Dread Pirate Roberts "Hell's Angels Assassination Transcript"

[presence]

Dread Pirate Roberts 3/31/2013 8:59 : Don’t want to be a pain here, but the price seems high. Not long ago, I had a clean hit done for $80k.

http://newsbtc.com/2015/02/03/fascin...on-transcript/

That problem was dealt with. I’ll try to catch you online to give you details. Just wanted to let you know right away so you have one less thing to worry about.

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-tr...ssassinations/

his scheme spirals from merely tracking down a blackmailer to intimidate him, to hiring Hell’s Angels to kill that blackmailer, to paying those same hitmen a total of $650,000 to kill four more people.

[muh_roads]

I want to feel sorry for him because the consequences of getting caught during the war on drugs is the greatest atrocity the Government has imposed on its people since slavery.

On the flip-side Ross was a huge idiot for writing a journal documenting everything...keeping all his chats...never destroying PGP keys...never using a tumbler when moving coins...etc. Motherboard has a good article on this.

He may have had a jury nullification chance on the drug stuff with an appeal...but plotting to kill is incredibly retarded...especially for a self-proclaimed libertarian who should believe in non-aggression. Why he didn't just retire early and disappear with 6 figures of BTC's I'll never understand...

[Acala]

Although in this case, BECAUSE of the illegal and immoral war on drugs, the person he purportedly had killed was threatening the lives of many other innocents. Arguably legitimate defense of others and CERTAINLY well-deserved consequences for mr. blackmailer.

[dannno]

Although in this case, BECAUSE of the illegal and immoral war on drugs, the person he purportedly had killed was threatening the lives of many other innocents. Arguably legitimate defense of others and CERTAINLY well-deserved consequences for mr. blackmailer.

Ya and it's hard to imagine they weren't govt. provocateurs.

[amy31416]

If you're dumb and violent enough to have someone "hit," I guess it makes sense that you're dumb enough to make transactions online to do so.

[Christian Liberty]

I think presuming we know what actually happened here is to presume too much. Just IMO.

The government could well be making this up in order to make an alleged libertarian hero look bad.

[fr33]

The black market sucks. The recourse you have is not legal no matter what it is.

[PRB]

Although in this case, BECAUSE of the illegal and immoral war on drugs, the person he purportedly had killed was threatening the lives of many other innocents. Arguably legitimate defense of others and CERTAINLY well-deserved consequences for mr. blackmailer.

Yep, fight blackmail with murder, free market at work.

[PRB]

The black market sucks. The recourse you have is not legal no matter what it is.

The price of freedom, isn't it?

[PRB]

If you're dumb and violent enough to have someone "hit," I guess it makes sense that you're dumb enough to make transactions online to do so.

his whole case goes to show how no amount of cryptography will protect you if you're stupid enough to...be human.

1. how did somebody blackmail him? whoever blackmailed him knew who he was
2. he had to know the person blackmailing him, I mean, you have to, to want to kill somebody
3. he would've never been caught in connection with silk road if he wasn't an idiot using an email address with his real name to begin with
4. when all said and done, you can't get away with crimes forever, if you make money committing crimes, you'll slip up when you spend it, or die young. Crime just doesn't pay.

[PRB]

He may have had a jury nullification chance on the drug stuff with an appeal...but plotting to kill is incredibly retarded...especially for a self-proclaimed libertarian who should believe in non-aggression. Why he didn't just retire early and disappear with 6 figures of BTC's I'll never understand...

it's not aggression when you're killing somebody who "deserves it" (Acala's words), is it?

why didn't he cash out and retire? Because he's human. Not because he's retarded, but because he's not retarded. Humans never know when to walk away on a winning streak. Greed is knowing you're never satisfied, pure and simple.

[Acala]

it's not aggression when you're killing somebody who "deserves it" (Acala's words), is it?

why didn't he cash out and retire? Because he's human. Not because he's retarded, but because he's not retarded. Humans never know when to walk away on a winning streak. Greed is knowing you're never satisfied, pure and simple.

If somebody holds a gun to the head of an innocent and threatens to kill them if you don't meet his demands, the law in most states, and my moral values system, says you can use deadly force to stop him from harming the innocent third party. I think the actual facts here are too uncertain to say for sure, but I could see a situation where a person makes a credible threat to unleash deadly forces upon innocent persons and in such a case, killing that person to stop the threat is justified.

