zlacker

>>uptown+(OP)
It's interesting. On one hand, if a leader of a traditional drug distribution network landed a life in prison sentence, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. With Silkroad though, I'm actually convinced by the defendants argument: that it provided safer, more trustworthy drugs to users.

I've had friends who've died from purchasing bad drugs at raves from people who were looking to make money and run. In one situation it ended up being rat poison. The guy had other drugs in his system, and combined with the poison his body went into shock. With darknet markets and independent lab testing networks, this type of thing doesn't happen.

People are still going to use drugs. I'd rather law enforcement go after the guys who are selling rat poison at raves than the guys who are setting up safe distribution networks.

>>jjcm+T1
Maybe I've watched Scarface one too many times, but I think the reason leaders of traditional drug distribution networks get life sentences is because they frequently resort to brutally violent means of running and defending their drug operations. Because they hold the supply of drugs rather than simply being a two-sided marketplace like the Silk Road, they have to physically defend that supply and the locations which house it (from rival organizations, the Police, etc). In a way, not only were the drugs being sold on the Silk Road safer, but the process of selling drugs was probably safer.

EDIT: This argument would probably hold up a lot better if Ulbricht hadn't tried to have people killed. sigh