5 ms·

I'm just shocked it was a full pardon instead of a commutation or something. I don't think the US is gaining a ton from keeping him locked up but he still did r

I'm just shocked it was a full pardon instead of a commutation or something. I don't think the US is gaining a ton from keeping him locked up but he still did run an organization he knew was used for selling drugs and other illegal things and a full pardon for that seems weird. I feel like I mainly heard people talking about commuting his sentence

timewizard 2y ago
Is there some reason he should not be allowed to vote, own a firearm, or receive federal benefits?
- nateglims 2y ago
  He was convicted and the party of law and order typically views these punitive post release measures to be part of the punishment.
- sophacles 2y ago
  Yes. He was convicted of several crimes.
- lokar 2y ago
  Why should he be treated differently then people who committed similar crimes?
- arp242 2y ago
  No one said anything about voting or benefits? That's an entire different discussion. It's just that, in layman's terms, a pardon means "you did nothing wrong", whereas a commutation means "you did something wrong but were sentenced too harshly". As far as I know that's also what it more or less means legally (with some nuance). I'm absolutely not a fan of "tough on crime" sentencing, but he absolutely did do something wrong, even if we ignore the contended "murder for hire" claims he should have been sent to prison for a number of years (personally, I'd say about 5-10 years). This is also by Ulbricht's own admission by the way.
liquidify 2y ago
He built a website. He didn't dictate how people used it. That was the point. He was charged as a drug kingpin with mobster era consequences. His sentence didn't fit whatever crimes he did or didn't commit.
- ecocentrik 2y ago
  Trump killed Net Neutrality during his first term and you think he would use it to justify the actions of someone running an internet black market that trafficked in drugs, prostitution and murder?
  - ttyprintk 2y ago
    The difference between Obama’s ideal Section 230 and Trump’s is a good point. Even though the President doesn’t enact legislation, Trump issued a formal paper calling for changes to Section 230. Looks to me like DPR was more innocent under Obama.
- les_diabolique 2y ago
  If someone facilitated a transaction of goods that were illegal between two people and received a cut of the sale, do you think they deserve some culpability?
BurningFrog 2y ago
I agree that a commutation would have made much more sense. But "always make sense" doesn't seem to be in Trumps OKRs... That's mostly a symbolic difference though. The practical end result is the same

timewizard 2y ago

Is there some reason he should not be allowed to vote, own a firearm, or receive federal benefits?

nateglims 2y ago
He was convicted and the party of law and order typically views these punitive post release measures to be part of the punishment.
sophacles 2y ago
Yes. He was convicted of several crimes.
lokar 2y ago
Why should he be treated differently then people who committed similar crimes?
arp242 2y ago
No one said anything about voting or benefits? That's an entire different discussion. It's just that, in layman's terms, a pardon means "you did nothing wrong", whereas a commutation means "you did something wrong but were sentenced too harshly". As far as I know that's also what it more or less means legally (with some nuance). I'm absolutely not a fan of "tough on crime" sentencing, but he absolutely did do something wrong, even if we ignore the contended "murder for hire" claims he should have been sent to prison for a number of years (personally, I'd say about 5-10 years). This is also by Ulbricht's own admission by the way.

liquidify 2y ago

He built a website. He didn't dictate how people used it. That was the point. He was charged as a drug kingpin with mobster era consequences. His sentence didn't fit whatever crimes he did or didn't commit.

ecocentrik 2y ago
Trump killed Net Neutrality during his first term and you think he would use it to justify the actions of someone running an internet black market that trafficked in drugs, prostitution and murder?
- ttyprintk 2y ago
  The difference between Obama’s ideal Section 230 and Trump’s is a good point. Even though the President doesn’t enact legislation, Trump issued a formal paper calling for changes to Section 230. Looks to me like DPR was more innocent under Obama.
les_diabolique 2y ago
If someone facilitated a transaction of goods that were illegal between two people and received a cut of the sale, do you think they deserve some culpability?

BurningFrog 2y ago

I agree that a commutation would have made much more sense. But "always make sense" doesn't seem to be in Trumps OKRs... That's mostly a symbolic difference though. The practical end result is the same