17 ms·

What a colossal waste of time. Prosecuting someone for selling online something that is illegal in a lot of states. Mindblowing how stupid the war on drugs is.

lysium 6y ago
You mean ’legal‘ in a lot of states, don’t you?
- amelius 6y ago
  At least they implied legal in some states.
heavenlyblue 6y ago
They have seized 30M in cash which means they will be able to fund their department with that cash. If taxpayers don’t fund the police, the police funds itself.
- syspec 6y ago
  I'm super sure, that is exactly how play out......
  - heavenlyblue 6y ago
    But that money doesn’t get burnt and/or destroyed - it all goes into the budget. Same thing with confiscated cars in relation to drug deals which was quite recently in HN
mixologic 6y ago
Yeah, weed really shouldnt be a priority, and should be legalized nationwide, but... ```Canna_Bars, on Hansa, advertised pounds of methamphetamine. In the description of the product, Porras had claimed the methamphetamine came “direct from Mexico.”``` So, defintely not legal anywhere, nor is mass distribution of meth really something that is of benefit to anybody but the cartels he bought it from.
- bunfunton 6y ago
  It’s a benefit for me. Meth is the only thing that treats my adhd without horrible side effects. 10mg / day orally. I can’t afford the outragous out of pocket price for desoxyn per month. Moreover, after initially being prescribed it and having great results, after moving I can’t find any psychiatrist willing to prescribe it because they are all terrified of the DEA. Thus I and many other stigmatized people directly benefit from cheap pure meth on the street. Thanks for reading about this casualty of the drug war.
  - mixologic 6y ago
    I was not aware that there were legitimate prescriptions for it. But it sounds to me like you're a casualty of the pharma industry more so than the drug war. The ratio of people that street meth helps to people that it harms is, by my SWAG, a very, very small number.
sneak 6y ago
There's no victim. Literally nobody was harmed here. "Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself; and where they are, they should be changed." - Jimmy Carter, 39th President of the United States
- jmnicolas 6y ago
  > There's no victim. Literally nobody was harmed here. The IRS doesn't agree.
  - sneak 6y ago
    While the US spends the incredible quantities of tax money it does[1] waging neverending imperialistic war, there is a strong argument to be made that not giving the IRS money is the "least harm" option among the set of ("pay the IRS", "don't pay the IRS"). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditure_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_... (Spoiler alert: the US spends more on its military, per capita, than any country in the world except Israel, and more than 2x as much as the next free, industrialized, developed country (Norway), and many multiples more than all other developed free countries.)
    - jmnicolas 6y ago
      The point I was trying to make is that you may see no harm as an individual, but the state has another viewpoint.
    - amanaplanacanal 6y ago
      Money taken by the IRS and money spent by Congress have almost no relationship. “Starve the beast” doesn’t work. It has had the effect of adding trillions to the debt we are passing on to our children and grandchildren though. Good job boomers! And I say that as a boomer myself.
  - jokethrowaway 6y ago
    The more money the IRS get the more money they waste or use to increase inequality. The US is already spending 13bln per day
johnwheeler 6y ago
He also had a prior felony, sold meth, sold Xanax, and had an Uzi. Not someone you’d want to date your daughter.
- plutonorm 6y ago
  What people put into their bodies is their own business.
  - johnwheeler 6y ago
    So you say. I’m not obliged to agree with what you think should be legal or illegal.
    - henearkr 6y ago
      This has nothing to do with an abstract notion of morality. In our society, we look out for each other, if somebody is in distress, e.g. hurt on the side of the road, we help him, call an ambulance, he gets medical help. The fact that society makes huge efforts to save and cure people requiring medical attention, is at the root of the taboo on substances (or behaviors) that are unhealthy. Otherwise that would be a pure waste of resources for the society. At least that was the theory. In practice, you are free to drink booze until you pass out...
      - johnwheeler 6y ago
        Yes, this is correct. I also don’t want my children to take drugs, and when you make things widely available, people use them more. You don’t have to look further than the opioid crisis to see that.
        bunfunton 6y ago
        So perhaps you should teach them not to use drugs instead of trying to control what other people are allowed to put into their own bodies.
blunte 6y ago
There is considerable information back from the 80s to suggest that the US war on drugs was actually a system to enable racial discrimination. Then some years later, the ear on drugs became associated with the growth of the private prison industry and it's lobbyists. Indeed I provide no references here because it is quite an involved topic and difficult to prove given the publicly available information.
- pmachinery 6y ago
  The motivation for fictitious wars against bogeymen is to empower and bankroll law enforcement while diminishing the civil rights of citizens. Like the war on terror, the decades long war on drugs has been a roaring success.
  - wwright 6y ago
    The war on terror and war on drugs are closely related enough (through expansion of powers and economic policies such as allowing police to purchase old military equipment) that I wonder if it’s worth even treating them as separate things.
    - Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
      The war on drugs has a lot more raids in the own territory while the war on terror has more bombings in foreign territory, so for now there are some major differences. However once using predator and reaper drones against citizens without any judicial oversight is normalized, that difference will be gone.
      - pc86 6y ago
        There are quite a few domestic impacts of the war on terror: domestic spying and the USA PATRIOT Act are two huge examples. In the context of "bankroll law enforcement while diminishing the civil rights of citizens" it's nearly identical to the war on drugs domestically.
aristophenes 6y ago
I can partially understand that point of view for marijuana (though I think it’s important for a functional society to obey laws, and get them changed if they aren’t working instead of just breaking them based on personal preference). But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Our government provides costly services for people who are incapable of taking care of themselves, and that drug creates a bigger burden on those programs. Unless you also advocate for the removal of social safety nets I don’t see how you can justify thinking that the government shouldn’t try to limit drug use.
- greenduck 6y ago
  Sure, but purely from the side of pragmatism, throwing people in jail isn't effective either. Treating them compassionately and giving them help for their problem works much better.
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    Also imagine saying the US has social safety nets.
    - aristophenes 6y ago
      The US has social safety nets.
- darkmoney007 6y ago
  "Unless you also advocate for the removal of social safety nets" Trump is actively defunding Social Security and other programs.
- non-entity 6y ago
  > But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Time to arrest the liquor store owners?
  - jh86 6y ago
draugadrotten 6y ago
You are glossing over the illegal firearms. Would it really be better to wait for the murder.
- antihero 6y ago
  The firearms were legal and licensed, however due to the drugs, they became illegal.
ykevinator 6y ago
I totally agree. Consenting buyer and seller, this is a leftover from the Mayflower (no dancing kind of thing). At some point the world should just stop wasting money on preventing things that humans want. Prostitution, pot, etc., will never be stopped because people want to buy and sell it.
yboris 6y ago
My favorite book on the topic is "Legalize This!" by Douglas Husak arguing that we should decriminalize all drugs. Surprisingly, the prohibition of alcohol in 1920's did not punish alcohol drinkers, just distributors. This model for drugs today would be a major improvement over the draconian treatment we have of the non-violent drug offenders. https://www.amazon.com/Legalize-This-Decriminalizing-Practical-Ethics/dp/1859843204 https://www.amazon.com/Legalize-This-Decriminalizing-Practic...
hendersoon 6y ago
Per the article, this guy also sold methamphetamine in large quantities on another site, so it isn't just about marijuana.
AviationAtom 6y ago
Think you meant to say legal