[PRB]

If somebody holds a gun to the head of an innocent and threatens to kill them if you don't meet his demands, the law in most states, and my moral values system, says you can use deadly force to stop him from harming the innocent third party.

So you believe a person who hasn't harmed another person deserves to be killed?

I think the actual facts here are too uncertain to say for sure, but I could see a situation where a person makes a credible threat to unleash deadly forces upon innocent persons and in such a case, killing that person to stop the threat is justified.

Credible threat hasn't been harmed.

[William Tell]

Wow, he paid to have at least 5 people slaughtered? If so, dude, not cool.

[pcosmar]

The price of freedom, isn't it?

nope.
A black market is proof of the Lack of Freedom.

[Acala]

So you believe a person who hasn't harmed another person deserves to be killed?



Credible threat hasn't been harmed.

I don't believe self-defense requires a person to wait until they have been harmed. The law in most states is that a person who is in reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury can use deadly force to stop the attack BEFORE it happens. If someone points a gun at me with what a reasonable person would believe is the intent to shoot me, I can shoot them first. The same rule typically applies for intervention on the behalf of another person. If instead of me the would-be murderer is pointing the gun at another person and I have a reasonable belief he is going to shoot that other person, I can shoot him first. I do not have to wait for the murder or rape or arson to actually happen.

"Deserved" is probably not the best word. I would restate it that a person who makes a credible threat to kill a bunch of other people for his own profit has nothing to complain about when he is killed first.

[muh_roads]

Wow, he paid to have at least 5 people slaughtered? If so, dude, not cool.

There is no proof that they were actually killed. It was likely that he was paying Government stooges pretending to be hitmen.

[PRB]

nope.
A black market is proof of the Lack of Freedom.

you mean to say, black market is the result of a regulated market, but black market participants are exercising freedom, are they not?

[PRB]

I don't believe self-defense requires a person to wait until they have been harmed. The law in most states is that a person who is in reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury can use deadly force to stop the attack BEFORE it happens. If someone points a gun at me with what a reasonable person would believe is the intent to shoot me, I can shoot them first. The same rule typically applies for intervention on the behalf of another person. If instead of me the would-be murderer is pointing the gun at another person and I have a reasonable belief he is going to shoot that other person, I can shoot him first. I do not have to wait for the murder or rape or arson to actually happen.

This is basically PRE CRIME. The justification for drunk driving laws. Arrest and imprison somebody before he's harmed anybody. Threats are not crimes, no harm no crime.

[William Tell]

There is no proof that they were actually killed. It was likely that he was paying Government stooges pretending to be hitmen.

But if you are right he still paid to have people killed. He's just as much a scumbag whether the people he paid went through with it or not.

[muh_roads]

But if you are right he still paid to have people killed. He's just as much a scumbag whether the people he paid went through with it or not.

The War on Drugs itself causes people who were never violent to become violent to protect themselves.

I'm not justifying what he did...but the system at its root core is the problem.

[muh_roads]

BTW Ross was just found guilty on all accounts. May 30th is the sentencing. 20 to life. Will probably appeal since the Judge blocked evidence and testimony by the Defense from being put on record on numerous occasions.

[Acala]

This is basically PRE CRIME. The justification for drunk driving laws. Arrest and imprison somebody before he's harmed anybody. Threats are not crimes, no harm no crime.

I didn't say anything about what is or is not a crime. I am talking about lawful use of deadly force in self-defense or defense of another.

To use deadly force in self-defense or defense of another from imminent death or serious bodily injury, you do NOT need to wait until the death blow has been delivered. That would be even more idiotic than the law typically is.

If you ever intend to use a gun to defend yourself, your home, or your loved ones, you need to know this law CLEARLY. Look at your state statute. I will quote the law of my own state:

"[A] person is justified in . . . using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force."

You do NOT need to wait until you have been attacked if you reasonably believe you WILL be. You may use deadly force to PREVENT a deadly attack from happening. Call it pre-crime if you like, but it is the law. And I agree with it. What you are suggesting would be moronic.

[William Tell]

The War on Drugs itself causes people who were never violent to become violent to protect themselves.

I'm not justifying what he did...but the system at its root core is the problem.

Black market big shots make money because of the war on drugs. I don't consider him a victim in the least. He made money off the fact that drugs are illegal. Presumably way more money than many narcotics officers. Hiring assassins to kill 5 people is not self defense.

