• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Explain why it is wrong to snitch.

as drug users, as people who break the law of our leaders, what we do is a delicate thing. I cant just go walking down the road smoking weed and expect that no one is going to care, or that no one will call the police. Yeah, MOST people dont give a fuck, but it only takes 1 person to call the police and im FUCKED.

We all live in secrecy. Its almost like a secret society.. well, its not almost, it IS. We are an underground society, what we do is not documented, it is not available for all to see. We have a secret, and its bound among many many people. It only takes 1 person, to fuck that up. Not for 1 or 2 people, but for all those people that those 1 or 2 people know, and so on. It has a ripple effect. It causes a small amount of chaos, and our secret society is hurt and damaged.

To keep this society working, we must not snitch. To keep the flow of drugs, the flow of fun and mind opening exploration going, we must not snitch.

Snitches just dont get it. You must treat this society like a family.. if you can get a lesser sentence by narking on your brother.. would you? I think not. So dont do it to your other brother, the one selling you your drugs.
 
Enlitx said:
Do you think a lot of the gruesome pictures from Mexico showing decapitated and tortured corpses belong to snitches from the cartels? Or are they mainly reserving this punishment for rival cartel members?
Click to expand...

And if drugs were legalised the cartels would disappear overnight.
 
I think it depends on the context just like anything else. I would never snitch on someone for possession or supply of drugs because I both take and own many different drugs at any time, and have sold drugs in the past too. I don't think there is anything wrong with this, and so this is why I would feel it would be wrong to snitch on someone for this, as getting someone into trouble for something that is not inherently wrong is bad.

On the other hand, if someone is a danger to the public and there is no way of stopping this other than causing them harm (which would be a bad idea) or going to the police, you should go to the police, regardless of this person's drug use or your friendship status. If however this person is a friend of yours then try and talk them out of whatever it is they are doing that is harming others before you go to the police, it should be a last resort, but it is most definitely not betrayal, others should not have to get hurt because of someone's stupid mistakes, and if they are not willing to correct them then they will have to face up to the punishments society has established for them. In some cases someone's drug use will be the only thing you can snitch them for, in which case you should just wait until you have something more solid, as their drug use/possession/sales may not be enough to get them punished in the first place, and secondly it will just add to the stupid statistics about criminals and drug use.

Then there's the moral snitch, for example, you catch your friend's boyfriend/girlfriend cheating, and you tell them. I think this is a good thing to do but of course you shouldn't just go around looking for these situations so you can tell people about them, if you do happen to run into an awkward situation like this though, there's no reason to keep your mouth shut, that'll just make things worse when someone does find out later.
 
I think this is another of those questions that gets lost in interpretation.
We all communicate with others using a language but we also use the same language to communicate with ourselves while constructing thoughts, that contributes to some major misunderstandings derived from a poor interpretation of the true meaning of a simple noun or verb. As we grow we come to understand that some words that we used to consider as synonyms turn out to be very distinct in their meaning and context.

IMO The true question should be 'where can we trace the line between snitching and reporting for a good cause?'. One has an intrinsic negative goal and the other should have a positive meaning, again we are confronted with the fundamental question 'what is right and what is wrong?'. The answer to this question then becomes as easy an answering 'where do we trace the line between aggression and defense?'.

Ethics people, ethics. Some fucked up shit to understand...but it's worth the effort.
 
I know I was raised by my parents not to tattle tail and it has always stuck.

http://www.educationworld.com/a_curr/profdev/profdev123.shtml

How I kinda look at it is that when somebody is doing something 'wrong?', who am I to decide that it is wrong. I believe that punishment [for lack of a better word] occurs after death [or in this life just manifested in a different manner?] and when I step in and try to change the natural progression of events is just not what I am about. Except for when that event could possibly cause death. In that case civil authorities might not even be the best people to turn to. Like I mentioned above I was raised that you NEVER involve police unless it is an absolute necessity.

peace.
seedless
 
Good post, MDAO. Even if you have a good reason to snitch (dangerous cuts, violent crimes, etc), you're still putting yourself and every drug user in that "society" at risk - from cops, an angry dealer/gang, other users, or even just getting blacklisted/losing connects.

I'm not saying that the pigs should never be involved in those situations, just that prohibition has created an atmosphere that keeps real crimes from being reported.:\
 
To the original poster. Explain what you mean by snitch?
Are you talking about turning in people who you have been involved in an illegal transaction with for that transaction?
Or are you talking about reporting crimes in general?

