4 ms·

I personally want drug-dealing gun-wielding ex-felons to be put in prison. Plus he only got 5 years, which isn't a long sentence in the US.

bunfunton 6y ago
I personally don’t want somebody supplying goods to customers who want them, coming together in a consensual transaction jailed. Where one person then decides to alter their own brain chemistry with their own consent. 5 years not long? Ok.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  By that logic, would you be okay with people supplying random people with tons of explosive? I mean, it's supplying goods to customers who want them.
  - tchaffee 6y ago
    > Where one person then decides to alter their own brain chemistry
    - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
      There are large social impacts to lots of individuals choosing to alter their brain chemistry, just as there would be large impacts from distributing explosives. Individuals don't live in a vacuum.
      - tchaffee 6y ago
        Well yes there are. We have seen that with both alcohol and sugar. And with alcohol we have seen how horribly wrong it goes when you try to treat a medical problem - addiction - by using the legal system. It doesn't work.
        TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
        Your comment implies that most people drink alcohol because of addiction, which isn't the case. Most people drink it for novelty or entertainment. Addiction isn't the only reason people take drugs, so only addressing or dissuading addiction wouldn't fix the social problems that arise from ubiquitous drug use.
        tchaffee 6y ago
        > Your comment implies that most people drink alcohol because of addiction, which isn't the case. No it doesn't. You might have wrongly inferred that though. > Most people drink it for novelty or entertainment. And? So what? What do you suggest be done differently in the case of alcohol? > only addressing or dissuading addiction wouldn't fix the social problems that arise from ubiquitous drug use. Take a look at how Switzerland took an out of control and growing youth heroin use problem and turned it into a medical issue that young people have zero interest in. Also what are are the exact "social problems" you are trying to fix that come from wide spread drug use? Please give concrete examples. Because based on history, I'm almost certain the problems you are trying to fix won't get fixed by making things against the law. The legal system is not the only tool in the toolbox.
        bunfunton 6y ago
        Most people also use drugs (safely) for novelty or entertainment. And what's wrong with that?
serpix 6y ago
In Finland manslaughter is maximum 6 years in prison. This guy sold plants.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  This guy also sold a neurotoxic addictive stimulant(methamphetamine), supported Mexican cartels by doing so, and had guns while being an ex-felon.
  - sumedh 6y ago
    > This guy also sold a neurotoxic addictive stimulant(methamphetamine) So should alcohol manufacturers and bartenders be thrown in jail as well?
    - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
      There is no widespread, easily producable alternative to alcohol. Prohibition is ended not because the drug isn't bad, but because it's truly trivial to make it, making enforcement impossible. Meth has several good alternatives just as easy to manufacture(for big companies with the right precursors) that aren't neurotoxic. Think adderall, methylphenidate, modafinil, etc. Those bring the stimulation without destroying your brain.
      - bunfunton 6y ago
        All of those have distinctly different effects and, in the case of ADHD, all work subpar with worse side effects. The reason why people get so fucked up on meth is BECAUSE it's so safe that you can smoke half a gram w/o a problem. Also, meth is the easiest to manufacture out of all of the above. Will give you that meth is the most addictive.
tchaffee 6y ago
Then you should waste your own personal money on it. It has made the problem worse. The illegal drug trade to the US is now almost as big as big oil. It's an industry in the hundreds of $ billions. This type of thinking has created millions of addicts in the USA along with helping make many very rich and powerful criminals globally.
- TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
  The two aren't mutually exclusive. I support drug legalization and regulation(for many drugs. Methamphetamine and strong opioids like carbofentanyl shouldn't be legal IMO). I also think that cartel activity and drug distribution by ex-felons should not be supported. Drug enforcement wouldn't go away if drugs were legalized and regulated.
  - tchaffee 6y ago
    > Methamphetamine and strong opioids like carbofentanyl shouldn't be legal IMO I'm not sure how your personal opinion adds anything to the conversation? Please at least explain your reasoning to move the conversation along. Addiction is a medical problem, not a legal problem. You are wasting my hard earned tax dollars by using the legal system to fix a medical problem. > I also think that cartel activity and drug distribution by ex-felons should not be supported. Well yes, making all recreational drugs legal and easy enough to get through your doctor (or other legal sources) would completely eliminate that. > Drug enforcement wouldn't go away if drugs were legalized and regulated. I don't think anyone made that claim? How many criminal cases are there these days around alcohol sales and purchase via dark net? How many people thrown in $$$ expensive jail for five years for selling alcohol to another adult? How many criminals are getting rich and powerful thanks to alcohol sales?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
sneak 6y ago
In this specific case, there was no violence, and no one victimized. If you want to spend $5+ million USD in tax money (which is approximately what would have happened in the event of his refusing the plea agreement) on investigating and charging and prosecuting and caging and feeding and medicating someone for their entire lifetime for engaging in activities that victimized no one, then I don't really know what to tell you other than that seems like an extreme emotional/nationalistic bias to me, because I know what $5mm USD can do when wielded instead to benefit people versus caging them like animals. > Plus he only got 5 years, which isn't a long sentence in the US. Five years is a long time in jail no matter what the country, but it's an exceptionally long time in the US given that people are commonly and routinely tortured[1] whilst imprisoned there. Being pro-incarceration in the US, given the present abusive system and widespread, well-documented prison conditions, is congruent and coterminous with being pro-torture, which is an unconscionable viewpoint to promote, in my view. I really, really hope that it's an opinion from ignorance of these systems, because I can't personally fathom a world where reasonable human beings want other human beings (who have not caused anyone to come to harm in this case, but really any human being) to be tortured. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement_in_the_Un... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement#Torture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement#Torture

