FBI raids alleged online drug market Silk Road, arrests owner

If drug reform is going to be taken seriously it needs to be based on fact, one of those facts is that drug use carries inherent risks regardless of it's legality.

Very true, but from study and personal experience, when it comes to overall danger of a drug, I would say that the actual physical effects of the substance take a back seat to indirect harm caused by prohibition. In the case of substances considered soft I would say that the percentage of harm that stems purely from the substance itself is negligible.
 
^you won't see any argument here, the overall harm from the current system far outweighs the benefits whether it's heroin or weed. Even if the number of drug related deaths doubled legalisation would still be a better option IMO.

As much as I want to see it happen, I think it's important to remain rational about the issue, especially when discussing it with non users, proposals like 7-11 heroin don't really do the cause any favours.
 
Those Silk Road Ecstasy tabs are collector's items, lol. Box it up, put it in your loft for twenty years - be worth shed loads. Not sure about the t-shirts, lol, they look tacky...unless they glow in the dark =D

I was wondering: why is that new sheep place called what it is? It's just a weird name. I mean, of all the names, why after a sheep? It doesn't even have anything to do with drugs, does it?
 
I only do ecstasy very occasionally...

But I have to say: Those are some fucking sick looking pills!

300 mgs?! That's just absurd! God bless the naïve raver who pops one of those!
 
More people die from prescription opiates every year than from heroin....Even if you know the exact purity, people still try to get as high as possible and OD all the time. It would be better if it was standardized, but people will continue to take too much.
Is this not simply a result of there being significantly more prescription opiates on the market than heroin? I have little doubt this is nothing more than a result of the hugely-different availability and channels the two compounds see in the black market, but would be interested if anyone knows or cares to google around.

It's difficult to not see someone who had apparently hoarded 5% of all BC's in circulation as a profiteer though no?
Along w/ the supposed contract killings (which seem incredibly dubious - will be interesting to see actual, verifiable proof, not merely email text purportedly from him), this is one of the most commonly-mentioned wrongs of this. Why is it wrong that he took a commission? Was it that the commission was too high? Or no commission at all is fair?
He risked a lot, he setup a service that was of value, and he wasn't skimming money in a shady fashion but merely setup a commission structure which, evidenced by years of being used, the site's customers/sellers agreed with.
"Profiteer" is an inherently subjective word, and personally I prefer to save it for groups such as halliburton or OPEC, not dpr..

But with most overdoses, it is a combination of medications not just one. Although it does happen, but most people just take benzos,opiates, then maybe chug a beer thinking it is alright.
Yes, absolutely. Nobody is suggesting that ending prohibition turns a dangerous situation to a safe one; it merely makes it safer (in regards to the product / the act of getting high; obviously freedom and finance are two other important areas being f'd by the war)
While prohibition doesn't make anyone safer, there's hardly anything that makes life safer for the wreckless types you describe here, they're the types that run a way higher chance of hurting themselves in many ways from drugs to speeding/DUI, and the very notion of setting up regulations for everyone, to protect those who don't care to exercise the smallest cautions to protect themselves, is a foolish way to structure policy (IMO. Clearly there are many who would disagree. My opposition to "OTC, 18+" sales has absolutely nothing to do with protecting individual users who are of age and sane mind, but more to do with other negatives of cheap, potent narcotics - for instance, a kilo of fentanyl shouldn't be available at any price to anyone, because it's no longer dangerous solely in a personal OD sense)

As much as I want to see it happen, I think it's important to remain rational about the issue, especially when discussing it with non users, proposals like 7-11 heroin don't really do the cause any favours.
Are you addressing a strawman, or did someone actually suggest 7-11's carry OTC heroin at market costs? I haven't read every post in this thread so I may have missed where that was suggested..




[apologies for grammer/ramble, cannot wake up properly today lol]
 
People OD on pharmacy medicines all the fucking time, opiates, benzos, muscles relaxants , the dose is known and yet they still go over. In fact I think you will find prescription drug deaths far outnumber those of illicit drugs.
People get caught up in the moment , take too much, or are unaware of the effects of a drug in combination with another. People make mistakes and if drug reform were to take place we would have to put regulations in place to minimize those mistakes being made , that was my point.

If drug reform is going to be taken seriously it needs to be based on fact, one of those facts is that drug use carries inherent risks regardless of it's legality.

I am very much pro-legalization but agree that prohibition is not even close to the only cause of drug overdoses. What really needs to be done here is serious education on drug risks in schools. As much as parents will go crazy about this, young people need to be taught how to take drugs in a safer manner. Primary focus should be put on emphasizing the danger inherent in combining depressants, as this is how most "licit" drug overdoses occur.

I think a possible solution would be to create a licencing scheme (similar to a driver's licence) where one must take a class on the subject of drugs and safety before being allowed to purchase them.

