Feeds

back to article Silk Road dealer 'SuperTrips' faces 40 years for DVD drug imports

US law enforcement is claiming a victory in its 43-year War on Drugs™ after a Dutch man accused of being one of the largest drug dealers on the now-defunct Silk Road online bazaar agreed to plead guilty to a single drug conspiracy charge. Over an 18-month period, the Feds allege, Cornelis Jan Slomp sent 104 kilograms of MDMA, …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Appropriate

"Slomp wanted them to handle customer support because they had better English language skills that he."

14
0
Silver badge

I know there's a Send Corrections button, but...

"Prosecutors claim Slomp wanted them to handle customer support because they had better English language skills that he."

Just thought it was too good to not be quoted for posterity.

Edit: Damn! Just not quick enough. Gave Stephen 2 a thumbs up, purely for his posting speed.

0
0
Silver badge

40 years in prison

effect on drugs market: Nill, Zilch, Nada.

24
1

Re: 40 years in prison

And as an American, I get to enjoy paying taxes for the investigation, prosecution, and incarceration. Whereas if we simply allowed people to do what they want, the sales would actually benefit the economy, in addition to the savings from not chasing and locking people up.

26
1
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: RegMidnight Re: 40 years in prison

"....if we simply allowed people to do what they want, the sales would actually benefit the economy, in addition to the savings from not chasing and locking people up." The criminals involved are not the junkies 'doing what they want', they are the people deliberately making a profit illegally from the misery of others. And if you think the hard drugs sold by organized criminals are harmless I suggest you need to do a lot more reading on the social impact of such drugs. After all, it would also be a lot cheaper to simply put all the junkies up against the wall rather than spend public money on rehabilitation programs, needle exchange programs, methadone programs, help groups for junkies trying to get clean, 'awareness' campaigns, and just think of the police and military savings if we just forego the War on Drug dealers and make it a War on Drug users. Simply pass one law - all users and handlers of illegal drugs can be executed by members of the public, no need for a trial - and we can even save extra money on psychopath treatment by making them productive members of society doing 'what they want'! There could even be an economic boost from selling weapons to the psychos to kill junkies with (well, at least until all the junkies are dead). Are you sure arguing on legality on the basis of 'doing what you want' is such a good idea?

7
34

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Bronze badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

Oh god, lambchop, you just don't change. You put up specious arguments and have them blown down again and agian and aggan and agasdfasffff.... And then you come back for another hoofing, spouting more made-up 'facts' and forever distorting what people say.

Nothing changes in your head, no new connections formed, no new neurons fire, the eternality of when the entire clockwork of the universe has run down to utter stillness and silence and you're frozen forever at that point.

4
4

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

Most of the social impact of drugs is not the social impact of the drugs themselves, per se, but of their illegality and the stigma attached to them. Drug users have a harder time finding jobs--not because they are any less able to work, but because people like you think they deserve to be shot. They suffer social isolation--not because they are less able to interact with people, but because many of their would-be friends are people like you who think they deserve to be shot. And these things, in turn, result in many secondary and tertiary forms of unpleasantness, all with their attendant costs, such as underemployment and its effects on health and crime, and the effect on mental health of knowing that millions of holier-than-thou types want them dead.

Alcohol and tobacco provably do more physical and mental harm than marijuana, LSD, psilocybin, or MDMA, and lung cancer, cirrhosis, pancreatic cancer, stroke, heart disease, and drunken violence all inflict immense costs on society. However, because they are widely accepted as normal, their users do not suffer from the effects of being ostracized by their peers and by law enforcement, and their negative consequences are simply accepted as facts of life. We tried ostracizing them, back when people thought the Volstead Act was a good idea. Few people today seriously consider the idea of reviving it. Tell me, have you been to a pub recently?

A good friend of mine died of cardiac arrest on the toilet because he felt like he had something to hide. If he had asked for a sitter--or had some safe, FDA-approved source as opposed to the internet--he would likely be alive today and still be pursuing a chemistry degree.

11
3
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"...if you think the hard drugs sold by organized criminals are harmless I suggest you need to do a lot more reading on the social impact of such drugs."

Well you got an upvote from me, Matt.

I've been there, see that. Up close and personal. Seen the deaths. Seen the crippling. Seen people lose million dollar businesses. Seen families broken up. Seen people go to prison. Seen ambulance and cops more than I ever wanted to.

Hard drugs DESTROY people, their friends and family, not to mention they are ticking time bombs as your coworker or employer or client.

To think other wise shows a profound lack of knowledge and real life experience. In others words, it makes you look like an ignorant git.

And amphetamine users are the worst. Useless waste of spaces at best, dangerous, deadly psychopaths on average.

7
5
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Blowhard Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"....How many billions is it so far?...." The Police estimate that drugs are a factor in at least half of thefts in the UK, meaning drugs currently cost the UK population about £2.5bn every year in goods stolen in burglaries, muggings, carjackings and pickpocketing. That is just the cost of goods stolen and does not take into account the psychological pain inflicted on people suffering such crimes, nor the cost to all of us through the increased cost of insurance premiums. But why would anyone expect a cluetard like you to actually know anything about the realities of crime? You probably base your whole opinion on the fact Lady Gaga admitted she has used drugs, so you probably think it's cool and 'right on'.

