." but then after say the most commonly abused ones are legal?

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

People choose to take drugs of their own free will. Their being illegal is a large part of the appeal of doing them.

And since drugs lead to addiction I do hold dealers responsible. They prey and benefit on the weakness of others. Hell...even those who are not yet addicted are weak. I don't make excuses for those who use.....I blame them fully for their choice. But the dealer is guilty as well. He knows what he's doing. He banks on the addiction. Repeat business is more profit.

Avatar image for n64dd
N64DD

13167

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 N64DD
Member since 2015 • 13167 Posts

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Avatar image for CreasianDevaili
CreasianDevaili

4429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 CreasianDevaili
Member since 2005 • 4429 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

lol libertarians

Avatar image for ReadingRainbow4
ReadingRainbow4

18733

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#16 ReadingRainbow4
Member since 2012 • 18733 Posts

I wonder who's going to get the movie rights.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

Avatar image for n64dd
N64DD

13167

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 N64DD
Member since 2015 • 13167 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@Aljosa23 said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

lol libertarians

I was a libertarian once....when I was in High School, then I grew up and saw how the world really was.

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

The guy who founded the Silk Road is still alive? Hasn't that road been around for thousands of years? He must have some special exotic ginseng or something.

Avatar image for silkylove
silkylove

8579

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#23 silkylove
Member since 2002 • 8579 Posts

He trafficked drugs and illegal weapons using interstate commerce and was involved in a murder for hire plot. Life in prison sounds about right to me.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

You could make that same argument against much of the pharmaceutical industry - yet instead of going to jail they make millions.

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

Hmm...

@mingmao3046 said:

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

Yeah, but he did more than simply facilitate a hub were drugs could be sold, didn't he?

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@KHAndAnime said:
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

You could make that same argument against much of the pharmaceutical industry - yet instead of going to jail they make millions.

There's a lot of corruption in that industry that should be regulated and punished.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

No, they did not. He did not force anyone to take any drug. He offered a viable alternative to buying these substances in person where often times, users must interact with sketchy individuals who could harm them. The SR also used a feedback based system, so that other users could tell you about the product, if the dealer was reliable, etc. Drugs purchased on the SR were superior to street drugs because the dosage and chemical was very accurate, as buyers could either vouch for or against the dealer in that regard. In this way, SR actually helped people get pure drugs as opposed to random stuff that could have been deadly.

Drug users would have gotten these drugs either way, the SR just provided a safer alternative. Do you believe that alcohol companies actions result in death and suffering, and should those companies be held responsible? When does personal accountability come into play?

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@thebest31406 said:

Hmm...

@mingmao3046 said:

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

Yeah, but he did more than simply facilitate a hub were drugs could be sold, didn't he?

What else are you talking about? Silk Road was all about buying and selling drugs

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

No, they did not. He did not force anyone to take any drug. He offered a viable alternative to buying these substances in person where often times, users must interact with sketchy individuals who could harm them. The SR also used a feedback based system, so that other users could tell you about the product, if the dealer was reliable, etc. Drugs purchased on the SR were superior to street drugs because the dosage and chemical was very accurate, as buyers could either vouch for or against the dealer in that regard. In this way, SR actually helped people get pure drugs as opposed to random stuff that could have been deadly.

Drug users would have gotten these drugs either way, the SR just provided a safer alternative. Do you believe that alcohol companies actions result in death and suffering, and should those companies be held responsible? When does personal accountability come into play?

I think you have real issues to try to paint what he did as a good thing.

No, many people don't have readily available access to drugs, but when given easy access people who may be curious about them are able to attain them when it ordinarily would have been difficult. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup being introduced about 1990, following that there was an explosion of obesity. Could people have gotten sugar before? Yes but it was more difficult. Simply adding a barrier of difficulty to purchasing something reduces the number of people that will use a product. Here he made it possible for people who couldn't have gotten drugs, to get them, and people died.

Avatar image for gamerguru100
gamerguru100

12718

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#30 gamerguru100
Member since 2009 • 12718 Posts

@whipassmt said:

The guy who founded the Silk Road is still alive? Hasn't that road been around for thousands of years? He must have some special exotic ginseng or something.

ROFL that's what I thought. XD

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

No, they did not. He did not force anyone to take any drug. He offered a viable alternative to buying these substances in person where often times, users must interact with sketchy individuals who could harm them. The SR also used a feedback based system, so that other users could tell you about the product, if the dealer was reliable, etc. Drugs purchased on the SR were superior to street drugs because the dosage and chemical was very accurate, as buyers could either vouch for or against the dealer in that regard. In this way, SR actually helped people get pure drugs as opposed to random stuff that could have been deadly.

