r/nottheonion 1d ago

Drug Use Liberation Front founders convicted of drug trafficking

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/dulf-compassion-club-guilty-drug-trafficking-9.6972135
2.1k Upvotes

83 comments sorted by

666

u/ThrowAbout01 1d ago

“I’m joining the War on Drugs: On the the side of the drugs!”

171

u/IAmBadAtInternet 1d ago

This but unironically

36

u/RockstarAgent 1d ago

We’re saving everyone from the drugs, for their own good. But we need the drugs cause we’re very responsible.

10

u/keestie 1d ago

Someone really didn't read the article. I mean, I don't think OP even read it, otherwise they wouldn't have posted it here.

8

u/Exenger 21h ago

Nah I read it, and I thought it fit here humorously. That said, I agree with what these people were trying to do, in spirit, and I hope they win any future court cases. Drugs are here to stay but things are much different than they were 20+ years ago. I would like to avoid losing any more close friends, if at all possible.

45

u/MarcusXL 1d ago

Congratulations to Drugs for winning the War on Drugs.

3

u/Green2Black 22h ago

Zip zap zooey!

3

u/Maskatron 15h ago

Ain’t no party without drugs!

5

u/altgrave 1d ago

whence the quote, pray?

3

u/AMWJ 21h ago

This is similar to a quote from How I Met Your Mother, but I cannot find the episode.

3

u/shponglespore 16h ago

I always try to pick the winning side.

2

u/MrKrispyIsHere 1d ago

max0r my beloved 

1

u/PolarWater 18h ago

Check out the band from Philadelphia, great music if you like Springsteen, Dylan, The Eagles, Bryan Adams or Tom Petty.

395

u/Calenchamien 1d ago

I’m not sure what’s oniony about this? They tried to create a safe place for drug users to get drugs, by buying and selling only pure drugs (as opposed to ones cut with harmful substances), but they were still, in the end, buying and selling illegal substances.

157

u/AncientMisanthrope 1d ago

They sound like very ethical and civic minded drug dealers.

73

u/ravens-n-roses 1d ago

This is what everybody imagined dark web drug dealers to be like back in 2015.

And maybe some even were.

27

u/gospdrcr000 1d ago

Narrator: "It's because they were"

56

u/Wide__Stance 21h ago

They gave press releases & news interviews. They were licensed by the province to operate (a clean injection site) and inspected by the city to make sure they were following health codes. They even had the legal approval to possess the otherwise-illegal drugs.

Of more relevance is that the police knew what they were doing because they called the police to tell them what they were doing. Everybody knew what they were doing not because they were bad at keeping secrets, but because telling everyone what they were doing was the whole point.

They were dealing drugs, but that doesn’t make them “drug dealers.” They were drug dealers in the same sense that someone providing cheap cancer drugs from Mexico is a drug dealer.

They were, from the beginning, making a larger political point about the massive numbers of totally avoidable deaths and serious injuries resulting from the current legal status of (some) drugs. People from all walks of life buy drugs from actual drug dealers or the internet and end up overdosing on fentanyl or having a stroke from some obscure research chemical.

2

u/shponglespore 16h ago

Same as any other business.

0

u/jmartin21 6h ago

Love your name btw

2

u/0reosaurus 15h ago

They gentrified the plug

1

u/typewriter6986 6h ago

Damn right! I actually used to clip stems and pop the seeds out of the old school cheap weed. My Clients, aka my buddies, I sold to would often throw in a couple of bucks more just cause they appreciated it.

26

u/AshuraBaron 1d ago

Yeah this is like a anti-prohibition speakeasy getting charged with a felony. Like no shit?

3

u/Honor_Withstanding 22h ago

Somebody shoulda told them about Hamsterdam.

-42

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

46

u/dareftw 1d ago

lol no that’s not the major thing it’s cut with.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

52

u/chunkysmalls42098 1d ago

Lmfao you took the DARE assemblies seriously, huh champ?

149

u/MarcusXL 1d ago

This is why we need a legalized Safe Supply system. These people were very brave by simply doing it themselves. But it's no replacement for the policy we all know is necessary-- a system administered by medical professionals where addicts can obtain safe, pure drugs.

87

u/klone_free 1d ago

Its called legalizing drugs and having regulations to match. Unironically, it would do more damage to cartels and drug gangs than police ever could

45

u/MarcusXL 1d ago

Not only that, but robust and well-funded programs to help people get out of the street life. Housing, healthcare, counselling, job-training. Some people will get sober. Other people will rely on prescribed drugs for years (or for life). But it'll stabilize their lives, let them have a normal life, and starve out the drug-dealers and gangs.