3
3
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Boring Green Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"....You put up specious arguments and have them blown down again and agian and aggan and agasdfasffff...." And, yet again, again, you seem unable to actually post any argument, let alone one that could even be considered interesting let alone knock anything down. Please do try a lot harder or just give up, mmmkay?

2
6
Silver badge

Re: Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

If we're going on anecdotes, I've seen too many people trashed by the effects of ethanol. But, that's just damned inconvenient for your argument, isn't it?

Never mind that unless you want to turn the world into North Korea, you will not, ever, in a million years stamp out recreational use of drugs. Hell, I bet even the Norks have a problem in that regard.

So keep waging that war. We all love a good war. Especially when it has a total positive benefit of around the square root of fuck all and a massive cost economically and socially. Meanwhile, those few countries that have liberalised their laws, that do not punish, torture and/or kill you for what you choose to put in your body, continue to see drops in the usage of hard drugs. In fact, drops in the usage of all recreational drugs.

But that's just damned inconvenient for the sadistic psychopaths who want a good excuse to fuck someone over, isn't it?

12
3
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Captain Tantrum Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"....Drug users have a harder time finding jobs--not because they are any less able to work...." Rubbish, they are usually less able to work because drug addiction makes them less able to work. And you seem to be oblivious to the simple fact drug users CHOOSE to be drug users, so - TBH - tough!

"....people like you think they deserve to be shot...." Did I say I thought they deserved to be shot? No, I did not. I merely posted a farcial argument of the cost savings and economic benefits of doing so to show how stupid RegMidnight's argument that legalising drugs would only save the taxpayer money. Where does the moron think all those junkies that steal now for illegal drugs are suddenly going to get money for legalised drugs? The simple truth is they will still commit crimes to feed their habits.

".....They suffer social isolation--not because they are less able to interact with people..." But because their interaction with other people is all to often to steal from them.

"....And these things, in turn, result in many secondary and tertiary forms of unpleasantness...." Well boo-fucking-hoo. What, was it simply too hard for you to understand 'Just say no'?

"....Alcohol and tobacco provably do more physical and mental harm...." And here we go with the usual junkie mantra - 'cigs and drink are worse' - which does not in any way reduce the harm drugs do. Two wrongs do not make a right, so bleating on about tobacco and alcohol in an attempt to justify legalising drugs is just denial.

"...A good friend of mine died of cardiac arrest on the toilet because he felt like he had something to hide...." So he was an idiot? No, seriously, he was stupid enough to get into drugs, then stupid enough not to seek help, and you want to paint that as some great sob story when the truth is his decisions put him there. You can blame society, you can blame inequality (kinda hard if he was doing a degree), whatever you like, but the truth is your friend made all the decisions that put him on that toilet. And then you think it would be a good idea to encourage more people to kill themselves by legalising drugs???? WTF?

4
11
Bronze badge

Re: Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

> The Police estimate that drugs are a factor in at least half of thefts in the UK, meaning drugs currently cost the UK population about £2.5bn every year in goods stolen in burglaries, muggings, carjackings and pickpocketing.

Reference please plumpness.

And BTW please have you considered white collar crime also, this may not be impartial but it's at least not written by you <http://www.bdo.co.uk/press/fraud-costs-uk-85.3-billion-per-year>. The URL is not the whole story so feel free to read it all.

3
1
Bronze badge

Re: Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

> The Police estimate that drugs are a factor in at least half of thefts in the UK, meaning drugs currently cost the UK population about £2.5bn every year in goods stolen in burglaries, muggings, carjackings and pickpocketing

from <http://www.alcoholconcern.org.uk/campaign/statistics-on-alcohol>

"Victims believed the offender(s) to be under the influence of alcohol in around half (47%) of all violent incidents, or 917,000 offences"

"Alcohol-related crime costs £11 billion per year (2010-11 costs, England)"

BAAAAAA

5
2
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Blowhard Re: Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"....I've seen too many people trashed by the effects of ethanol. But, that's just damned inconvenient for your argument, isn't it?...." See? Straight into the 'drink and fags are worse' schpiel. What, is it written on the crack bags nowadays? As I pointed out already, simply stating that alcohol and cigarettes cause health issues does not in any way mitigate the massive harm done by illegal drugs. Major denial.

"....unless you want to turn the world into North Korea...." What, only a despotic dictatorship could ever want to halt the damage done by illegal drugs? But you just said alcohol and tobacco are so bad that you would want to stop them, so you're just Kim il Jong Mk2? And, as you obviously failed to notice, our democratically elected politicians maintain the laws on illegal drugs because they are supported by the majority of the electorate, so it is you and your drug-addled chums that are in the minority.

