[flagged]
didn't he pay for a would-have-been hit to get somebody killed but it was actually an FBI agent (aka he got set up and fell for the trap)?
> Ross was not convicted of selling drugs or illegal items himself, but was held responsible for what others sold on the site.
isn't that arguably worse? he helped people in a lot of countries break the law (created a place where illegal sales can be facilitated)
it isn't like he moderated them off the platform. it was almost exclusively the entire purpose of the platform.
Judge : Unfortunately for you, the line you crossed was real and the plants you brought with you were illegal, so your bail is twenty thousand dollars.
I don't know, did he?
The government dropped those charges, and then when his defense team tried to present evidence defending him from those allegations (note that two federal agents eventually went to jail for their corruption during this case) the judge wouldn't allow them to present their evidence.
Basically, he never got a chance to defend himself from that allegation. Yet it was used at his sentencing to show he deserved life in prison (for non-violent crimes).
I get that a lot of people like to smoke weed and maybe do mushrooms at Coachella, but not all drugs are the same.
Silkroad and other darknet markets sell everything from date rape drugs to fentanyl. Framing it as facilitating a harmless or victimless crime is disingenuous. Not to mention the ancillary services that often pop up like counterfeit documents, money laundering services, guides and tools for scamming people, and other crap.
Drugs shouldn't be illegal. Prohibition has always failed.
Regardless, he didn't commit violence. The distinction between violent and non-violent crime is a meaningful one, and I strongly oppose his life sentencing.
Consider someone who knowingly brokered a sale of baby formula that they knew was tainted with rat poison and killed dozens of children, would you consider that a non-violent crime that deserves leniency in sentencing?
The logic is not sound.
1. If someone started selling drugs using someones GitHub/GitLab issue tracker, would the project owner be accountable? I understand that Ross was likely well aware about the drug sales on his website, but saying someone is facilitating the activities because they own the place is not a great argument in isolation.
2. What is illigal is very different different from country to country. A majority of the sales on Silk Road was marihuana, which is now legal in a 21 US states and decriminalized in 10 others. There are countries where it has never been illigal. Personal posession of AR-15 is legal in the USA, but illigal in a lot of other countries. Suffice to say that it is pretty subjective.
It’s not a matter of how one feels about drug policy or even financial / identity fraud.
He wasn’t just a kid that helped people sell drugs online.
Anyone that begins to spout this BS I assume either doesn’t know the full extent of the Silk Road story (which is inexcusable given its immense media coverage) or is a sheltered “you should just be able to do anything mahn” haven’t-really-thought-about-it-for-more-than-one-second libertarian.
US law enforcement is incredibly corrupt and the case stinks. The 'media' is full of outright sensationalised bullshit and your comment is just another example of how it poisoned the case
Ultimately the sentence reflects the governments urgent, non negotiable and final position as arbiter of trade in its capitalist economy. Without this stringent check the market would be free to sell everything from bootleg kidneys to child slaves.
This sort of libertarian absolutionist malarkey is how we wound up with Bolshevik terrorist attacks and pinkerman slaughters.
These aren't supposed to be on hn.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency)
They have a colorful history of at one point being hired guns and were used by companies to violently end labor strikes.
Interestingly enough the Pinkerton agency still exists.
They're still scummy union-busting pieces of shit as well.