I was wondering: why is that new sheep place called what it is? It's just a weird name. I mean, of all the names, why after a sheep? It doesn't even have anything to do with drugs, does it?

It reminded me of the Flash video website Albino Blacksheep, I wonder if there's any connection? The logos are similar...
 
Last edited:
Lol whaa 300mg? Thats so awesome they were able to make cool looking pills and double sided too. Goes so show how common place sr is. While i never used it, i did (do) have a few ppl around a handful od diff countries that sell small qty and such of various things nothing crazy. but the first time i got sr i was amazed at the selection but also the prices were nuts. But its completely true, you get what you pay for. If i wanted something say mdma no way would i get it from around here. I dont have a test kit anymore and id probably have some moron trying to sell me "molly" man, when its really methylone or who knows what. Same for L. Sad to see it go under and the dude get charged, but this just frees more market space and thats what the gov depends on, multiple targets. They have to fight someone or something and since non violent drug users rights are the easiest to violate, the more of them buyin from multiple places the better.
 
Those Silk Road Ecstasy tabs are collector's items, lol. Box it up, put it in your loft for twenty years - be worth shed loads. Not sure about the t-shirts, lol, they look tacky...unless they glow in the dark =D

I was wondering: why is that new sheep place called what it is? It's just a weird name. I mean, of all the names, why after a sheep? It doesn't even have anything to do with drugs, does it?

Sheep are key in the understanding of and knowledge in knowing how HIV was man made. Lambs, sheep, I think are what the animal equivalent HIV AIDS is based on; as sheep and us both have both non-HIV forms.

Science made HIV (whether you are an AIDS denier one way or the other I don't fucking care) couldn't out-do the two wraths of god (non-HIV AIDS)

For someone (the Ancient Egyptian notion of having to fuck like rabits to protect the whole) set off a chain reaction where we have too many sheep. Scientists were paid the Cayman Islands AND THEN SOME... and those still failed us miserably as it is immoral to not let GOD take over.
 
...I think a possible solution would be to create a licencing scheme (similar to a driver's licence) where one must take a class on the subject of drugs and safety before being allowed to purchase them.

Choosing what to ingest is a basic human right not a privilege. Also hasn't the government already proved it's inability to educate through the public school system? And you want them to try and make a legit drug education class?
 
Also hasn't the government already proved it's inability to educate through the public school system?

Public Education in the US worked well until recently, and even today the problems stem more from poverty and funding issues.

Also, if you are lucky enough to grow up in a wealthy area, chances are the schools are pretty good too.
 
Those Silk Road Ecstasy tabs are collector's items, lol. Box it up, put it in your loft for twenty years - be worth shed loads. Not sure about the t-shirts, lol, they look tacky...unless they glow in the dark =D

I was wondering: why is that new sheep place called what it is? It's just a weird name. I mean, of all the names, why after a sheep? It doesn't even have anything to do with drugs, does it?

Totally agree those pills will be worth a fortuyne at some point in the future.

The Sheep thing, that name is what makes me think it's dodgy. Like we are all the sheep flocking to a new home, when really we could be getting set up for a big fall. A few friends have ordered their medication only one claims his didn't come (cannabis order).

It has a long way to go before the vendors will be as trustworthy as SR or the site is as secure. I noticed the other night there is a tor version of privnote that could be useful for those who can't fathom PGP, I don't know how safe that would be? I've found a site that will actually generate a PGP message for you all you need is the vendors key, again not as good as using the actual programme I suspect but just because one thing doesn't work something else always will. All these things are handy to know :)
 
Sheep are key in the understanding of and knowledge in knowing how HIV was man made. Lambs, sheep, I think are what the animal equivalent HIV AIDS is based on; as sheep and us both have both non-HIV forms.

Science made HIV (whether you are an AIDS denier one way or the other I don't fucking care) couldn't out-do the two wraths of god (non-HIV AIDS)

For someone (the Ancient Egyptian notion of having to fuck like rabits to protect the whole) set off a chain reaction where we have too many sheep. Scientists were paid the Cayman Islands AND THEN SOME... and those still failed us miserably as it is immoral to not let GOD take over.

Captain.Methamphetamine? What are you doing on Captain.Heroin's account?
 
Positivists can think what they want. That's their right.

As long as I am not physically harming anyone else, no human being (positivist or not, religious or atheist) should have the right to deprive me of my freedom if I choose to possess and/or ingest a psychotropic substance; especially one derived from a plant, such as marijuana or the opium poppy.

The truth is that these plants were initially made illegal not because of the risks associated with short or long-term use by the user, but rather, because of racist Caucasians who disliked American culture being influenced by "Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers." And since then, they've been used repeatedly as a crutch by corrupt bureaucrats to garnish votes from brainwashed, racist, religious simpletons.

