Mail Interception and CDs - How does it actually work?

So many different opinions on this. From the very paranoid to that'll never happen. So trying to think it through logically. Interesting in feedback on how things should theoretically work or how they actually do work if known. For purposes of discussion, let's assume the buyer is not under investigation and is ordering shit for his own personal use.

So it seems to me that a CD can really either occur if a package is intercepted OR if a vendor is compromised around the time you place your order. The compromised vendor isn't really a point of interest b/c in that case, yeah that's a no-brainer.

So how can mail be intercepted? Two obvious ways are package rips open, drug dog sniffs it out or it reeks. This is a no-brainer as well - at this point, the cops job on doing a CD if they choose is easy.

Mail can also be intercepted if the vendor's packages are profiled. Again, this is fairly a no-brainer on how the cops can act next. Sort of related, if the buyer is under investigation already, all that buyer's mail may be getting looked at.

Other problems are use of fake addresses, USPS snafus where it gets returned to sender, things like that. We know the drill here.

Assuming you aren't outed by the above, this to me is where it gets confusing. How is it possible for the cops to obtain a warrant to open the mail to know something illegal is in it?? Am I mistaken in that if the above criteria isn't met, that it'd be almost 0% that the package would be intercepted? Obviously certain drugs are harder to conceal, btu assuming it is properly concealed, is there any appreciable chance that a package with drugs will be uncovered? And I'm not only talking about the sheer numbers game (huge number of packages sent out daily) - I'm also talking about the ability of LE to do anything. An envelope/package standing out or "looking suspicious" certainly can't be enough for LE to get a warrant? I know there are exceptions and some judges are rubber stamps, but I'm talking more probable than the exception. I don't see how LE could go to a judge and say "Yeah this package has stamps on it and they handwrote the address" and the judge give them a warrant to open the mail to verify? Or am I being incredibly naive here? What on God's green earth could be a justifiable reason to open mail unless some condition of the above is met??

Is my logic flawed somewhere? Genuine question here. Trying to learn and was just walking through the stuff I've learned here and made some extrapolations. There is so much out there, but when I think about it, it seems like a CD happens due to a very real mistake made. Its not random. The vendor used shitty stealth, packages profiled, etc. Or the buyer was already under investigation or got ratted out by a nosy roommate or family member. It seems like if you stick to vendors who are known for their stealth, you should never run into an issue. Of course, mistakes happen. Vendors are people and shit happens. That I understand. But from how I see it, a CD doesn't happen or mail doesn't get intercepted unless there was a serious breakdown in opsec - in other words, it isn't necessarily random at all. They could photograph every package and it seems like it shouldn't matter. A hunch shouldn't be enough to get a warrant right?

Or am I completely wrong in the power LE has is searching one's mail? I know there are some serious abuses of power going on and our liberties are being chipped away daily, so not speaking with hyperbole, anyone out there know of specifics of this? I understand there is protection due to the sheer number of packages out there. But not taking that into account, if every piece of mail sent was darknet packages, would there be CDs?? Theoretically it shouldn't matter how many darknet packages there are if warrants are working as how they should be working - ie, no fishing expeditions, warrants only granted with real proof that something wrong is going on.

I'm a bit rambling here. I'm very curious on the thoughts here and perhaps my breakdown in logic is b/c of a poor assumption I've made. Seen so much shit on PO fears, wondering what is real and what isn't.


Comments


[1 Points] dnmuse:

A slight tug on a leash is all it takes to get a drug dog to signal. Testifying that a dog signaled on a package is all the probable cause LE needs to get a warrant.

One time I hard my car searched on the way to a festival and saw this BS in action. Thankfully somehow I was totally clean. But after tearing my car apart for an hour while being threatened with all kinds of things, you kind of just sit there, shut up and accept your fate isnt in your hands.


[1 Points] RosyPalm:

The process in a nut shell:

CD in a nutshell: