A Proposed Law Would Force Internet Companies to Spy on Their Users for the DEA | The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it...
A Proposed Law Would Force Internet Companies to Spy on Their Users for the DEA | The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it...
The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it would be a disaster for digital privacy.
The Cooper Davis Act would force tech companies to report suspected drug activity to the government. Experts say it would be a disaster for digital privacy.
You're viewing a single thread.
Combating drugs is good, spying is not good, you need a very transparent law that tackles the issue in a smart way.
EDIT: Why the downvotes? Is this a pro-drugs community?
Simplistic sentiments like 'combating drugs is good' is exactly what leads to people to think spying on citizens should even be considered.
What about pedophilia? Should we also let it go when we give up all investigations on drugs?
Try harder.
I don't understand, try harder in the investigations? I thought you were telling us to stop investigating them!
Let me guess, you're an anarchist.
Now you're trying too hard.
I see, we'll investigate the drug traffickers but ONLY A LITTLE. Arrest like 20% of them. Same for the pedophiles and human traffickers.
People can consent to taking drugs. Children cannot consent to having sex.
Children cannot consent to their parents taking drugs and ruining their family.
I assume you feel the same about alcohol - the most destructive drug of them all.
Taking drugs does not ruin families. Having untreated mental illness is ruining families AND leading to drug abuse.
Keep trying.
Since it seems you sincerely don't understand I'll explain. Violating the rights of 99% of the population, who are law abiding citizens, in order to catch a small number of criminals is not a reasonable course of action.
In the U.S. we have seen many of our freedoms eroded by policies like this, passed under the guise of safety and security and it can't be tolerated any longer. Governments must address criminal activity without unjustly violating the freedoms of others.
So, what specifically makes combating drugs (not specific ones, just drugs in general) good, and how is it comparable to fighting pedophilia? And is it important enough to encroach on individual rights like privacy and due process?
So, what specifically makes combating drugs good?
Did your elementary school not teach that drugs are bad? Just asking, I can point you to another number of sources if you want proof.
and how is it comparable to fighting pedophilia?
Both are crimes largely committed through the internet.
And is it important enough to encroach on individual rights like privacy and due process?
Necessary evil. Go too far in the human rights narrative and society crumbles.
Permanently Deleted
Did your elementary school not teach that drugs are bad?
I see, so you think elementary school is valid jurisprudence. This says everything about your ability to form logical conclusions.
I see, so you think drugs are good. This says everything about your ability to form logical conclusions.
I see, so you think drugs are good. This says everything about your ability to form logical conclusions.
Thank you for demonstrating my point.
You're welcome.
I think our government is over stepping their bounds. My body my choice. They aren't doing this to go after kids. They are doing this to put more bodies in jail. If they cared about the well being of people then they would be making programs or other such things to help people. This proposal to hand over our info is only to hurt us.
Schools say all sorts of stuff, then you grow up and find out it was mostly BS.
Now I'm pretty sure you are trolling
"bUt ThiNk oF thE cHildrEn!!1!1" is not an excuse for surveillance
"Fuck the children" is exactly the vibe I'm getting from this thread. They'll have a good life being raised by drug addicts and then sold to some human trafficker.
drugs are much more complex than "doing them is bad" and banning encrypted messanging apps and implementing surveillance does very little in terms of capturing pedos, while people who use them for legitamate reasons are screwed over
Scroll up and find the part where I said to ban encrypted messaging. You'll find the following sentence instead "spying is bad".
You also said
Necessary evil. Go too far in the human rights narrative and society crumbles.
in response to
And is it important enough to encroach on individual rights like privacy and due process?
Combating drugs is good, spying is not good, you need a very transparent law that tackles the issue in a smart way.
Can't expect any smart idea from drug addicts though.
You didn't say it, yes. But established survaillance can be countered by encrypted messanging apps, so the next logical step is to ban them. In fact, the US has been trying to do so for a long time now and the same excuse is always given - "think of the children". There's a video by Louis Rossmann and another one by Mental Outlaw, both going into detail about why this is just that, an excuse. Survaillance isn't normal and should not be normalised.
America, Smart. Pick one.
Every country has survaillance, US just makes the most noise with laws being passed. It's the principle that matters - once other countries see that a certain law allows them to monitor people more closely, they'll want to pass their version of that law. Australia is basically a Police State, UK also has very privacy-invasive laws.
Perhaps you might consider asking what we ought to do instead of continuing the failed war on drugs?
I'd point out that this is a classic 'waddabout the children' non sequitur, but you already know that.
Nah, he doesn't understand Latin
Pedophiles harm other people. Selling drugs that are inspected and tested not to contain additives and are of a set potency would do wonders preventing accidental overdoses. The taxes made off of the legal sale of drugs can be used for education and harm reduction programs.
combatting drugs is bad. it leads to a black market and unreliable product, resulting in overdoses & deaths
A drug addict does not make any contributions to society, he's the living dead.