"....those few countries that have liberalised their laws, that do not punish, torture and/or kill you for what you choose to put in your body, continue to see drops in the usage of hard drugs...." Which 'liberalised' countries do you mean? Maybe Holland, where the official policy has four objectives:

1.To prevent recreational drug use and to treat and rehabilitate recreational drug users.

2.To reduce harm to users.

3.To diminish public nuisance by drug users (the disturbance of public order and safety in the neighborhood).

4.To combat the production and trafficking of recreational drugs.

Wow, that doesn't sound like the ringing endorsement of the virtues of hard drugs you insist it is! Oh, and 72% of the organised crime in Holland is still drug-related.

Or maybe Switzerland, which tried a crackdown, then gave in to liberal pressure and started treatment including not just methadone but professionally administered heroin. The result has been that heroin abuse has hit a steady population of long-term addicts, whilst other drug abuse has seen a steady increase in Switzerland over the last thirteen years. For all the anti-Yank rants posted on here by you sheeple, it will no doubt come as a major shock to hear that Switzerland makes more arrests (per capita) for simple possession of cannabis than even the United States. Indeed, the public were so alarmed that the Swiss government could not pass a law to decriminalise cannabis in 2004. The recent austerity measures introduced due to the depression have meant many Swiss have strongly objected to continuing the current spending on the liberal drug program.

"....But that's just damned inconvenient for the sadistic psychopaths who want a good excuse to fuck someone over, isn't it?" But I thought you were arguing FOR the drug dealers?

3
10
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Boring Green Re: Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"....Reference please plumpness....."

'....Examples of users needing £15,000 to £30,000 a year to fund drug habits have often been given. To make such amounts of money from stolen goods police often suggest multiplying by three – on the basis that stolen goods will fetch about one third of their normal value. There are estimates of around 306,000 heroin and / or crack users in England, with around 200,000 of them in treatment in any one year. That is a lot of theft, burglary, fraud or shoplifting if all are stealing to pay for things. This has led some people to suggest that up to half of all acquisitive crime is drug-related and that the market value of goods stolen involved could be between £2-2.5 billion each year.....' - DrugScope (http://www.drugscope.org.uk/), a rather drug-liberal charity (and from my own observations of others having to feed their habits I'd say the £15-30k figure is low). I could have used the Home Office figure for the total cost of illegal drugs to the UK annually, which is £15bn, but that heaps in a load of other 'costs' such as the costs to the NHS of treating A&E admissions of junkies, costs to the Police of fighting drug crime, etc. The Home Office also put the total cost of all drug-related crime (included organised crime) at £13.9bn, but does not break that figure down into how much is junkies stealing to feed their habits and how much is the organised crime element. But, as your buddy Blowhard Gale seems to have missed, here in pro-Drug War Britian with our 'antiquated' and 'non-liberal' laws, there has been a drop in drug use every year since a peak in about 2004.

"....have you considered white collar crime...." So when the 'cigs and drink are just as evil' schpiel fails, you want to reach for the other Leftie standard mantra, 'think of the Evil Bankers'? Seriously, that's just denial and distraction, like saying we should ignore rape because murder is a much more serious crime. I get it, you like your drugs and your life would be a misery without them, but the rest of us are just not so dependent on artificial highs for their laughs as you obviously are.

2
6
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Boring Green Re: Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"Victims believed the offender(s) to be under the influence of alcohol in around half (47%) of all violent incidents, or 917,000 offences" Once again, you are seeking to deny the harm caused by drugs by saying drink is worse. It actually isn't (see below), but you are desperately trying the denial strategy again.

"Alcohol-related crime costs £11 billion per year (2010-11 costs, England)" That's the TOTAL cost, including policing and NHS. As I have already posted, the Home Office figure for the total cost of drug-related crime is £15bn, so about 35% more than that of drink. So BAAAAA yourself, you desperately denialist, blinkered, drug-addled sheep. Please go ask a responsible adult for help before trying to formulate another post.

1
7
Silver badge

Re: Blowhard Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

See? Straight into the 'drink and fags are worse' schpiel.

Because they are.

But you just said alcohol and tobacco are so bad that you would want to stop them

Where? It would certainly be a sensible idea not to take up tobacco as it's bloody addictive and bloody harmful, but where did I mention "wanting to stop" them? Thanks, but I don't want to expand your war even further. It's just not worth it.

And, as you obviously failed to notice, our democratically elected politicians maintain the laws on illegal drugs because they are supported by the majority of the electorate, so it is you and your drug-addled chums that are in the minority.

When slavery was abolished, only a minority of people supported it.

A majority voted to ban gay marriage in California.

In neither case did the baying mob get what they wanted. Sometimes, the minority needs protecting from the tyranny of the majority. Like now. A free country is far more than an X on a ballot paper. Just because it's the best out of a bunch of bad ways of choosing which bastards tell everyone else what to do, doesn't mean that mob rule is suitable for everything.

Ultimately, your war is futile and costing more than it saves, in human life and money. There is no logic to it. However, it does give a few authoritarians a nice erection I'm sure.

