I find it absurd that a person that has not committed any violence could face a life in prison.
And probably the silk road decreased by some degree gang violence.
And probably the silk road decreased by some degree gang violence.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5503929/Bernard-Madof...
I'm more inclined to believe that the union of "drug dealers regularly involved in violence" and "drug dealers who reign in their violent ways to instead spend time on the computer filling SR orders" is near zero.
Edit: Methamphetamine is a neurotoxin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine#Neurotoxicity
So he made a website. I would have preferred to see him convicted on the stuff he was not charged with - trying to organize hits.
Or attempt to.
Personally? I don't have much issue with the use of many (though not all) drugs, in and of themselves. But they aren't used in an isolated vacuum.
The problem with that argument is that, not only is limiting it to drugs is arbitrary (why not convict the guy who becomes morbidly obese or extremely anorexic?), but I think it often is simply wrong, because it ignores the real alternative. The medical bills of an heroin addict may be expensive, but a guy who dies in his 60s from drug use is probably much cheaper if he had died in his 90s, possibly with some chronic condition.
Besides, imprisoning him is probably more expensive still, so it's cutting your nose to spite the face anyway.
When I'm not being an IT geek, I'm working as a paramedic, so I definitely see the entire gamut.
Show me a "moridly obese"/anorexic who committed violent crime for his/her habit.
Misuse of language harms the works that people do to tackle obesogenic companies like McDonalds.
We need a War on Food.
Sure, so did Walter White.