Topic: News: Bulgaria's Boevski Abused by Prisoners in Brazilian Jail - Lawyer

[Arturo Gómez]

Ok, thanks;

[Shaun Le Conte]

Boevski's profits from drug trafficking in the present system of law are probably potentially greater than if there was free trade, right? And this is due to the risks involved in trafficking cocaine? Let's not argue against his imprisonment then, it was the risk he took as stated earlier. To say it would be moral to bust him out of jail is like saying arguing that the big corporations should keep the profits from their risky
investments but not take responsibility for their losses.

Rather, argue against the system in general which criminalizes the drug trade.

I'll read replies but not going to write anything else.

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Yes, the extraordinary profits in the "illegal" drug trade are due entirely to the fact they are illegal. This is totally irrelevant to the morality of imprisoning him. Boevski has committed violence against exactly no one, yet tremendous violence has been used against him. The fact that someone makes a nice profit by risking traveling the roads despite bandits in the area robbing travelers in NO way justifies the robbery the bandits commit nor would it justify the robbers not only robbing them but then imprisoning them for an alleged crime under the pretext that, after all, it was the "generosity and hard-work" of the robbers which created the greater profit potential for those risking traveling the roads.

The non-aggression principle is very clear. It is never moral to *initiate*aggression, yet defense against such aggression is *always* moral. It would in fact be completely moral to kill every guard in that prison to get Boevski out and if I had the money to spare to fund such a rescue operation I would do it without hesitation. My answer would be exactly the same if *you* were arrested for smuggling 9kgs of fried potato chips.

[John Way]

even if 1kg of coke was $1 us dollar, crime would still be associated with it, as criminals would kill off the competition etc as they curently do! never trust a druggie or a dealer!

[John Way]

chris ever rationalise that some of the drugs cartels dont just do it for the money, but also for the power!

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

If violence was not used to try and prevent people from getting what they want, there would be no more violence in the trade of drugs than food. It is the violence of the state prohibition which begets more violence and creates the cartels, just as it did with alcohol prohibition in America. There are likely trillions of illegal drug trades done every day and very, very few involve any violence and even then only again because the state makes it impossible to go to one's *alleged* protectors for help when it happens. I have bought marijuana thousands and thousands of times and never had the slightest problem. Dealers provide me what I want so they can get my repeat business. It is the cops that are violent bullies that violate our rights and are above the law. It is the cops that are criminals seeking to steal our property and imprison us. It is the dealers risking themselves to provide us what we want. If the state made food, water, wood, or any other desired commodity illegal, there would be violence in those markets very quickly and in fact this has always been the way of "black markets."

The drug war is retarded tyranny and pure evil. There is never a moral reason to initiate violence. Only savages make such arguments.

[Andy Dick]

The non-aggression principle is very clear. It is never moral to *initiate*aggression, yet defense against such aggression is *always* moral. It would in fact be completely moral to kill every guard in that prison to get Boevski out and if I had the money to spare to fund such a rescue operation I would do it without hesitation. My answer would be exactly the same if *you* were arrested for smuggling 9kgs of fried potato chips.

I have a question because I don't understand fully how this can work.  So I get that according to this because putting him in prison is immoral and that to defend him you can go kill all these people to break him out.  Except is it wrong that say this situation is about to occur and someone tips the guards off that you are going to come basically kill them to free him and they track you down and kill you to defend themselves?  They did not put him in prison the courts and judge did the guards are just not letting him out because its thier job to not open a door wether they know why he is there or not.  But by hindering his freedom they are worthy of the death penalty?  They are not worthy to protect themselves against aggression?  Does the threat of breaking the non-aggression principle even though it has not been acted out warrant violence against someone?

If violence was not used to try and prevent people from getting what they want, there would be no more violence in the trade of drugs than food.

Question 2 - if the drug war ended today do you think the cartels would just get rid of thier free labor in these third world countries growing, harvesting, cooking up these drugs?  Would a second war emerge against the drug lords unwilling to get rid of thier cheap labor off the backs of abusing the human rights of others?

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Andy, on your first question, the non-aggression principle forbids the *initiation* of violence, not defensive violence. It is violence used to imprison Boevski.  Certainly, only the violence necessary to free him would be moral to use. The guards are criminals, are initiating violence. No, they have no right to attack others who may free one of their victims. This is akin to asking if a highwayman has the right to defend themselves from their victims that choose to defend themselves.

On your second question, without government the cartels would lose control over the industry in the same way that the organized mafias lost control of alcohol production and distribution after prohibition was finally ended. The profit margin would shrink to that of any other industry and only those who provided the very best product, for the best price, in the most reliable fashion would survive and violence would be of no use just as it would not benefit your local alcohol store to use it on their customers.