Wow, that doesn't sound like the ringing endorsement of the virtues of hard drugs you insist it is!

Where am I endorsing hard drugs?

Oh, and 72% of the organised crime in Holland is still drug-related.

Because. It. Is. Illegal.

Really Matt, learn to stick 2 and 2 together and come up with 4, instead of -1.

Or maybe Switzerland, which tried a crackdown, then gave in to liberal pressure and started treatment including not just methadone but professionally administered heroin. The result has been that heroin abuse has hit a steady population of long-term addicts, whilst other drug abuse has seen a steady increase in Switzerland over the last thirteen years.

Background Heroin-assisted treatment has been found to be effective for people with severe opioid dependence who are not interested in or do poorly on methadone maintenance.

Aims: To study heroin-assisted treatment in people on methadone who continue intravenous heroin and in those who are heroin dependent but currently not in treatment.

Method: In an open-label multicentre randomised controlled trial, 1015 people with heroin dependence received a variable dose of injectable heroin (n=515) or oral methadone (n=500) for 12 months. Two response criteria, improvement of physical and/or mental health and decrease in illicit drug use, were evaluated in an intent-to-treat analysis.

Results: Retention was higher in the heroin (67.2%) than in the methadone group (40.0%) and the heroin group showed a significantly greater response on both primary outcome measures. More serious adverse events were found in the heroin group, and were mainly associated with intravenous use.

Conclusions: Heroin-assisted treatment is more effective for people with opioid dependence who continue intravenous heroin while on methadone maintenance or who are not enrolled in treatment. Despite a higher risk, it should be considered for treatment resistance under medical supervision.

--Christian Haasen, MD, Uwe Verthein, PhD, Peter Degkwitz, PhD and others (2007) Heroin-assisted treatment for opioid dependence [online] Available at http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/191/1/55 [last accessed: April 2014]

Indeed, the public were so alarmed that the Swiss government could not pass a law to decriminalise cannabis in 2004.

Which just shows you what a bunch of FUD can do. You're also guilty of lumping everything together under the umbrella term "DRUGZ" yet again. Fine, so long as you include ethanol in that.

But I thought you were arguing FOR the drug dealers?

Where?

8
5
Silver badge

Re: Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

here in pro-Drug War Britian with our 'antiquated' and 'non-liberal' laws, there has been a drop in drug use every year since a peak in about 2004.

You mean this publication right here which seems to show a drop in drug use going back far further than 2004, and having precious little to do with being a sadistic motherfucker and smacking people over the head with a stick, and more to do with societal attitudes toward hard drug use?

That publication?

Yeah, amazing how evidence works. Sorry, but everywhere you look, your war is either being lost, or it's the wrong damned side to be on. Funny how societal disapproval works a shitload better than your sadistic approach to things. Also note that quite a lot of people consider casual cannabis use to be acceptable. I guess not everyone has been taken in by the bullshit and convinced that everything is "DRUGZ".

9
3
Silver badge

Re: Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

As I have already posted, the Home Office figure for the total cost of drug-related crime is £15bn, so about 35% more than that of drink.

And bear in mind that "drug related crime" includes the use of the bloody stuff. Oh and the sadistic punishments and imprisonments. All the stuff that wouldn't exist if your war was ended, and all the stuff that would exist tenfold for alcohol if the US govt had got its way circa the 1930s.

But you keep on cherry picking.

4
3
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Blowhard Re: Blowhard Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"Because they are....." Again, that's just trying to diminish the impact of drugs. It is as stupid as saying 'murder is a worse crime than rape, therefore we should ignore rape'. The relative harm of one does not excuse the other, it's just you want to baaaah-lieve it to be so.

".....When slavery was abolished, only a minority of people supported it....." The abolition of slavery (at least in the Empire) was passed by majority votes in the democratically elected Houses of Parliament with the passing of the Slave Trade Act of 1807 and the Slavery Abolition Act 1833. In the US it was the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, passed by majority vote in (again) the democratically elected Senate (1864) and House of Reps (1865). Now, if as you claim, those had not been popular with the majority, then why were those politicians not replaced at the next election with politicians willing to repeal those Acts and Amendments? So, sorry, but you're wrong again. The majority supported the abolition of slavery, and the majority support the current laws against hard and 'recreational' drugs.

"....Ultimately, your war is futile and costing more than it saves, in human life and money. There is no logic to it. However, it does give a few authoritarians a nice erection I'm sure...." And your statistics and verifiable facts to support that argument are... oh, as usual, you don't have any. All you have is a vague dribbling about erections (something you think about a lot, maybe?).

You then posted that bit form "Heroin-assisted treatment for opioid dependence", which did not disprove anything I posted about how the treatment has maintained a hard-core of long-term heroin abusers. Sorry, but what exactly was your point, that hard-core junkies prefer free heroin to free methadone? Hardly a surprise. It also did not deal with the continued rise in drug abuse in Switzerland, a country held up as an icon of liberal progressiveness. Please do try harder.

