That's an interesting perspective. But it does hinge upon two different
   assumptions.
   First, it hinges upon the assassination market being fake (or more
   generally, that the severity of what was happening there is
   overstated), which I would think the most effective way to evaluate
   would be to consider with an institution devoted to getting to the
   heart of what is true and false. Such as a court. Which it did.
   Unless you are advising that our nation should use some other
   institution, such as your personal judgment, to determine truth from
   fiction, I'm not sure what you are proposing. So far as the law is
   concerned, the severity of what was happening there was extreme enough
   to justify the sentance, and you disagreeing with the outcome doesn't
   make it any less a valid outcome for one who believes in the rule of
   law. Which I'll admit, you might not.
   The second part is to take issue with the laws that our society has
   created, and to a very large degree supports. While there is widespread
   support for legalization of marijuana, the same cannot be said for the
   kind of hard drugs that Silk Road was reputed to traffic in.  So I
   think it can be frustrating when you disagree with the rest of society
   in a democracy, but that doesn't make the democracy itself flawed. It
   just makes you an outlier, which is a feature not a bug of a
   representative democracy.
   I think it's easy to pick and choose from the outcomes that you like in
   order to criticize our court system. But I would encourage you to focus
   more on the process itself, and advising specific fixes to the process
   if you are unhappy with its results.
   On the other hand, if you can't identify specific changes you'd like to
   make in the process, then you should just sit back and accept the
   results.
   And if you are instead of advising that we just scrap the whole thing
   start over, I would encourage you to get clear on what specifically you
   would like to be different in the new society versus the old, and why
   revolution is the most effective way to accomplish it.
   David

   On Sun, Jun 27, 2021, 11:54 AM jim bell <[1]jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:

   I am not aware that Silk Road ever had a genuine "assassination"
   market.   Fake perhaps, not genuine.
   As for "illicit drugs":  Probably billions of dollars of 'illicit
   drugs' are bought and sold, daily, without any connection to the
   Internet.  If anything, Silk Road made the world a safer place:  There
   was much less likelihood of being arrested for drug deals, due to
   little or no human contact.  And because of the concept of
   "reputation", chances are good that the drugs sold on Silk Road (or
   other subsequent 'Dark Markets') were more reliable, higher and
   more-consistent purity, fewer unhealthy 'cuts', etc.
   So, it was a BENEFICIAL website.  It simply thwarted the desire of some
   people who wanted to suppress drug sales and use.
                    Jim Bell
   On Sunday, June 27, 2021, 11:35:53 AM PDT, David Barrett
   <[2]dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
   Just to make sure I understand, you are describing Silk Road, a hidden
   marketplace for everything from illicit drugs to assassinations, as
   harmless?
   David
   On Sat, Jun 26, 2021, 9:40 PM grarpamp <[3]grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:

     While other people get less than 25y for Murder, Rape, etc, and
     nothing for War, Torture, Infinite Detention, Global Organized
     Theft, etc.
     Any questions?
     #FreeRoss
     #RIPJohnHurley
     #McAfeeDidntKillHimself
     BTW: People actually could buy, did buy, still can buy,
     and indeed should consider buying... a cannon.
     Or at least 3D-Print one :)

References

   1. mailto:jdb10987@yahoo.com
   2. mailto:dbarrett@expensify.com
   3. mailto:grarpamp@gmail.com