bunfunton 6y ago

I personally don’t want somebody supplying goods to customers who want them, coming together in a consensual transaction jailed. Where one person then decides to alter their own brain chemistry with their own consent. 5 years not long? Ok.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
By that logic, would you be okay with people supplying random people with tons of explosive? I mean, it's supplying goods to customers who want them.
- tchaffee 6y ago
  > Where one person then decides to alter their own brain chemistry
  - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    There are large social impacts to lots of individuals choosing to alter their brain chemistry, just as there would be large impacts from distributing explosives. Individuals don't live in a vacuum.
    - tchaffee 6y ago
      Well yes there are. We have seen that with both alcohol and sugar. And with alcohol we have seen how horribly wrong it goes when you try to treat a medical problem - addiction - by using the legal system. It doesn't work.
      - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
        Your comment implies that most people drink alcohol because of addiction, which isn't the case. Most people drink it for novelty or entertainment. Addiction isn't the only reason people take drugs, so only addressing or dissuading addiction wouldn't fix the social problems that arise from ubiquitous drug use.
        tchaffee 6y ago
        > Your comment implies that most people drink alcohol because of addiction, which isn't the case. No it doesn't. You might have wrongly inferred that though. > Most people drink it for novelty or entertainment. And? So what? What do you suggest be done differently in the case of alcohol? > only addressing or dissuading addiction wouldn't fix the social problems that arise from ubiquitous drug use. Take a look at how Switzerland took an out of control and growing youth heroin use problem and turned it into a medical issue that young people have zero interest in. Also what are are the exact "social problems" you are trying to fix that come from wide spread drug use? Please give concrete examples. Because based on history, I'm almost certain the problems you are trying to fix won't get fixed by making things against the law. The legal system is not the only tool in the toolbox.
        bunfunton 6y ago
        Most people also use drugs (safely) for novelty or entertainment. And what's wrong with that?

serpix 6y ago

In Finland manslaughter is maximum 6 years in prison. This guy sold plants.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
This guy also sold a neurotoxic addictive stimulant(methamphetamine), supported Mexican cartels by doing so, and had guns while being an ex-felon.
- sumedh 6y ago
  > This guy also sold a neurotoxic addictive stimulant(methamphetamine) So should alcohol manufacturers and bartenders be thrown in jail as well?
  - TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
    There is no widespread, easily producable alternative to alcohol. Prohibition is ended not because the drug isn't bad, but because it's truly trivial to make it, making enforcement impossible. Meth has several good alternatives just as easy to manufacture(for big companies with the right precursors) that aren't neurotoxic. Think adderall, methylphenidate, modafinil, etc. Those bring the stimulation without destroying your brain.
    - bunfunton 6y ago
      All of those have distinctly different effects and, in the case of ADHD, all work subpar with worse side effects. The reason why people get so fucked up on meth is BECAUSE it's so safe that you can smoke half a gram w/o a problem. Also, meth is the easiest to manufacture out of all of the above. Will give you that meth is the most addictive.

tchaffee 6y ago

Then you should waste your own personal money on it. It has made the problem worse. The illegal drug trade to the US is now almost as big as big oil. It's an industry in the hundreds of $ billions. This type of thinking has created millions of addicts in the USA along with helping make many very rich and powerful criminals globally.

TheAdamAndChe 6y ago
The two aren't mutually exclusive. I support drug legalization and regulation(for many drugs. Methamphetamine and strong opioids like carbofentanyl shouldn't be legal IMO). I also think that cartel activity and drug distribution by ex-felons should not be supported. Drug enforcement wouldn't go away if drugs were legalized and regulated.
- tchaffee 6y ago
  > Methamphetamine and strong opioids like carbofentanyl shouldn't be legal IMO I'm not sure how your personal opinion adds anything to the conversation? Please at least explain your reasoning to move the conversation along. Addiction is a medical problem, not a legal problem. You are wasting my hard earned tax dollars by using the legal system to fix a medical problem. > I also think that cartel activity and drug distribution by ex-felons should not be supported. Well yes, making all recreational drugs legal and easy enough to get through your doctor (or other legal sources) would completely eliminate that. > Drug enforcement wouldn't go away if drugs were legalized and regulated. I don't think anyone made that claim? How many criminal cases are there these days around alcohol sales and purchase via dark net? How many people thrown in $$$ expensive jail for five years for selling alcohol to another adult? How many criminals are getting rich and powerful thanks to alcohol sales?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

sneak 6y ago

In this specific case, there was no violence, and no one victimized. If you want to spend $5+ million USD in tax money (which is approximately what would have happened in the event of his refusing the plea agreement) on investigating and charging and prosecuting and caging and feeding and medicating someone for their entire lifetime for engaging in activities that victimized no one, then I don't really know what to tell you other than that seems like an extreme emotional/nationalistic bias to me, because I know what $5mm USD can do when wielded instead to benefit people versus caging them like animals. > Plus he only got 5 years, which isn't a long sentence in the US. Five years is a long time in jail no matter what the country, but it's an exceptionally long time in the US given that people are commonly and routinely tortured[1] whilst imprisoned there. Being pro-incarceration in the US, given the present abusive system and widespread, well-documented prison conditions, is congruent and coterminous with being pro-torture, which is an unconscionable viewpoint to promote, in my view. I really, really hope that it's an opinion from ignorance of these systems, because I can't personally fathom a world where reasonable human beings want other human beings (who have not caused anyone to come to harm in this case, but really any human being) to be tortured. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement_in_the_Un... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement#Torture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitary_confinement#Torture