"....Which just shows you what a bunch of FUD can do...." So, once again, if you do not agree with someone's arguments (in this case the Swiss Governments) it has to be FUD? Very open-minded of you! Tell you what, since you stated it was all FUD, please do go away and research the debate and show that all the arguments presented against the legalisation of cannabis were FUD as you claim. It should be easy for you if it really was just all FUD, right? Before you do, you may want to also consider that the Swiss also held a referendum on legalising cannabis in 2008 where only 36.7% actually voted for legalisation. So it would appear that the 'FUD' was damn good stuff!

"....You're also guilty of lumping everything together under the umbrella term "DRUGZ" yet again...." Oh puh-leeeeease, that is just pathetic. 'My drug is not a bad drug, alcohol is so much badder'. Yeah, whatever. It obviously escaped your attention that the UK Government, off the back of a mandate from the majority, set the classifications (A,B and C) for illegal 'recreational' drugs, not me. And in the US it was their Government, also off a majority mandate, which set the classifications and punishments for importing such drugs as SuperTrips allegedly smuggled into the US. If you don't like it then you go waste your vote on some minor party politician willing to legalise your drug of choice, and if you should ever get a majority then you can quit whining. Either way, what SuperTrips is charged with is criminal in the States.

2
8
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Blowhard Re: Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison...

"....seems to show a drop in drug use going back far further than 2004, and having precious little to do with being a sadistic motherfucker and smacking people over the head with a stick, and more to do with societal attitudes toward hard drug use?...." Oh dear, your research into the War on Drugs seems to have been as lamentable as all your other attempts. The WoD has always included more than men with sticks, it has always included education to ensure the next generation don't grow up as thick and blinkered as you are.

"....Yeah, amazing how evidence works. Sorry, but everywhere you look, your war is either being lost, or it's the wrong damned side to be on...." So if drug use is declining in the UK, where we are pretty full-on with the WoD, that is 'losing'? Ah, now I see how you get so confused in your socio-political outlook - you haven't a clue as to what winning looks like! ROFLMAO!

"....Funny how societal disapproval works a shitload better than your sadistic approach to things...." Oh, I don't know, it probably helps to expose the idiocy of people like you, it probably makes others think about the possible adverse mental effects of long-term drug abuse.

2
8
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Blowhard Re: Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison....

"....Oh and the sadistic punishments and imprisonments...." Speaking from experience? What did you expect - everyone KNOWS it's illegal, the penalties are not exactly hidden from public view, so if you went to prison then it's your own stupid fault. Same goes for that cretin SuperTrips.

"....But you keep on cherry picking." LOL, it was you and your fellow sheeple that introduced the idea that drink and cigs were so bad that the damage of drugs could be ignored, so don't start crying now just because that has been debunked.

1
7

Re: Blowhard Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

For the record, an unashamedly Stalinist totalitarian state is not sufficient to stop, or even very well stem, the production and distribution of illegal drugs. In particular, North Korea has a major meth problem:

http://blogs.wsj.com/korearealtime/2013/08/20/north-korea-grapples-with-crystal-meth-epidemic/

So exactly what do anti-drug laws accomplish, if even three-generations-of-punishment-land can't keep people from puffing the bingdu?

Well. Besides destroying respect for the law and for law enforcement officers and costing lots of money and manpower.

Is this really less harmful--in Pyongyang or anywhere else--than encouraging people to know themselves, to know their sources, and to know their drugs, and cultivating a culture of being responsible for one's own actions? Is the strict enforcement of paranoid laws ever a substitute for that?

4
2

Re: Captain Tantrum RegMidnight 40 years in prison

Cool, I have a nickname from Matt. At last I'm a regular!

5
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Captain Re: Blowhard Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison....

"....Well. Besides destroying respect for the law and for law enforcement officers and costing lots of money and manpower....." Maybe your view is blocked by the rest of your flock, but the rest of the population don't seem to share your disrespect of the Police for putting drug smugglers and dealers behind bars. And policing any form of crime costs, and in this case much, much less than the cost to the population of drug-related crime. So if, as even Blowhard admits, drug use is reducing, it would seem an effective use of the money as well. There is, of course, no way to calculate the number of lives saved from ruin by the actions of the Police and other parties fighting the WoD, but then that's probably something the pro-drug crowd would rather gloss over.

"....than encouraging people to know themselves, to know their sources, and to know their drugs, and cultivating a culture of being responsible for one's own actions?...." Which is all part of the 'soft' side of the WoD. And it looks like SuperTrips will be finding out plenty about having to take responsibility for his actions. He can swap notes on knowing drugs with the other inmates he meets in the prison showers.

1
7
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

It isn't about what's good and bad, its about what can be achieved. They did ban ethanol but it proved too easy to make, difficult to police and generally not what society wanted - it was unenforceable.

That said, it does far more total damage than the "hard" drugs.

Narcotics, however are generally recognised by society as a bad thing. It then becomes possible to control them to an extent. You don't want hard-drugs available on the same level as alcohol. Apart from anything else, unlike narcotics and despite your assertion, I'm pretty sure it isn't physiologically addictive. The addiction is psychological only.