lysium 6y ago

You mean ’legal‘ in a lot of states, don’t you?

amelius 6y ago
At least they implied legal in some states.

heavenlyblue 6y ago

They have seized 30M in cash which means they will be able to fund their department with that cash. If taxpayers don’t fund the police, the police funds itself.

syspec 6y ago
I'm super sure, that is exactly how play out......
- heavenlyblue 6y ago
  But that money doesn’t get burnt and/or destroyed - it all goes into the budget. Same thing with confiscated cars in relation to drug deals which was quite recently in HN

mixologic 6y ago

Yeah, weed really shouldnt be a priority, and should be legalized nationwide, but... ```Canna_Bars, on Hansa, advertised pounds of methamphetamine. In the description of the product, Porras had claimed the methamphetamine came “direct from Mexico.”``` So, defintely not legal anywhere, nor is mass distribution of meth really something that is of benefit to anybody but the cartels he bought it from.

bunfunton 6y ago
It’s a benefit for me. Meth is the only thing that treats my adhd without horrible side effects. 10mg / day orally. I can’t afford the outragous out of pocket price for desoxyn per month. Moreover, after initially being prescribed it and having great results, after moving I can’t find any psychiatrist willing to prescribe it because they are all terrified of the DEA. Thus I and many other stigmatized people directly benefit from cheap pure meth on the street. Thanks for reading about this casualty of the drug war.
- mixologic 6y ago
  I was not aware that there were legitimate prescriptions for it. But it sounds to me like you're a casualty of the pharma industry more so than the drug war. The ratio of people that street meth helps to people that it harms is, by my SWAG, a very, very small number.

sneak 6y ago

There's no victim. Literally nobody was harmed here. "Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself; and where they are, they should be changed." - Jimmy Carter, 39th President of the United States

jmnicolas 6y ago
> There's no victim. Literally nobody was harmed here. The IRS doesn't agree.
- sneak 6y ago
  While the US spends the incredible quantities of tax money it does[1] waging neverending imperialistic war, there is a strong argument to be made that not giving the IRS money is the "least harm" option among the set of ("pay the IRS", "don't pay the IRS"). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditure_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_... (Spoiler alert: the US spends more on its military, per capita, than any country in the world except Israel, and more than 2x as much as the next free, industrialized, developed country (Norway), and many multiples more than all other developed free countries.)
  - jmnicolas 6y ago
    The point I was trying to make is that you may see no harm as an individual, but the state has another viewpoint.
  - amanaplanacanal 6y ago
    Money taken by the IRS and money spent by Congress have almost no relationship. “Starve the beast” doesn’t work. It has had the effect of adding trillions to the debt we are passing on to our children and grandchildren though. Good job boomers! And I say that as a boomer myself.
- jokethrowaway 6y ago
  The more money the IRS get the more money they waste or use to increase inequality. The US is already spending 13bln per day

johnwheeler 6y ago

He also had a prior felony, sold meth, sold Xanax, and had an Uzi. Not someone you’d want to date your daughter.

