zlacker

[return to "Ross Ulbricht Sentenced to Life in Prison"]
1. smhend+v1[view] [source] 2015-05-29 20:26:52
>>uptown+(OP)
That seems way too harsh to me. I have strong opinions on the US War on Drugs and it's failure to meaningful deal with drug use/abuse in the USA. And I feel even worse about how it's spilling out into the rest of the world as we go "global" with everything.

I can't say I know every detail of the case but I don't recall anyone getting killed or even hurt by Mr. Ulbricht so in my mind the punishment does not fit the crime. IMHO the death penalty should be off the table completely (go Nebraska!) and life in prison reserved for only violent offenders. You can argue that he enabled people to harm themselves but I think that's stretching it. If people want to take drugs, even take too much drugs their going to get it somewhere. If drugs were legal and treatment of abuse the focus instead of punishment Silk Road wouldn't have existed in the first place.

◧◩
2. drcode+o2[view] [source] 2015-05-29 20:31:59
>>smhend+v1
You have to understand that the "murder for hire" evidence was introduced as part of the trial (at which point Ross' lawyer could have disputed it, but didn't) so it could be used as part of the sentencing decision... and that kind of takes the luster off of the "non-violent crime" argument.
◧◩◪
3. Cantre+b3[view] [source] 2015-05-29 20:36:14
>>drcode+o2
Plus, it happened multiple times. Even if no one was actually killed the guy still tried to have multiple people killed.
◧◩◪◨
4. dewell+e7[view] [source] 2015-05-29 21:05:34
>>Cantre+b3
allegedly tried to have multiple people killed.

The prosecution brought this up at trial but he was not charged or convicted of this in the criminal trial.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. zanny+S7[view] [source] 2015-05-29 21:11:14
>>dewell+e7
This is the key point. He is going to spend the rest of his life in prison, pretty much, for running a website. Not for hurting anyone, not for even threatening to kill anyone - those charges weren't a part of his conviction - but simply by enabling the exchange of drugs he apparently should be locked away forever.

Go Team 'Murica....

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. tzs+jd[view] [source] 2015-05-29 22:11:52
>>zanny+S7
Are you implying drugs don't hurt anyone?

Even the most ardent proponent of full legalization usually acknowledges that many drugs are very harmful--they just believe the people should be free to do things even if they are harmful to themselves.

I generally support decriminalization or even legalization, but I would be reluctant to allow internet sales. I'd require sales to be through licensed dealers and in person, so that an addict cannot completely cut themselves off from human contact. Internet sales make drugs too easy.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. homuli+Yg[view] [source] 2015-05-29 22:58:35
>>tzs+jd
Cars and guns also hurt people but pretty much anyone can sell those.

I agree that drug sales should be regulated but that doesn't in any way make sentencing someone to life in prison for running a website any less fucked up.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. tzs+Xk[view] [source] 2015-05-30 00:08:41
>>homuli+Yg
> Cars and guns also hurt people but pretty much anyone can sell those

When car or gun buying addiction becomes more then a negligible problem, you'll have a terrific point.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. jonono+po[view] [source] 2015-05-30 01:30:24
>>tzs+Xk
90+% of American households own cars. Approximately 30'000 die in car crashes every year. I'd say the US is addicted to cars.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. roel_v+xB[view] [source] 2015-05-30 06:46:01
>>jonono+po
Under a nonsense 'definition' that nobody uses. Sure I can make any point if I get to redefine words any way I want.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
11. pbhjpb+AG[view] [source] 2015-05-30 09:58:18
>>roel_v+xB
FWIW "addicted to cars" has results with headline in major news outlets - it's a common trope.

In human geography terms it simply means that giving up cars is a supremely difficult thing for society to do - particularly in some Western areas that are designed around the idea that all people have cars available [cheaply].

This has enough similarity to addiction that people use "addicted" commonly like this - "I'm addicted to coffee" or "I'm addicted to chocolate" usually just means you'd find it hard to give it up. [I don't know if clinically those statements are true for some though.]

As it happens I've given up alcohol, chocolate, coffee, videogames, and cars at various points and the car was definitely the hardest requiring the most change in my lifestyle.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
12. wglb+Ix1[view] [source] 2015-05-31 03:23:06
>>pbhjpb+AG
Would you say that you are addicted to shoes? I would find it harder to give up shoes as compared to cars.

Disagree with your definition of addicted

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲
13. pbhjpb+8d2[view] [source] 2015-05-31 20:51:52
>>wglb+Ix1
I've gone barefoot a few times - it's a bit sore on gravelly ground but other than that not terrible. Supermarket chiller sections feel very cold.

>Disagree with your definition of addicted //

I made pains to show that "addicted" was being used metaphorically. I was describing common use not presenting an alternate definition. That said the roots of the word are in having an inclination towards something and it is still defined in some dictionaries as alternately relating towards habits rather than solely pertaining to psychological or physiological dependency.

[go to top]