You don't "solve" hypocrisy by sinking to the lowest common denominator. You do what you can and recognise the limitations of what is possible.

1
2
Silver badge

Re: 40 years in prison

"Whereas if we simply allowed people to do what they want"

Sure, but you lose the right to complain when your bus driver ploughs the bus into the back of a big rig at full speed because he was too busy watching unicorns fart rainbows.

1
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Silver badge

Re: Blowhard Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison...

The WoD has always included more than men with sticks,

Reefer Madness? Talk To Frank? "This Is Your Brain On Drugs"? Yeah, "education". Followed by getting the utter shit kicked out of you.

So if drug use is declining in the UK, where we are pretty full-on with the WoD...

http://www.ukdpc.org.uk/publication/are-criminal-justice-interventions-working/

These are people being paid to research ways to reduce illegal drug use. Funnily, they seem to think that being a sadistic cunt doesn't work either.

It obviously escaped your attention that the UK Government, off the back of a mandate from the majority...

On a what? Oh please don't make me laugh by mentioning the ABC classification system.

... set the classifications (A,B and C) for illegal 'recreational' drugs, not me.

Oh. You just did. You mentioned the same system that puts marijuana in the same class as amphetamines. Which considers sniffing glue and sleeping pill abuse to be less dangerous than cannabis, and completely fails to include alcohol in there anywhere.

This is the same system which had the ol' mowie wowie dropped to a class C for a little while, until Rupert "Arsehole" Murdoch and the Sun ran a FUD campaign. An independant report recommended that cannabis be decriminalised. The Sun went all full fucking retard. Cannabis went back up to a class B, and that's not FUD? Same publication that still has limited circulation in Liverpool 20-odd years after the Hillsborough disaster, due to their bullshit about Liverpool FC fans. "SOME FANS URINATED ON POLICE OFFICERS" indeed. You think they've changed?

Anybody who has done any actual study into it knows that the UK's drug classification system is a politically motivated fucking joke. Anybody apart from you, it would seem.

While we're at it: http://abolition.e2bn.org/campaign.html

The abolitionist movement for slavery was not as straightforward as you like to think. While a "majority" in government may have voted against it (more for geopolitical than humanitarian reasons), this was not necessarily what everybody else thought. I'm sure you probably think that in the US, it was "The South" who was for slavery and "The North" that was against. Sorry. Wasn't the case.

So thanks for making my point for me there, even if you do seem to think that democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.

LOL, it was you and your fellow sheeple that introduced the idea that drink and cigs were so bad that the damage of drugs could be ignored...

Where? Where did I say that the damage of drugs could be ignored? You think that because I'm not a sadist that I haven't seen people fuck up? Mostly on alcohol, but also on things like amphetamines, and heroin. None on marijuana, funnily enough.

If it really was about "education", then I'd probably be helping! As it is, as long as drug policy is "hit them with a stick", then fuck drug policy.

He can swap notes on knowing drugs with the other inmates he meets in the prison showers.

Keep showing everyone how much of a bloody-minded sadist you are. How bloody-minded and sadistic most of the hard-line anti-everything-except-alcohol-because-I-like-getting-drunk crowd are.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

Apart from anything else, unlike narcotics and despite your assertion, I'm pretty sure it isn't physiologically addictive. The addiction is psychological only.

Alcohol is incredibly, and physically, addictive. So much so that extreme addicts cannot just stop. They have to come down first, otherwise the shock to the system can kill.

I have known people who are in that boat. It's not a pretty place to be.

2
1
Silver badge

Re: 40 years in prison

Sure, but you lose the right to complain when your bus driver ploughs the bus into the back of a big rig at full speed because he was too busy watching unicorns fart rainbows.

Because tripping out in the comfort of your own home is exactly the same as shooting up in the driver's seat of a multiple-ton death machine.

Seriously, why do we have drink-driving laws?

3
1

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Anonymous Coward

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

Loads of real harm is done elsewhere in the world due to Cocaine and Heroin where it is made.

(Strange how America is treating the drug company who got loads of people addicted to Oxycodone. Compared to the amount of resources expended on stuff like this).

Most heroin users in a heartbeat would get a job if the conditions of doing so allowed them cheap clean legal heroin (Or morphine).

Psychedelics are a loose cannon. (Stuff like psychosis can happen with them - very unpredictable and quite unpleasant).

MDMA I dunno whether abusing it too much can seriously affect peoples ability to ever be naturally happy again.

Dexedrine is fine (Good enough for fighter pilots good enough for anybody - less issues than methamphetamine or amphetamine).

GHB is also about as safe as they come (Unless mixed with Alcohol). It was legal for ages. Any problems from it are the same as someone sleeping with somebody else when drunk and then regretting it later. If you have too much you just go straight into a deep sleep (Which looks much worse than it is if it happens out and about). Bodybuilders used to use it for that reason you need to sleep less and more of it is productive. It is used medically still but under another name due to the stigma attached to it.