It's no surprise that since we are living in 'The Information Age', word has begun to spread throughout the world about the truth in relation to this spectacular failure of a draconian drug policy, which was adopted by UN nations back in '61.

It may take decades yet, but the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs will be amended sooner or later. The US will eventually have a drug czar who does not have a background in law enforcement. Change is coming, slowly but surely. And I'm celebrating. /nod
 
Last edited:
The problem with this site is it gives my a positive outlook. There are many people here who agree with me completely on the subjects I'm interested in. The problem is, though, that because I tend to gravitate towards these sites, I get a biased worldview of the subjects at hand and, like an isolated child with no stimulation will never fulfil their potential as a well balanced human being due to the isolation, they will never learn the arts of language, emotion or how to do simple life things, I will not be very tolerant of the views which people who oppose the opposition of the drug war have (anti-disesdrugnianarismists? I haven't slept for a while, I hope someone can see my point.)

I share the views of most on Bluelight, however the members of Bluelight are not a representative of the real world, unfortunately. When I read so many positive attituted towards the end of this bullshit war on drugs, I am happy, for a while. Then reality sinks in. The only way to win the war is to educate the masses which means changing the opinion of brainwashed anti-drugs conservatives which make up at the very least 50% of the world, probably much more if you consider some countries/cultures/religions. I don't think anything will change until something like 75% of the world demands change. I can't see that happening in a lifetime or two.
 
Last edited:
Choosing what to ingest is a basic human right not a privilege. Also hasn't the government already proved it's inability to educate through the public school system? And you want them to try and make a legit drug education class?

I agree that it's a right, but most people don't, so concessions must be made.
 
Choosing what to ingest is a basic human right not a privilege.
Precisely.

.... is serious education on drug risks in schools.
.............
I think a possible solution would be to create a licencing scheme (similar to a driver's licence) where one must take a class on the subject of drugs and safety before being allowed to purchase them.
Licensing would sure be a better approach than prohibition. I don't think any licenses for mj or un-extracted plants, but can at least see the logic and safety/practicality in a simple licensing setup for 'pharmacy cards' for those who are addicted to harder drugs. Unsure how things like uber-potent psychoto's like DOI or LSD would ever fit into this type of schema though, and think they should be some of the most UNrestricted of all.

Legal positivists would disagree.
I'm unsure WTF you are trying to get across here and cannot figure it out by reading their wiki. Legal positivism is, basically, if it's the law, it's the law, whether it's just or unjust is besides the point, if I'm understanding it properly? Am truly curious what the substance of your post was. Clearly it's not an appeal to their authority, otherwise the obvious "the constitution would disagree with your legal positivists" trumps that pretty fast, no?

I agree that it's a right, but most people don't, so concessions must be made.
Must they be? When things are gray I can understand this line of thinking, but when you preceded it with acknowledgement that something's a right, it's hard to justify concessions.

The problem with this site is it gives my a positive outlook. There are many people here who agree with me completely on the subjects I'm interested in. The problem is, though, that because I tend to gravitate towards these sites, I get a biased worldview of the subjects at hand and, like an isolated child with no stimulation will never fulfil their potential as a well balanced human being due to the isolation, they will never learn the arts of language, emotion or how to do simple life things, I will not be very tolerant of the views which people who oppose the opposition of the drug war have (anti-disesdrugnianarismists? I haven't slept for a while, I hope someone can see my point.)

I share the views of most on Bluelight, however the members of Bluelight are not a representative of the real world, unfortunately. When I read so many positive attituted towards the end of this bullshit war on drugs, I am happy, for a while. Then reality sinks in. The only way to win the war is to educate the masses which means changing the opinion of brainwashed anti-drugs conservatives which make up at the very least 50% of the world, probably much more if you consider some countries/cultures/religions. I don't think anything will change until something like 75% of the world demands change. I can't see that happening in a lifetime or two.
Most people are sheep; %'s of 'popular support'* don't really mean too much in these things much of the time (whether the support is for, or against, a thing) I'm sure this is nothing more than sheer optimism, but I like to think that ignorant folk occasionally stumble on here, get a big dose of reality on a subject they never saw/experienced and really weren't well informed on, and subsequently their knowledge seeps to their uninformed/ignorant friends (I'm thinking of non-drug users. I really cannot understand or expect much from drug users who are not for legalization)
[*re 'popular support' or democracy/mob rule, I don't even see how this is a good way to determine what is right, which is the premise that our laws must be made upon (unless you're a 'legal positivist', I guess?) I definitely see how it's better than, say, a dictatorial setup, but it's certainly not something that can give 'just' or 'right' systems, unless of course 'popular' = 'right', but hopefully few would agree that's the case]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
'popular support' or democracy/mob rule, I don't even see how this is a good way to determine what is right

^ I don't agree with the system, but I accept that it's a reality.
 
Top