Drug users would have gotten these drugs either way, the SR just provided a safer alternative. Do you believe that alcohol companies actions result in death and suffering, and should those companies be held responsible? When does personal accountability come into play?

I think you have real issues to try to paint what he did as a good thing.

No, many people don't have readily available access to drugs, but when given easy access people who may be curious about them are able to attain them when it ordinarily would have been difficult. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup being introduced about 1990, following that there was an explosion of obesity. Could people have gotten sugar before? Yes but it was more difficult. Simply adding a barrier of difficulty to purchasing something reduces the number of people that will use a product. Here he made it possible for people who couldn't have gotten drugs, to get them, and people died.

If they dont have in person access to drugs then they probably arent too curious about them in the first place. Drug use is common amongst people from all walks of life, always has and always will. Corn Syrup isn't even similar here. It was being added to food that people were eating. People were not just going to the store and drinking the stuff straight out of a container.

In Sweden I believe, they have centers where heroin addicts can go to shoot up safely with clean needles and what not, and ensure that they have real heroin. This helps deal with the health aspects of addiction. Is this a bad thing since they are giving drug users access to injection materials? I would say this is a good thing, it is harm reduction. Prohibition of alcohol didnt do anything significant in regards to deterring people from drinking.

If someone is truly curious, they will get drugs whether they are legal or not, and it should be everyones right to use drugs without breaking any laws. Again, alcohol companies provide and sell alcohol "causing" many people to die through and suffer through alcoholism, drunk driving, etc. Why cant we say that people are free to use substances, they just must be responsible for themselves? No one is forcing anyone to drink alcohol or shoot heroin. You should have every right to if you want, but you can't blame the seller for personal irresponsibility.

Avatar image for MrGeezer
MrGeezer

59765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 MrGeezer
Member since 2002 • 59765 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:

If they dont have in person access to drugs then they probably arent too curious about them in the first place. Drug use is common amongst people from all walks of life, always has and always will. Corn Syrup isn't even similar here. It was being added to food that people were eating. People were not just going to the store and drinking the stuff straight out of a container.

In Sweden I believe, they have centers where heroin addicts can go to shoot up safely with clean needles and what not, and ensure that they have real heroin. This helps deal with the health aspects of addiction. Is this a bad thing since they are giving drug users access to injection materials? I would say this is a good thing, it is harm reduction. Prohibition of alcohol didnt do anything significant in regards to deterring people from drinking.

If someone is truly curious, they will get drugs whether they are legal or not, and it should be everyones right to use drugs without breaking any laws. Again, alcohol companies provide and sell alcohol "causing" many people to die through and suffer through alcoholism, drunk driving, etc. Why cant we say that people are free to use substances, they just must be responsible for themselves? No one is forcing anyone to drink alcohol or shoot heroin. You should have every right to if you want, but you can't blame the seller for personal irresponsibility.

You can most certainly blame the seller for selling the drug, which happens to be a crime. This guy is a criminal whose crime led to people's death. You're basically just saying that he should get let off the hook because you don't agree that what he did should have been a crime. Well, too bad. It was a crime and it still is a crime, and he's apparently guilty.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@MrGeezer said:
@mingmao3046 said:

If they dont have in person access to drugs then they probably arent too curious about them in the first place. Drug use is common amongst people from all walks of life, always has and always will. Corn Syrup isn't even similar here. It was being added to food that people were eating. People were not just going to the store and drinking the stuff straight out of a container.

In Sweden I believe, they have centers where heroin addicts can go to shoot up safely with clean needles and what not, and ensure that they have real heroin. This helps deal with the health aspects of addiction. Is this a bad thing since they are giving drug users access to injection materials? I would say this is a good thing, it is harm reduction. Prohibition of alcohol didnt do anything significant in regards to deterring people from drinking.

If someone is truly curious, they will get drugs whether they are legal or not, and it should be everyones right to use drugs without breaking any laws. Again, alcohol companies provide and sell alcohol "causing" many people to die through and suffer through alcoholism, drunk driving, etc. Why cant we say that people are free to use substances, they just must be responsible for themselves? No one is forcing anyone to drink alcohol or shoot heroin. You should have every right to if you want, but you can't blame the seller for personal irresponsibility.

You can most certainly blame the seller for selling the drug, which happens to be a crime. This guy is a criminal whose crime led to people's death. You're basically just saying that he should get let off the hook because you don't agree that what he did should have been a crime. Well, too bad. It was a crime and it still is a crime, and he's apparently guilty.