Anything safer on a balance of probabilities than Alcohol should be legal. (Or Alcohol made illegal again and replaced with a safer alternatives like GHB).

The most obvious thing is if the government decided to start just providing drugs to whoever wanted them. The deficit could be gone overnight. Clean cheap / readily available. Reduce crime. (Without the money then the organised crime would cease to exist and its very rare crime is committed to fund alcohol or tobacco).

1
0
h3
Bronze badge

Re: Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison

None of that crime would happen if you could just buy the drugs from Tesco.

(Or it would become an insignificant problem due to massive increases in tax revenue. More than enough to pay for any associated problems - same way that smoking more than pays for the issues it causes).

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

I had an amphetamine user in my team in one job and it was absolutely brilliant. (Nobody knew other than me). It was not at all obvious but it meant the whole team got lots of pay rises due to him just sometimes deciding to do something overnight for no other reason than something to do. Some people cannot handle them. Other people can and go on to do things that go down in history (Such as Adolf Hitler). No way he can be considered to be useless he did lots of things.

Whilst the family orientated members of the team did nothing the second they left the building.

He never made mistakes and cared about doing the job perfectly (Like I did).

The pharmaceutical amphetamines are obviously safe (Which is why they are used by the Airforce or on the ISS) especially with the safest sleeping pill in combination.

2
1
Bronze badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

> I had an amphetamine user in my team in one job [and how great he was]

I'm also aware of Erdos, however... my landlord of a while back used speed a lot in the 70's and I can tell you it fucked him up.

And I lived with a druggie, who liked his speed (and his mary-jane and his booze and his E's and his glue - he liked his glue, I think it was a lot of effect very cheaply - and whatever else he could reach) and overdid it one evening, leaving me to spend the night in hospital with him. Nasty bit of work he was. No use to anyone. Just a couple of counterpoints.

> Whilst the family orientated members of the team did nothing the second they left the building.

err, good? Because they shouldn't?

> The pharmaceutical amphetamines are obviously safe

This is so stupid I can't believe it.

In fact your post is so dumb I can only feel it's a bit of an agent provocateur invite for the anti-drug brigade.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"from the misery of others"

Speak for yourself. You must have never been invited to any good parties...

1
1

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

Some recent research on the effect of psychedelic use on mental health:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747247/

21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems.

Not exactly loose cannons, from the sound of it.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"> The pharmaceutical amphetamines are obviously safe

This is so stupid I can't believe it."

Is it? I take pharmaceutical methylphenidate hydrochloride every single day with no side effects worth mentioning. In fact they do me a lot of good since I have ADHD-Combined.

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

> Is it? I take ...

There is no such thing as a safe drug. However, if prescribed and taken correctly one can assume that the pros outweigh the cons on average.

However again, we're not talking about prescribed legal drugs but recreational use, or at least that's how I read the original post.

(I remember seeing a film of a US airman, taken in the sixties when the government was experimenting with (presumably pharma grade) speed to keep them up for long missions. He was trying idly to catch nonexistent butterflies in the air. 'safe' is not a function of how it's produced but how it's taken, in what quantity etc.)

1
1
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"The criminals involved are not the junkies 'doing what they want', they are the people deliberately making a profit illegally from the misery of others."

And they would be out of a job if the drugs were legalised, and we wouldn't have to pay to catch them, either.

"And if you think the hard drugs sold by organized criminals are harmless I suggest you need to do a lot more reading on the social impact of such drugs."

Sorry... MDMA and cannabis are hard drugs, are they?

As for the social impact: Our streets would be a lot safer if MDMA and cannabis were the drug of choice on a Saturday night, instead of alcohol. MDMA had a history of being used for marriage counselling before being used as a party drug and then being banned by the DEA on the basis of...err...nothing. More people die by falling off horses.

"After all, it would also be a lot cheaper to simply put all the junkies up against"

Yes, because anyone who uses recreation drugs is a junkie, right? Anyone who drinks is an alcoholic, by the same measure? Anyone who puts a quid on the National has a gambling problem?

1
0
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"Hard drugs DESTROY people"

Yo, the article was primarily about a guy selling MDMA, not 'hard drugs'.

"And amphetamine users are the worst."

You appear to have mixed up the word 'user' and 'addict'. The two are not the same thing.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Captain Tantrum RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"'....Drug users have a harder time finding jobs--not because they are any less able to work....' Rubbish, they are usually less able to work because drug addiction makes them less able to work. "

Matt; User != addict. You just deliberately changed the words to comply with your point. A completely spurious line of argument. So: Bollocks.

"The simple truth is they will still commit crimes to feed their habits."

No they won't. Addiction does not automatically equate to crime. Not everyone who is an addict turns to crime, just as you probably wouldn't start stealing if you can't afford whatever it is that you like to spend your spare money/time on [aside from telling other people how to live their lives. I imagine you might flip out totally if you were deprived of that].

"'.....They suffer social isolation--not because they are less able to interact with people...' But because their interaction with other people is all to often to steal from them."