Certainly the system is a problem. But it can't be blamed for all evil. If he really did hire assassins he is the only one to blame for that.

[hillertexas]

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/silk-ro...richt-verdict/
Ross Ulbricht Convicted of All 7 Charges

[PRB]

I didn't say anything about what is or is not a crime. I am talking about lawful use of deadly force in self-defense or defense of another.

Same thing, really.

[kcchiefs6465]

Black market big shots make money because of the war on drugs. I don't consider him a victim in the least. He made money off the fact that drugs are illegal. Presumably way more money than many narcotics officers. Hiring assassins to kill 5 people is not self defense.

Certainly the system is a problem. But it can't be blamed for all evil. If he really did hire assassins he is the only one to blame for that.

I was hoping for nullification. If the case were that said five people were blackmailing him, threatening him with a few hundred years in a cage, his family ruined, etc. well, meh. I'd cry more over spilled piss.

To recognize that such a scenario (his rise to power as well as said informants looking to possibly extort him for his freedom and allegedly and subsequently being killed after the fact) was only made possible through the inane drug laws is simply just that. I don't excuse what he may have done and I don't know the exact circumstances.

Regardless it is clear to see that absent the drug laws being what they are now, his life would have probably been considerably different. Pushing for freedom and challenging the status quo with regards to entrepreneurial norms and technology, maybe he would have been 'legitimate' as well as wealthy? Guess we won't know... because to prevent his 'crimes' (the only few of which being said murders where a proper defense was not even allowed) everyone must be robbed to collectively pay for a five million dollar prosecution/incarceration. And that is a low figure. Their investigation alone probably tallied into the tens of millions.

The DEA sells drugs. They regulate and are directly involved in the pimping of them to children too. Maybe they were upset that he wouldn't become an informant? That he shrugged at their good cop, bad cop, shenanigans? It's funny who is allowed to sell cocaine (though this gentleman never directly or provably sold any, I don't believe) and who is not. Look at the sort of people the DEA routinely covers for in said trafficker's cocaine/murder/gun running schemes. It's almost as if they are incompetent, politicized whores.

Norwin Meneses comes to mind but the list is quite long. Their entire history is full of similar fail.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Same thing, really.

Disbarred lawyer/law school dropout?

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

The movement should definitely not throw any support behind this guy just because he claims to have shared ideals. Hiring a vicious biker gang to murder people is not acceptable under any framework. Certain circles I was involved with had one percent bikers on the periphery, and they are brutal, horrendous human beings.

It's one thing to offer a service to customers, it's quite another to try and murder people to maintain your business. I know people are saying they were government operatives (which I've seen no actual evidence for), but even if they were, he contracted people to be killed. There's no excuse for that, and saying you can kill people who were going to aggress against others is a slippery slope. By that standard, you could argue it's okay to kill politicians, or cops or maybe even government workers or welfare recipients. It's not a road to go down.

[Christian Liberty]

Wow, he paid to have at least 5 people slaughtered? If so, dude, not cool.

But if you are right he still paid to have people killed. He's just as much a scumbag whether the people he paid went through with it or not.

Black market big shots make money because of the war on drugs. I don't consider him a victim in the least. He made money off the fact that drugs are illegal. Presumably way more money than many narcotics officers. Hiring assassins to kill 5 people is not self defense.

Certainly the system is a problem. But it can't be blamed for all evil. If he really did hire assassins he is the only one to blame for that.

The movement should definitely not throw any support behind this guy just because he claims to have shared ideals. Hiring a vicious biker gang to murder people is not acceptable under any framework. Certain circles I was involved with had one percent bikers on the periphery, and they are brutal, horrendous human beings.

It's one thing to offer a service to customers, it's quite another to try and murder people to maintain your business. I know people are saying they were government operatives (which I've seen no actual evidence for), but even if they were, he contracted people to be killed. There's no excuse for that, and saying you can kill people who were going to aggress against others is a slippery slope. By that standard, you could argue it's okay to kill politicians, or cops or maybe even government workers or welfare recipients. It's not a road to go down.

Some people do indeed go down "that road", its quite common in ancap circles actually (though of course there are plenty of ancaps who won't "go there." (I've never heard of anyone go as far as "welfare recipients" though.) But really, I don't think that's the main question here. Of course it was wrong if he hired assassins. My real question is; did he actually hire assassins? Or is this just government being like "see, this is why drugs need to be illegal"?