Funny how alcohol addicts are allowed to participate in society normally though while no one in any high paying job is allowed to smoke a joint.
I know lots of alcoholics that still show up to work and contribute to society everyday
Alcohol, cigars and then... cocaine, LSD, crack? Are you honestly making this comparison?
Could you look someone in the eye and tell that cocaine and tobacco are the same thing?
The fact that you put LSD between cocaine and crack made me literally lol.
You've clearly lived a very sheltered life and have been fed all of your information on drugs from entertainment media.
Maye LSD is "less bad" than the others, fine. I'm not a drug connoisseur.
That was obvious when you posted cocaine then crack.
It showed that not only are you not a connoisseur, but your understanding of drugs is most likely mainstream fiction and copaganda regurgitated as news.
Crack is just cocaine that has been processed so you can smoke it instead of snorting or injecting it.
Disclaimer: don’t Fuck around with cocaine, it dumps your dopamine and eventually makes it impossible to feel happiness outside of continued use, and the use diminishes in its dopamine dumps
Edit: I didn’t even read the comment two up, they had the same assessment, lol
Disclaimer: don’t Fuck around with cocaine, it dumps your dopamine and eventually makes it impossible to feel happiness outside of continued use, and the use diminishes in its dopamine dumps
Thank you for agreeing with my anti-drug agenda. You are correct in this sentence, we must ban cocaine immediately and persecute anyone involved in its production and distribution.
I wish you a long life, dear friend, even though I know you'll die young.
I wish you a long life, dear friend, even though I know you’ll die young.
Did you just threaten that user or are you accusing them of abusing illicit substances because they possess medical knowledge of the effects of cocaine?
Locking people in cages hasn’t fixed the problem yet
Even if I thought you were gonna go home and kill yourself tonight, I wouldn’t feel the compulsive need to rub it in your face.
I think you should probably work that all out with a therapist. It sounds like you probably have some CPTSD from growing up in an unstable environment due to parental drug abuse.
I've found this channel to be particularly useful to me in my journey.
Best of luck in your healing journey ❤️
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/channel/UCbWvYupGqq3aMJ6LsG4q-Yg
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Do you consider medical professionals to be 'drug connoisseurs'?
More like drug sommeliers if we are going to utilize the analogy to its fullest /s
not a drug connoisseur.
wants all drugs banned because "drugs > bad"
- alcohol deaths per year: 140,000
- tobacco deaths per year: 480,000
- cocaine deaths per year: 15,000 (including crack)
- opioid deaths per year: 68,000
- LSD deaths per year: 0
- cannabis deaths per year: 0
Our drug war is a fucking farce. It is, and always has been, a fascist culture war.
Now we're talking, I like to see numbers and data. You're clearly different from the others here.
Now go a biiit further and check usage statistics for alcohol, cocaine and opioids. Is it the same number of people using all three?
No thanks. But you go right ahead.
Now, now, I wonder how many dozens of millions of people are using cocaine each year.
Cocaine is not particularly dangerous. Oddly enough opioids are safe if, and only if, the user knows the specific opioid being used and it’s actual purity and doesn’t use improper techniques to use it. It doesn’t usually kill or cause major medical issues if the dosage and purity are known and clean needles are used. Alcohol is a medical issue at basically any dosage. There is no safe way to consume it. Tobacco is in the same category: all use is harmful, smoking is excessively harmful.
The point is we tolerate obviously harmful drugs, some of us refuse to admit they are drugs, or put them in some category where they should not be considered when discussing drug abuse. Why do people do this? As I said, it seems very much to be a cultural issue. Alcohol and tobacco, by far our most lethal drug abuse problems, are accepted as part of ‘our’ culture. By ‘our’ I mean the dominant European Christian culture- white people. The ‘bad’ drugs are all associated with ‘outsiders’, people not part of the dominant culture. Quite obviously also this cultural categorization is racist bullshit. White people are just as likely to be using the ‘bad’ drugs as non white people. So it’s an ideological campaign to justify what has become a corrupt government/capitalist ‘complex’. The failed drug war pumps billions of dollars into the private sector. There is no motivation to stop what is a quite successful system as far as the recipients of all that loot are concerned.
But certainly just simply adopting a harm reduction approach instead of continuing the idiocy of criminalization cannot be taken seriously. After all we cannot compare cigars to LSD.
I am not saying crack or other drugs are harmless, but man, have you ever seen an alcohol addict? It completely destroys your body, mind and family (which you like to mention when it comes to other drugs). You can absolutely compare it to crack.
I see, so you're arguing we must ban both alcohol and drugs? You bring a hard bargain, I'm interested in the connotations of this.
This has already been tried and didn‘t work. People consumed it anyway (surprise).
Why have laws then?
Can you tell me how it affects or even hurts anyone if someone is smoking weed at home? There is literally no point in making it illegal. What you can do is making it illegal to do certain things while under the influence of drugs, for example driving a car. And guess what, exactly this happens with alcohol too. But making the drug itself illegal is imo a bad idea.
Because people in power need excuses to hit people they don't like without having to pay weregild for it. That's it, that's the entire purpose of laws. The whole "protecting society" theory is a convenient smokescreen that we've all bought into through generations upon generations of Stockholm syndrome and the fact that we all also want to hit people and be justified in doing so from time to time.
So you want to go back to prohibition ? Because alcohol is a drug.
Want to see a video of how someone looks like after using psychedelic drugs for some time? Will you still make this comparison afterwards?
If you people establish that banning alcohol is a absolute requirement for banning cruel drugs that destroy entire families, so be it.
EDT: Downvoted in 20 seconds.
Look, you'd have to be both purposefully oblivious and living under a rock to not have a notion of what drunk people look like and the research done on the health risks of it, and all the addiction and alcoholism... Like, give me a fucking break.
Edit: I'm saying this to say that humans have accepted the risk associates with alcohol (not saying not to regulate it) and it should equally allow the same for drugs. The only difference is that some drugs are plain out less harmful than alcohol.
Based
Because the war on drugs was lost before our government (or any government) even started fighting it.
The DEA is neither necessary or helpful. Legalizing and regulating drugs - and yes, I do mean all drugs - would do far more to improve safety for people who want to, for one reason or another, use drugs (and “drugs” absolutely includes alcohol - it’s a substance that affects your mental state when consumed).
Or, you know, we could actually correct the root cause, which is wealth inequality, general despair over much of what’s happening in the world these days, and endemic poverty and homelessness. But that wouldn’t be profitable, and supply-side Jesus wouldn’t like that.
Why, is this an anti-drug community?
It is downvoted because you appear to think that more drug laws are the way to address the opiate addiction public health crisis.
crisis
Why is it a crisis? I thought you believed drugs were good!! Isn't it almost an utopic situation with all the opiate addicts around? Is this not what you were looking for?
Where did I say ‘drugs are good’?
Oh, are you not a pro-drugs individual? I'm being chased by those who defend drug abuse and a lawless society, sorry if I mistook you for one of the evil-doers.
Eh no, you are repeatedly and dishonestly conflating ‘it’s a public health problem not a criminal justice problem’ with ‘I love all the drugs’. I think I’m done. Arguing with clowns is pointless.
You either defend drugs or you oppose them. Can't look all hipster and defend strict control at the same time.
false dichotomy followed by strawman. You are clowning yourself.
Okay, drug addict. See you in 20 years if you're still alive.
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8
Down votes are because studies have shown that programs like DARE and the "war on drugs" didn't really make drugs go away, and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place. Also, saying we need to "combat" drugs is very adversarial, and reinforces the boogie man of "evil drug users", which helps the passage of overly powerful laws, and often make it easier to exploit minorities.
I also think the simplistic "[let's just] tackle the issue in a smart way" might rub people the wrong way, like "oh, well why didn't we think of that?"
EDIT: Your edit of "people don't agree with me, I guess that means they love drugs" is very assumptive, and close minded.
and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place.
You're almost there, one more step and you'll realize the true enemy is capitalism. Some of the weaker drugs can be legalized as long as they're kept in strict control.
You’re almost there, one more step and you’ll realize the true enemy is capitalism.
So there are no black markets outside of capitalist economies?
There are criminals too, and gulags.
Then how would eliminating capitalism resolve anything related to drug use?
and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place.
You’re almost there, one more step and you’ll realize the true enemy is capitalism.
and that we need better solutions that address quality of life and mental health issues to keep people from turning to drugs in the first place.
Sounds like you can't really connect those statements, you just feel like capitalism and drugs are bad so naturally their badness must be connected.
capitalism and drugs are bad so naturally their badness must be connected.
Most problems can be rooted back to capitalism.
Most problems can be rooted back to capitalism.
What does that mean to you in tangible terms? What do you think defines capitalism as an economic structure and how do you relate that structure to a cause of something as historical and widespread as drug use?
Although there are a few rebels and other cool kids seeking drugs for foolish reasons, most will end up in this path as a method of running away from the injustices of society and all the hardships it provides. A communist society makes significant investments in the expansion of its education system, digital access and cultural opportunities. Illiteracy rates dropped dramatically in all communist societies, let me repeat it, dramatically.
This is true for the Soviet Union, Cuba and even China's slowpoke liberal-infested implementation.
In the other hand, Capitalist societies see education and culture as nothing more than profits, a game of numbers.
You must be very young, I would guess 15-16