You're both wrong. Matt is wrong because of the afore-mentioned addict != thief. And the whole social isolation thing is wrong because users surround themselves with peers, at worse. More realistically, MDMA users are out on a Saturday night, having a whale of a time speaking to total strangers (what with it being a pro-empathic drug and all that) and probably more than averagely socially active and outgoing.

I appreciate that you learned most of what you did by watching 80s adverts about heroin, but today's users are not sad junkies sat in grotty squats. Instead they are very much your typical extroverted young-to-middle-age man/woman on the street, with a job and social life.

"which does not in any way reduce the harm drugs do....Two wrongs do not make a right, so bleating on about tobacco and alcohol in an attempt to justify legalising drugs is just denial."

It's not a justification: It's raising the point that our society believes that it is perfectly acceptable to take harmful, mind-altering drugs that are institutionalised (such as caffeine, booze, prescription anti-depressants), but not less harmful ones which are newcomers. Ultimately, the only thing that is really ours in life is our mind and body, and a sizeable number of us believe that other people should generally be allowed to do what they like with them, without the likes of you telling them that they can't because it somehow it offends you.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Blowhard Boring Green RegMidnight 40 years in prison @Plump & Bleaty

"our democratically elected politicians maintain the laws on illegal drugs because they are supported by the majority of the electorate"

And ultimately that's why they are illegal. Not because of the harm caused, health or anything else, but simply because a bunch of old voters would have a paddy and threaten to reverse their life-long dedication to a single party should things change.

The sooner they die, the better, really.

"so it is you and your drug-addled chums that are in the minority."

Dick.

Sorry: If you're going to reply to comments with insults and blind assertions, I thought I'd return the favour. Not everyone who supports legalising drugs is either taking them right now or taking them at all. I know it's hard for you to understand, but some people hold political views not entirely based around their own whims, but based on the rights that they wish everyone to have. It's like you with guns. You might not be a homicidal redneck yourself, but you broadly agree with their desire to legally own firearms.

"Oh, and 72% of the organised crime in Holland is still drug-related."

Well yeah, duh: That's because the drugs aren't legal at the 'business end'. A tolerant policy towards users is not going to decrease organised crime involvement.

" then gave in to liberal pressure and started treatment including not just methadone but professionally administered heroin."

There's a difference? More people died in Scotland last year with methadone in them than heroin. Our current treatment policy kills more people than the drug itself.

Meanwhile, more people died playing football than with MDMA in their system.

Crippling addicts will always find something to be addicted to. Blame their psychology rather than the specific vice. Drug users aren't all addicts, though. The vast majority aren't. The vast majority are reasonable people who would generally prefer not to have to give money to criminals to obtain their vice.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Blowhard Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison....

"What did you expect - everyone KNOWS it's illegal, the penalties are not exactly hidden from public view, so if you went to prison then it's your own stupid fault. Same goes for that cretin SuperTrips."

Users don't go to jail,.Matt. You're just showing your utter ignorance of the subject. As you do with every post and every cut-and-paste citation that you read on the internet somewhere.

How about you just educate yourself?

I don't mean look on Google like you normally do.

I mean actually go and talk to some people who use narcotics, from one extreme to another. Yes, some of it would prop up your preconceptions, but most of it would open your eyes a bit and make you a more rounded individual who could speak from experience, rather than a self-righteous dolt with a search engine.

Maybe smoke yourself a jay and go to a rave or two. And perhaps chill out that utterly dire attitude that you have towards other human beings.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: 40 years in prison

"Sure, but you lose the right to complain when your bus driver ploughs the bus into the back of a big rig at full speed because he was too busy watching unicorns fart rainbows."

No you don't.

There's a big difference between letting people do what they want with their bodies in their own time and letting people drive under the influence, or even be in the workplace while under the influence.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Blowhard Boring Green Blowhard RegMidnight 40 years in prison...

"Reefer Madness? Talk To Frank? "This Is Your Brain On Drugs"? Yeah, "education". Followed by getting the utter shit kicked out of you."

To be fair, Talk to Frank was pretty good when it started. Informative and honest. I looked again 6 months ago and it appears to have become 'drugs are just bad, ok'.

"You mentioned the same system that puts marijuana in the same class as amphetamines."

Isn't K now Class B or something stupid? Totally idiot system. I don't think anyone who has a clue would cite it as any kind of truism on the dangers.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: RegMidnight 40 years in prison

"> The pharmaceutical amphetamines are obviously safe

This is so stupid I can't believe it.

In fact your post is so dumb I can only feel it's a bit of an agent provocateur invite for the anti-drug brigade."

Why is it stupid? Amphetamine [incidentally, the plural of amphetamine is amphetamine] is dished out like candy in certain professions and to people with certain issues. Don't judge drugs based on pre-conceptions which cause an instant 'drugs are bad' response.

Most 'drugs' have been used in clinical trials and the effects are fairly well know and accepted. A huge number of them are used for treating various ailments. Hell, even K is being trialled against depression on a wider scale after some initial success.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.