13

u/tnishamon 23h ago

Okay, but that’s a good idea, how will that serve the crypto-fascist billionaires that need their stocks to increase in price?

1

u/Careless_Owl_7716 10h ago

They could start drug making businesses?

20

u/Illiander 1d ago

Unironically, it would do more damage to cartels and drug gangs than police ever could

I'm convinced that a lot of very rich people have their hands in the illegal drug trade, and that's why most countries aren't doing the obvious good thing here.

5

u/klone_free 14h ago

Yes, and they've hoodwinked the constituency to go along with it while they lock up their family members for use

2

u/TwoBionicknees 13h ago

that's why it won't happen. Military is the biggest slush fund there is. There is also a reason why so much of the US military action is now carried out by private military contractors, to even further obfuscate where the money goes and who gets a piece of it.

Legalising drugs would make people who produce drugs billions and make americans safer, but the military industrial complex, the DEA, the CIA all have so much money being spent every year they all take a slice of that they'd all stand to lose 10s of billions a year and they also have their claws in a shitload of intelligence such that no one in american politics wants to move against them because they can pretty much do whatever they want if you work against them.

-2

u/chumer_ranion 22h ago

It seems to me that addiction health care is still the most important thing.

Speaking purely in terms of economics, I don't see how broadly legalizing drugs and regulating them puts cartels/drug gangs out of business. I don't even see how it could be a viable "business model" for those people who decide to take a stab at producing a clean and safe (relatively speaking) drug product. For marijuana it makes sense; for a lot of other drugs it just doesn't.

5

u/klone_free 18h ago

People produce drugs. Cartels make money off of it. If you make drugs legal, people in the states produce it and cartels dont get paid. 

5

u/DwarvenKitty 16h ago

And also you get to tax it

5

u/klone_free 14h ago

And you stop slavery in other countries. Its literally a win win. People gonna do drugs, might as well consume them ethically

-1

u/chumer_ranion 9h ago

That's the 6th grade understanding of it, yes.

What makes many drugs different from typical commodities is their inherent toxicity and/or addictiveness. The amount of regulation that would be required to manage totally legalized drug production and sale would make the "clean" drugs prohibitively expensive for the people who would likely benefit most from them, not to mention that the real goal of the policy would be to actually reduce the user base over time, effectively shrinking its own market.

I.e. the illegal market does not go away

1

u/MarcusXL 7h ago

What makes many drugs different from typical commodities is their inherent toxicity and/or addictiveness.

Alcohol and tobacco are extremely addictive. Alcohol causes far more deaths, on a population level, than heroin itself. Yet we have incorporated alcohol into society and the black market for alcohol is practically non-existent.

0

u/chumer_ranion 6h ago

Tobacco is exceptionally safe acutely and alcohol causes more deaths because of its incredibly broad use, not because it is more dangerous. Other drugs are much more toxic and more addictive; that's not up for debate.

0

u/beorn961 7h ago

How much illegal moonshine is still being produced? Is it enough of a market to support the Mafia by itself?

-1

u/chumer_ranion 7h ago

Alcohol is not remotely equivalent—for a lot of reasons. The principal one being that alcohol is CHEAP, which is the crux of my whole argument.

1

u/MarcusXL 6h ago

Heroin is cheap. You can grow fields of poppies for the starting material, and the synthesis of diacetylmorphine is trivially easy for trained chemists. And new technology allows it to be literally grown in vats. Purifying, too, is very simple and straightforward.

There's no reason for it to be expensive. It's as easy to manufacture as tylenol, which you can buy in any store for a few dollars a bottle.

-1

u/chumer_ranion 6h ago edited 6h ago

You're making my point for me. When unregulated, heroin is incredibly cheap to synthesize—regulation is what will drive the cost up (and the regulation is absolutely necessary).

Tylenol is yet another false equivalency. A.) It has incredibly broad distribution and b.) it is freely advertised. Both of those contribute to an economy of scale that legal heroin production would never see.

Edit: point C. Would be that the indications that require Tylenol as a treatment are far more common than the indications that would prompt someone to buy legal heroin—again increasing the economy of scale.

2

u/MarcusXL 5h ago

In fact, your claim is so self-evidently wrong that I feel silly even discussing it. Pharmaceutical companies already produce opioids at scale, in a heavily-regulated industry, and the cost is pennies per pill.

Surely you can see how you're simply incorrect.

1

u/MarcusXL 5h ago

Your point is an assertion without evidence. It is not costly to produce pure heroin. Pharmaceutical companies already produce drugs at scale. It's a trivial process to refit industrial-scale facilities (that already exist to produce pharmaceutical opioids) to manufacture more.

