Why not normalize innocent drug receivings?

Maybe this topic's already been brought up but I can't find it searching and I'm just curious on your thoughts. From what I've read, it seems that just opening a package in a CD is enough to prove you had knowledge of what was inside and are thus guilty. This seems like bullshit.

If I'd gotten a package addressed to me before I knew anything about dark net markets and I didn't know what was inside my curiosity would have probably made me open it anyway. I suspect most people are still this way.

This leads me to my main question: If dealers were to occasionally just ship some small amount of drugs to various random (innocent and unknown) people, then wouldn't it (after enough clearly innocent people get shipped drugs and open them out of curiosity) erode the logic that anyone receiving and opening drugs is probably guilty?

Obviously it might take a while for this to sink in and the first innocent people to get shipped drugs would probably get fucked over. Fuck, maybe that's just too much of a shitty thing to do initially. After an ethically rocky start, though, wouldn't it help in the long run? Maybe there's something I'm missing but it seems like it would work as an excuse in a lot of these CD cases.

One problem I can think of is that the person doing this sending would take on a certain amount of risk and financial loss without much of any reward.


Comments


[2 Points] TrippinDraper:

The risk for domestic orders resulting in your arrest is already pretty low. Especially if you aren't buying bulk or reselling locally. I don't understand the consistent paranoia.


[1 Points] Aluminum_Foil_Hat:

I plan on goin to trial and sendin the jury drugs. If u got high...


[1 Points] Axaq:

This has been brought up before but doesn't make as much sense as you may initially think, for this to work world wide or across lots of states it would take a lot, I think a more beneficial method is everyone reporting to the police that random drugs keep getting mailed to them and handing them in, small loss but deniability if your packs are ever caught, could work but there's probably more to it that I am overlooking.


[1 Points] diOpAnonMu:

If the packs are noticed before delivery, stealth either sucks or it was an unlikely occurrence. Do you expect vendors to ship out 100s of packages to strangers?

The more likely situation is that they will arrive without incident and then the receiver will either panic and dispose of the drugs or call the police. Calling the police will lead to the packages/vendor getting profiled sooner. It saves the investigators money on controlled buys, etc...


[1 Points] Theeconomist1:

From what I've read, it seems that just opening a package in a CD is enough to prove you had knowledge of what was inside and are thus guilty.

Not true. Often possessing a pack is enough to execute a CD/search warrant to uncover more evidence against you. Whether or not they make it "stick" that you ordered the goods is largely dependent on how you act during the execution of the CD and/or if you don't have a clean house and they find more shit. You have plausible deniability as long as you don't fucken throw it away. Assuming you acted as you should during a CD and you have a clean house, LE still needs to make a case against you and prove it. That will depend on the circumstances of your purchase.

If dealers were to occasionally just ship some small amount of drugs to various random (innocent and unknown) people, then wouldn't it (after enough clearly innocent people get shipped drugs and open them out of curiosity) erode the logic that anyone receiving and opening drugs is probably guilty?

Overall terrible idea. As others have mentioned in this thread, the chances of a pack being intercepted for domestic is really, really low. There really is no need to create this sort of "confusion" you are proposing. While on the surface it does sound like an interesting idea, the problem with this approach is imagine the uproar and focus that will be thrust on drugs in the mail. Now, imagine a kid finding this shit and worse yet, using it and dying. Now that's extreme, BUT what is not extreme is that "innocent" people getting drugs in the mail will only bring scrutiny to our activities. While LE prob has this shit fairly high on their radar, I can only imagine them getting more and more funding if they could point to examples of drugs being mailed to people who didn't order it. Not only that, think of the sheer bulk that would have to be mailed out for this to be a common enough thing that you can point to. You have plausible deniability anyway. They still need to prove you ordered it.


[1 Points] FortunateSonDM:

I'm sure when people start receiving the packages, the media will be all over that. The news LOVES reporting on drugs. The increased publicity would be anything but beneficial I predict. I would imagine usps/LE would "move around" some funds and increase their security/detection protocols. For legit orders the increased chance of being caught is obviously not ideal lol. Plus as long as no one is being half assed, the risk of packs being caught before delivery is very low for domestic. No need to gain all that unwanted attention and cause problems. I don't see a lot of drug dealers being excited to waste product, waste money and make their jobs harder than they already are. Illogical on all sides.

I actually saw this yesterday and created a detailed list of cons. Discussing the relationship between LE and usps can be interesting when you're in the mood for it, especially when you're someone that is frequently using the markets. I'll post the pastebin link to my list during my lunch break later, just in case anyone happens to wanna read it on the off chance.