Im not saying it is legal to sell narcotics. I am saying that this law is morally wrong. If this man operating an ebay for drugs lead to deaths, then that means alcohol and tobacco companies are also causing deaths. Why is he the only one who bears responsibility? Who was personal accountability?

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178895

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36  Edited By LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178895 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

He engages in illegal activity.

Avatar image for MrGeezer
MrGeezer

59765

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 MrGeezer
Member since 2002 • 59765 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:

Im not saying it is legal to sell narcotics. I am saying that this law is morally wrong. If this man operating an ebay for drugs lead to deaths, then that means alcohol and tobacco companies are also causing deaths. Why is he the only one who bears responsibility? Who was personal accountability?

Again, he broke the law. It is not illegal to open a bar or a liquor store, and even then it's only legal to sell alcohol if you're following all of the many regulations. This dude opened up an online unregulated distribution for illegal drugs.

He is, by definition, a criminal.

Now you're just complaining that this criminal should be let off the hook, solely because you don't agree that what he did should be a crime. Well, it doesn't work like that. He's not on trial in order to evaluate whether or not the law is morally wrong. He's on trial to determine if he is guilty of committing a crime. Which he is guilty of, objectively. If you think that the law is wrong, then by all means try to get the law changed. Until that happens though, people who break the law and are convicted should face the consequences.

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@MakeMeaSammitch said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@CreasianDevaili said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@n64dd said:

F*** this guy. He got what he deserved.

He did nothing wrong

Somewhere, that would be true. But where he lives and operated, he did factually do something wrong. He is being used to set an example, and I approve of it.

Obviously he broke laws. I am saying that morally, there is nothing wrong with what he did

You have a warped sense of morality.

What did he do that was wrong?

His actions resulted in the deaths and suffering of others.

This is so strait forward that even mao "I'll never get a girl with my sense of morality" 3046 should get that.

No, they did not. He did not force anyone to take any drug. He offered a viable alternative to buying these substances in person where often times, users must interact with sketchy individuals who could harm them. The SR also used a feedback based system, so that other users could tell you about the product, if the dealer was reliable, etc. Drugs purchased on the SR were superior to street drugs because the dosage and chemical was very accurate, as buyers could either vouch for or against the dealer in that regard. In this way, SR actually helped people get pure drugs as opposed to random stuff that could have been deadly.

Drug users would have gotten these drugs either way, the SR just provided a safer alternative. Do you believe that alcohol companies actions result in death and suffering, and should those companies be held responsible? When does personal accountability come into play?

I think you have real issues to try to paint what he did as a good thing.

No, many people don't have readily available access to drugs, but when given easy access people who may be curious about them are able to attain them when it ordinarily would have been difficult. It's similar to high fructose corn syrup being introduced about 1990, following that there was an explosion of obesity. Could people have gotten sugar before? Yes but it was more difficult. Simply adding a barrier of difficulty to purchasing something reduces the number of people that will use a product. Here he made it possible for people who couldn't have gotten drugs, to get them, and people died.

If they dont have in person access to drugs then they probably arent too curious about them in the first place. Drug use is common amongst people from all walks of life, always has and always will. Corn Syrup isn't even similar here. It was being added to food that people were eating. People were not just going to the store and drinking the stuff straight out of a container.

In Sweden I believe, they have centers where heroin addicts can go to shoot up safely with clean needles and what not, and ensure that they have real heroin. This helps deal with the health aspects of addiction. Is this a bad thing since they are giving drug users access to injection materials? I would say this is a good thing, it is harm reduction. Prohibition of alcohol didnt do anything significant in regards to deterring people from drinking.

If someone is truly curious, they will get drugs whether they are legal or not, and it should be everyones right to use drugs without breaking any laws. Again, alcohol companies provide and sell alcohol "causing" many people to die through and suffer through alcoholism, drunk driving, etc. Why cant we say that people are free to use substances, they just must be responsible for themselves? No one is forcing anyone to drink alcohol or shoot heroin. You should have every right to if you want, but you can't blame the seller for personal irresponsibility.

Have you even been to college? Have you spent time with humans under the age of 25? I kinda suspect you haven't socialized based on the first sentence. Corn syrup made sweet foods dramatically cheaper and thus the sales of sugery foods increased dramatically. Same idea with drugs. You make it easier to obtain, more people will use.

Yes, in many developed countries they have detox clinics, and they have drugs decriminalized, not legalized. That is a big difference. I'd like to see a study showing that legalizing a drug didn't cause an increase in use.

