4 ms·

> Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff? Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their pro

> Can we find a way to help law enforcement police at the very least the really, really bad stuff? Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves. Law enforcement is fundamentally incapable of protecting people from themselves. That is why the "war on drugs" has been so ineffective. The most effective method to stop the drug (opioid, etc.) epidemic is treatment and education, not law enforcement.

mulmen 9y ago
I have never considered the failure of the war on drugs from this perspective, thanks for sharing that.
pelasaco 9y ago
The best way to fight the drug cartel and crime related with drugs is with law enforcement. The vast majority of victims aren't drug users.
chroma 9y ago
> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves. Two points: 1. I can think of many counterexamples to this: Self-harm, suicide attempts, people doing dumb stuff like playing with fireworks. We as a society have decided that if you're a danger to yourself, it's OK to have other people stop you and lock you up until you're not. Of course, people disagree on what counts as self-endangerment. 2. Self-endangerment is not the reason most anti-drug people favor strict punishments. They're concerned about the effect drug use has on society. eg: Worrying that addicts will commit crimes to get their next fix. I lean very libertarian, so my view is that these substances should be legal and taxed commensurate to the harm they cause. That said, I feel compelled to find flaws in arguments no matter what side they're on.
matthewbauer 9y ago
Although I mention it in the comment, drugs aren't my primary concern. What about for example: child porn, forced prostitution, contract killings, etc. These things all existed before crypto-markets, it just seems like crypto-markets make life so much easier for these types of things (if they are as effective as advertised). Sure, we can police the "meat space" part of these transactions, but at what cost?
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  The existence of a marketplace does not constitute the existence of criminal activity, or vice versa. Rather than focus on the monetary transaction, I believe we should focus on the crime itself. Pushing the monetary transactions for criminal behavior toward the public consciousness is, IMHO, beneficial to law enforcement, even if there is no clear or reasonable way to prevent or even track the monetary transactions themselves. So long as people are educated about criminal behavior, we can have a culture where law enforcement is actually effective; after all, real crime happens away from keyboard.
seanp2k2 9y ago
I think that the really really bad stuff here is e.g. Human trafficking, chemical weapons, assassination services, etc...not even any drugs, and as you've pointed out, people harming other people. How do you police that here, or don't you?
- eiehidjr 9y ago
  Funny how the biggest provider and consummer of those three things are governments, but you probably have no issue with watching billions of dollars be taxed and forced into bombs.
- fckomodnsj 9y ago
  Funny how the biggest producers and consumers of those three things are governments. What's scary is being forcibly taxed so billions of dollars are pumped into human misery.
- howdyddoo 9y ago
  Funny how the biggest consumers and producers of those three are governments.
- tgrosgo 9y ago
  Funny how the largest producer and consumer of those three things are governments.
- Trundle 9y ago
  All of those require physical actions apart from just a digital transaction. At some point a human is trafficked somewhere from somewhere else, they can follow that. Chemical weapons are sent somewhere from somewhere, they can follow those. An assassin shows up somewhere, they can grab them there. All of which can be orchestrated by the police themselves. In an anonymous transaction the other party could very well be the FBI.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Too 9y ago
> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves. Not true in countries where a very large portion of the taxes I pay go to free health care and unemployment grants.
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  That has nothing to do with law enforcement, let alone what it was designed for.
  - Too 9y ago
    Sweden has very restrictive laws around alcohol, eg taxation, where, how and when it can be sold. The purpose of this is to prevent people from falling into addiction (hurting themselves), as that would eventually lead to them getting unemployable, more prone to sickness and in general be a pita for people around them and an increased cost for the whole society. Whether that works or not is another topic but that is what those laws are designed for. Many countries, UK and Denmark for example, also have penalty tax on sugar and fat to prevent prevent from getting fat (protecting people from themselves) as it increases health care cost.

mulmen 9y ago

I have never considered the failure of the war on drugs from this perspective, thanks for sharing that.

pelasaco 9y ago

The best way to fight the drug cartel and crime related with drugs is with law enforcement. The vast majority of victims aren't drug users.

chroma 9y ago

> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves. Two points: 1. I can think of many counterexamples to this: Self-harm, suicide attempts, people doing dumb stuff like playing with fireworks. We as a society have decided that if you're a danger to yourself, it's OK to have other people stop you and lock you up until you're not. Of course, people disagree on what counts as self-endangerment. 2. Self-endangerment is not the reason most anti-drug people favor strict punishments. They're concerned about the effect drug use has on society. eg: Worrying that addicts will commit crimes to get their next fix. I lean very libertarian, so my view is that these substances should be legal and taxed commensurate to the harm they cause. That said, I feel compelled to find flaws in arguments no matter what side they're on.

matthewbauer 9y ago

Although I mention it in the comment, drugs aren't my primary concern. What about for example: child porn, forced prostitution, contract killings, etc. These things all existed before crypto-markets, it just seems like crypto-markets make life so much easier for these types of things (if they are as effective as advertised). Sure, we can police the "meat space" part of these transactions, but at what cost?

thomastjeffery 9y ago
The existence of a marketplace does not constitute the existence of criminal activity, or vice versa. Rather than focus on the monetary transaction, I believe we should focus on the crime itself. Pushing the monetary transactions for criminal behavior toward the public consciousness is, IMHO, beneficial to law enforcement, even if there is no clear or reasonable way to prevent or even track the monetary transactions themselves. So long as people are educated about criminal behavior, we can have a culture where law enforcement is actually effective; after all, real crime happens away from keyboard.

seanp2k2 9y ago

I think that the really really bad stuff here is e.g. Human trafficking, chemical weapons, assassination services, etc...not even any drugs, and as you've pointed out, people harming other people. How do you police that here, or don't you?

eiehidjr 9y ago
Funny how the biggest provider and consummer of those three things are governments, but you probably have no issue with watching billions of dollars be taxed and forced into bombs.
fckomodnsj 9y ago
Funny how the biggest producers and consumers of those three things are governments. What's scary is being forcibly taxed so billions of dollars are pumped into human misery.
howdyddoo 9y ago
Funny how the biggest consumers and producers of those three are governments.
tgrosgo 9y ago
Funny how the largest producer and consumer of those three things are governments.
Trundle 9y ago
All of those require physical actions apart from just a digital transaction. At some point a human is trafficked somewhere from somewhere else, they can follow that. Chemical weapons are sent somewhere from somewhere, they can follow those. An assassin shows up somewhere, they can grab them there. All of which can be orchestrated by the police themselves. In an anonymous transaction the other party could very well be the FBI.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Too 9y ago

> Law enforcement was designed to protect people (or their property) from the actions of other people, not themselves. Not true in countries where a very large portion of the taxes I pay go to free health care and unemployment grants.

thomastjeffery 9y ago
That has nothing to do with law enforcement, let alone what it was designed for.
- Too 9y ago
  Sweden has very restrictive laws around alcohol, eg taxation, where, how and when it can be sold. The purpose of this is to prevent people from falling into addiction (hurting themselves), as that would eventually lead to them getting unemployable, more prone to sickness and in general be a pita for people around them and an increased cost for the whole society. Whether that works or not is another topic but that is what those laws are designed for. Many countries, UK and Denmark for example, also have penalty tax on sugar and fat to prevent prevent from getting fat (protecting people from themselves) as it increases health care cost.