If you witness a rape or murder and report this to the police is this considered snitching?
 
^Again...lost in definition.
What if the drug dealer, raper or what not was a friend of yours that turned out to be pretty wicked...would that also be considered snitching.

Unfortunately the law has its strict a quick ways to deal with criminals, they don't really care about helping and changing people, all they want is to clean the 'system' by imprisoning (or even execute) certain individuals. The psychological support or 'treatment' they get in jail is close to negligible.
Also different counties are adopting opposite philosophies about sentencing.
Here in Italy we have almost abolished life sentence unless in extreme cases of multiple homicide in conjunction with other crimes following the philosophy that a sentence is not only supposed to punish the person but also to treat and correct the individual so that he/she will be able to live properly inside a public context.
I personally think that we have gotten way to soft with this crap since many rapers and murderers got out after just 10 or 7 years and even some mafia lords who have committed countless murders along with promoting prostitution, robbery and drug dealing are set free after less than 30 years. This normally happens when u have a good lawyer at your side assisting you through these years by legally 'attenuating' the penalty.
In many Asian countries you get cooked right away on an e-chair simply for dealing drugs in big amounts.

IMO the severity of the law also plays a big role in this debate that inevitably applies to a legal/social context.
 
Sweet P said:
And if drugs were legalised the cartels would disappear overnight.
Click to expand...
Depends on the accessibility really.
Heroin Girl said:
Good post, MDAO. Even if you have a good reason to snitch (dangerous cuts, violent crimes, etc), you're still putting yourself and every drug user in that "society" at risk - from cops, an angry dealer/gang, other users, or even just getting blacklisted/losing connects.

I'm not saying that the pigs should never be involved in those situations, just that prohibition has created an atmosphere that keeps real crimes from being reported.:\
Click to expand...

ehhh, it could go both ways. What if it's 'bomb h' cut with fentanyl that's making people drop like flies?

You have to make a moral decision...one or ten? two or fifteen? etc...

Are your drug connects worth a life? You could just make an anonymous tip as well.
 
In theory it is horribly wrong. You should be held accountable for your actions.

In practice it's more likely you'll roll. This goes for 99.9% of the people who said they would never do it. It just depends on the sentence, the deal, and your forethoughts on prison life.

Personally, I don't believe anyone that says that. I just make it a priority not to have anything on me that will make me want to squeal. A few felonies sure, a few days in holding, sure. Actual prison detail....I'd roll on you. :D (Except I don't get involved with situations that are pathways to prison details)
 
Sometimes it is not wrong. Say unstable uneducated ill equipped individual is selling drugs to schoolkids...

If you are a bad criminal (low stealth, big mouth) you will probably get snitched out. I have heard horror stories about ex's reporting grow ops as revenge as well...but I wouldn't say that is right.
 
^I believe you are missing the point. No responsible drug user is going to be selling or offering drugs to children, or for the matter associating with someone who would.
 
But there are irresponsible people, and they are going to try to make a buck, and I am sure some will go about it the wrong way. (I look at it as the only way to regulate a very profitable market)
 
Last edited:
Not in our subculture. Harm Reduction applies to behavior as well.

....

I had to clarify the original post of this thread. What I meant to say was subculture, not counterculture.
 
I don't think I understand what you are saying...

It is not okay to report irresponsible behavior if this person happens to be in our subculture?
 
If someone is being irresponsible in the manner in question, they are not of our subculture. We will never make progress if we deem such behavior acceptable.
 
@JJ
So you are only talking about going to the law regarding responsible drug dealers?
People who would be interested in BL and are generally decent honest folks?

I'm guessing that the only reason that this kind of "snitching" would happen is if one were doing it to get out of a sentence ones self. This could be seen as wrong because you are redirecting the long arm of the law away from yourself towards someone who you have benefitted from a trusting relationship with.

Also there is sort of an unspoken "honour among theives" code of conduct where if you are breaking the law and get caught the noble and honourable thing is to bear the consequences yourself without implicating others. The term I have heard used for such people is "a dog" or performing "a dog act"

The problem as I said before is when this code of conduct extends to other more reprehensible activities.

Its interesting that you identify BL or the harm reduction movement as its own subculture, I think there are many different subcultures involved here.
 
I believe it's wrong to turn in somebody else who has done you no harm in return for getting yourself a better deal on charges you're facing. But if some gangsta commits some serious crime against me or somebody close to me, it's not snitching to turn him in. It's using the law to defend yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top