plutonorm 6y ago
What people put into their bodies is their own business.
- johnwheeler 6y ago
  So you say. I’m not obliged to agree with what you think should be legal or illegal.
  - henearkr 6y ago
    This has nothing to do with an abstract notion of morality. In our society, we look out for each other, if somebody is in distress, e.g. hurt on the side of the road, we help him, call an ambulance, he gets medical help. The fact that society makes huge efforts to save and cure people requiring medical attention, is at the root of the taboo on substances (or behaviors) that are unhealthy. Otherwise that would be a pure waste of resources for the society. At least that was the theory. In practice, you are free to drink booze until you pass out...
    - johnwheeler 6y ago
      Yes, this is correct. I also don’t want my children to take drugs, and when you make things widely available, people use them more. You don’t have to look further than the opioid crisis to see that.
      - bunfunton 6y ago
        So perhaps you should teach them not to use drugs instead of trying to control what other people are allowed to put into their own bodies.

blunte 6y ago

There is considerable information back from the 80s to suggest that the US war on drugs was actually a system to enable racial discrimination. Then some years later, the ear on drugs became associated with the growth of the private prison industry and it's lobbyists. Indeed I provide no references here because it is quite an involved topic and difficult to prove given the publicly available information.

pmachinery 6y ago
The motivation for fictitious wars against bogeymen is to empower and bankroll law enforcement while diminishing the civil rights of citizens. Like the war on terror, the decades long war on drugs has been a roaring success.
- wwright 6y ago
  The war on terror and war on drugs are closely related enough (through expansion of powers and economic policies such as allowing police to purchase old military equipment) that I wonder if it’s worth even treating them as separate things.
  - Jon_Lowtek 6y ago
    The war on drugs has a lot more raids in the own territory while the war on terror has more bombings in foreign territory, so for now there are some major differences. However once using predator and reaper drones against citizens without any judicial oversight is normalized, that difference will be gone.
    - pc86 6y ago
      There are quite a few domestic impacts of the war on terror: domestic spying and the USA PATRIOT Act are two huge examples. In the context of "bankroll law enforcement while diminishing the civil rights of citizens" it's nearly identical to the war on drugs domestically.

aristophenes 6y ago

I can partially understand that point of view for marijuana (though I think it’s important for a functional society to obey laws, and get them changed if they aren’t working instead of just breaking them based on personal preference). But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Our government provides costly services for people who are incapable of taking care of themselves, and that drug creates a bigger burden on those programs. Unless you also advocate for the removal of social safety nets I don’t see how you can justify thinking that the government shouldn’t try to limit drug use.

greenduck 6y ago
Sure, but purely from the side of pragmatism, throwing people in jail isn't effective either. Treating them compassionately and giving them help for their problem works much better.
- aaomidi 6y ago
  Also imagine saying the US has social safety nets.
  - aristophenes 6y ago
    The US has social safety nets.
darkmoney007 6y ago
"Unless you also advocate for the removal of social safety nets" Trump is actively defunding Social Security and other programs.
non-entity 6y ago
> But the guy had been selling methamphetamine too, which is life destroying poison. Time to arrest the liquor store owners?
- jh86 6y ago

draugadrotten 6y ago

You are glossing over the illegal firearms. Would it really be better to wait for the murder.

antihero 6y ago
The firearms were legal and licensed, however due to the drugs, they became illegal.

ykevinator 6y ago

I totally agree. Consenting buyer and seller, this is a leftover from the Mayflower (no dancing kind of thing). At some point the world should just stop wasting money on preventing things that humans want. Prostitution, pot, etc., will never be stopped because people want to buy and sell it.

yboris 6y ago

My favorite book on the topic is "Legalize This!" by Douglas Husak arguing that we should decriminalize all drugs. Surprisingly, the prohibition of alcohol in 1920's did not punish alcohol drinkers, just distributors. This model for drugs today would be a major improvement over the draconian treatment we have of the non-violent drug offenders. https://www.amazon.com/Legalize-This-Decriminalizing-Practical-Ethics/dp/1859843204 https://www.amazon.com/Legalize-This-Decriminalizing-Practic...

hendersoon 6y ago

Per the article, this guy also sold methamphetamine in large quantities on another site, so it isn't just about marijuana.

AviationAtom 6y ago

Think you meant to say legal