No, using drugs is often a impulsive action. I've been to college and I've seen how people will try alcohol or drugs just on impulse. Very few people are going to actively seek out dangerous drugs. Inserting barriers makes it more difficult for people to get said drugs. On the issue of alcohol, if you look at the middle east where alcohol is illegal or among Mormons where alcohol use is forbidden, alcoholism, Drunk driving and use in general is non-existant. It goes to show that putting up barriers to use does actually reduce use.

Drugs aren't really even just a personal responsibility. You're lying to yourself if you think that. Drug use affects everybody, it raises health insurance costs, it destroys the lives of immediate family. Saying "it's just personal responsibility" is incredibly short sighted when people are getting hooked after a single use, or self medicating due to depression, or getting into a wrong group; people looking for a short term solution to long term problems, and you just simplify it to personal responsibility.

Avatar image for konvikt_17
konvikt_17

22378

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 konvikt_17
Member since 2008 • 22378 Posts

I dont get the point of the two life sentences, plus the 20 years and 15 years and 5 years.

Why not just say life without parole and leave it at that?

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#40 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

@gamerguru100 said:
@whipassmt said:

The guy who founded the Silk Road is still alive? Hasn't that road been around for thousands of years? He must have some special exotic ginseng or something.

ROFL that's what I thought. XD

lol. Great minds think alike.

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#41 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

@konvikt_17 said:

I dont get the point of the two life sentences, plus the 20 years and 15 years and 5 years.

Why not just say life without parole and leave it at that?

There are parts of the world where death is an illusion, he might have been to one. he might have learned to be very convincing. So in case he fakes his death the first time, and they later find out they can lock him up again.

Or maybe they figure that death would be a release from this life and his sentence has yet to be carried out. So when he dies they'll revive him, and when he dies again they'll revive him again, and then they'll take away everything that's dear to him, and then drive an arrow through his eye.

Avatar image for gamerguru100
gamerguru100

12718

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#42 gamerguru100
Member since 2009 • 12718 Posts

@whipassmt said:
@konvikt_17 said:

I dont get the point of the two life sentences, plus the 20 years and 15 years and 5 years.

Why not just say life without parole and leave it at that?

There are parts of the world where death is an illusion, he might have been to one. he might have learned to be very convincing. So in case he fakes his death the first time, and they later find out they can lock him up again.

Or maybe they figure that death would be a release from this life and his sentence has yet to be carried out. So when he dies they'll revive him, and when he dies again they'll revive him again, and then they'll take away everything that's dear to him, and then drive an arrow through his eye.

lol

Avatar image for -God-
-God-

3627

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 -God-
Member since 2004 • 3627 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

He engages in illegal activity.

He should have payed off some politicians to make those drugs legal and would be seen as a great CEO instead.

Avatar image for thebest31406
thebest31406

3775

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 thebest31406
Member since 2004 • 3775 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@thebest31406 said:

Hmm...

@mingmao3046 said:

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

Yeah, but he did more than simply facilitate a hub were drugs could be sold, didn't he?

What else are you talking about? Silk Road was all about buying and selling drugs

I thought gun distribution was involved. If it was a site for drug distribution then, morally, I see no difference between that and the distribution of other killers (alcohol and cigarettes).

Avatar image for Stesilaus
Stesilaus

4999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#45 Stesilaus
Member since 2007 • 4999 Posts

He ought to have realized that only the CIA can trade in narcotics with impunity.

Avatar image for mingmao3046
mingmao3046

2683

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 mingmao3046
Member since 2011 • 2683 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

He engages in illegal activity.

Just because something is illegal doesn't make it right or wrong

Avatar image for GazaAli
GazaAli

25216

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 GazaAli
Member since 2007 • 25216 Posts

I thought liberty trumps all; this guy should have the right to sell drugs, so long as he doesn't force people to use them.

Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48 MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

@mingmao3046 said:
@LJS9502_basic said:
@mingmao3046 said:
@LJS9502_basic said:

Eh I have no sympathy. Drugs destroy lives and families.

He is not forcing anyone to take any drugs. Much like alcohol companies are not forcing anyone to drink, yet alcohol kills more than all illegal drugs combined

He engages in illegal activity.

Just because something is illegal doesn't make it right or wrong

In this case it was morally wrong.

Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts

That's extremely harsh

Avatar image for iloveatlus
iloveatlus

599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#50 iloveatlus
Member since 2009 • 599 Posts

I don't have any problems with them selling drugs on silk road, but those scumbags silkroad also sold fake/stolen id's, and weapons. i'm glad he's getting locked up for life, I hope silkroad gets shutdown