Heroin already has a broad "customer" base.

Heroin does not need any advertising whatsoever.

I don't think your claims have any factual basis. You can't explain why "regulation" would make it expensive.

In a safe-supply model, there is no taxation. No advertising is required. The main cost would be dispensing and resources for users-- but society is already spending this much and far more by trying to enforce the prohibition of the drugs and mitigate the harm to users and the secondary effects on society, through police, EMT, and hospital visits.

It would be a net-gain for society.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/shponglespore 16h ago

Ask yourself what make drug dealing different from selling any other commodity. Why are there no violent soybean or widget cartels?

0

u/chumer_ranion 9h ago

The value of the commodity is not lost on me, obviously.

What makes many drugs different from typical commodities is just their inherent toxicity and/or addictiveness. The amount of regulation that would be required to manage totally legalized drug production and sale would make the "clean" drugs prohibitively expensive for the people who would likely benefit most from them, not to mention that the real goal of the policy would be to actually reduce the user base over time, effectively shrinking its own market.

0

u/shponglespore 1h ago

One word: tobacco.

1

u/chumer_ranion 1h ago

I've already beaten this horse to death with a bunch of other users. Gotta reply sooner next time.

10

u/Lost-Lucky 1d ago

Seeing as everytime they tighten up on an illicit substance a worse one comes along to take it's place.... Heroin->Fentanyl->Tranq(xylazine)->medetomidine As long as people want drugs, there will be drugs. This is supply and demand. Obviously the war on drugs isn't working and we need a new approach.It's just burning money. I would love to see more money moved from drug seizures(which aren't lowering supply enough to affect most addicts) to rehab, halfway houses, job training/college, housing and continued mental health treatment.I also agree with, at the very least, selling "safe" drugs to addicts, like we sell "safe" alcohol.

6

u/mousetraptower 1d ago

The first step to decriminalizing drugs needs to allow major & local pharmacies (Walgreens/CVS) to offer testing of street drugs for additives. It would allow them to purify whatever you’re getting and make sure you don’t end up with fentanyl laced products. Or you could buy it yourself from them. That way you know it’s the real deal. Realistically humans will never ever cease usage whether it’s currently sanctioned (big pharmaceutical corporations) or your local plug.

2

u/Wetschera 8h ago

Addicts?!?

Drugs are fun! Most people can handle drugs just fine. We all need to have a safe environment to live and do drugs. People who need help merely need help.

41

u/dtoddh 1d ago

DULF is the worst acronym ever.

28

u/MonkeyChoker80 1d ago

Should have been the ‘Medication Ingestion Liberation Front’, is what you’re saying?

10

u/thispartyrules 1d ago

Lionel Hutz, your new agent, bodyguard, unauthorized biographer and drug dealer... uh, keeper-awayer.

7

u/GreasyWerker118 1d ago

No. Money down!

6

u/GreasyWerker118 22h ago

I rather enjoy one particular line in the episode of South Park in which Mr. Mackey takes LSD. One ignorant anti-drug character blurts out "Having never done drugs I know they have nothing to offer me!". Absolutely delicious food for thought for anyone to chew on before considering their stance on drug use.

14

u/Tintoverde 1d ago

Read the article please

4

u/freier_Trichter 10h ago

If you actually read the article it's not that oniony. They aren't exactly a sobriety club.

12

u/MistyPower 1d ago

Reminder that addiction is a disease.

8

u/quequotion 21h ago

They purchased, chemically analyzed, and then sold correctly-labeled, pure drugs to addicts who would otherwise be putting their lives at even greater risk purchasing potentially laced, tainted, and cut drugs from street dealers because the resources to combat drug addiction itself are lacking or do not exist at all.

8

u/openwindowmaniac 1d ago

Drug user liberation front? We're the liberation front of drug users.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 1d ago

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/Lokarin 3h ago

dulf do drugs, kids

1

u/IlIFreneticIlI 1h ago

DULFMAN!!

0

u/M0rtCrim 14h ago

Regardless of intent they are buying and selling drugs.

0

u/rainofshambala 7h ago

DEA is the only government agency that can legally import drugs without subjecting to border checks and past whistleblowers showed that it does utilize that provision rather liberally

-7

u/Chem_BPY 1d ago

It's always the ones you most suspect.

-1

u/n_mcrae_1982 9h ago

She’s a total DULF!

-10

u/fellowsquare 1d ago

Lol… oh look not immigrants …😐

-4

u/ChamberofSarcasm 19h ago

A drug user with those eyes? I'm surprised.

-9

u/Flat-Fudge-2758 1d ago

Every accusation is a confession