Nope, not a joke. Currently more of a thought experiment that could turn into a startup if it really seems viable.
I'm in the US and I would actually be very interested in chatting with the DEA about my idea. If it turns out there is no legal way to move ahead with my idea, I won't pursue it further. As I said, I'm not even sure what kind of lawyer I could contact to get advice about this kind of thing. Saul Goodman?
I'm aware that the fentanyl is added on purpose, but I don't think they want to add so much that it kills their customers.
Last year there was some discussion of legalizing cocaine production in Columbia. I think the plan was eventually rejected, but it seems like people are seriously considering creative solutions.
Be careful dealing with federal agents and federal agencies. They can get you for "lying to federal agents". Always have a lawyer next to you, so that this lawyer can take notes, thereby preventing you from being charged under "trumped up charges". I don't know why you are exploring this area, unless you want to spend some time in some federal penitentiary.
Good advice. I know there have been situations where federal agencies have turned out to be "the bad guys", but I guess I'm optimistic that they are generally smart, well intentioned, and interested in some of the same outcomes that I'm talking about.
As to why I'm exploring this, it's just a topic I've been thinking about lately. My daughter is starting college in the fall and they've had a lot of deaths over the last few years from fentanyl in pot. I plan to send her with a bunch of fentanyl test strips. If she ends up using them for herself or friends or other random college kids, it could very realistically save a life. Depending on how that goes, I'm also looking at a program to get fentanyl test strips to college kids for free on a larger scale.
"lot of deaths over the last few years from fentanyl in pot."
Can you share a case where this has been confirmed? There was some hysteria in Connecticut last year, but my understanding is that this has never actually happened. I'd love to see a pointer to a coroner's report on a case of accidental fentanyl ingestion from laced pot having led to an overdose.
I have seen cases of fentanyl test strips coming up positive, but only with incidental contamination rather than anything in concentrations that are actually hazardous. Fentanyl decomposes at under 300 degrees and pot burns at 450, so it is not actually a viable route to ingestion.
I'll try to find a good source to back up the claim. The statement was made in a verbal, in-person presentation by the deputy chief of the university police, who was told by the city coroner. But for all I know, he could have made it up in an attempt to scare the kids.
Fyi, Fentanyl strips are not full proof. This is because the amount of Fentanyl mixed is so small, there is high likelihood that no Fentanyl is picked up in the tested sample. In other words, high chance of false negatives. Test kits + narcan on hand is the best way to be safe.
That's good to know. I've only done a little initial research around this. I ordered some test strips from a manufacture called MD-Bio (https://mdbio.com). I'll be sure to review all their instructions and safety info.
Out of curiosity, are you saying that a Fentanyl level can be so low that it's undetectable by the test strips, but still high enough to kill someone?
First, fentanyl is only one of many adjuvants that are mixed with illegal street drugs. Far more exotic compounds exist and are circulating. The issue is that illegal drug labs aren’t necessarily mixing the adjuvant in correctly. There can be “hot spots” where a granule of the toxic drug is not properly distributed, leading to some part of a sample having a vastly higher concentration than others.
So when you test your drugs with the test strip, if the hot spot isn’t in the test sample, you’re gonna die. And many of the adjuvants do not resolve with Narcan.
There is no way to reduce the risk of illegally produced drugs to a tolerable level in today’s environment. Don’t kid yourself. Tell you daughter she runs a serious risk of death even with testing. This shit is no joke.
Thanks for the extra details here. I can see how challenging it would be to know with a high degree of certainty that a drug was truly safe just using test strips. But it seems like the test strips are a practical, relatively low cost option that, while not perfect, could improve the status quo.
Test strips aren't the only option that I'm investigating. I know there are some facilities that will do lab tests to check for fentanyl and other dangerous additives. That might end up being a better approach.
I have family and friends with pharmaceutical industry, chemistry, and medical/healthcare backgrounds that I've reached out to for advice on the issue, especially the question of weather it's possible to safely use the test strips with a low risk of some kind of exposure.
Since Fentanyl is so potent, it's mixed in such low volume. The dosage is still high enough to kill you due to the potency.
Let's assume the desired drug to fentanyl ratio is 1000:1 by volume. When you take a small random sample of this, there's a good chance that 0 parts of Fentanyl have been selected in this random sample. You'll get a clean test result, even though the drug contains lethal amounts of Fentanyl.
most test kits properly instruct you on this, but you can dissolve your entire dose, or the entire batch, in water, test that, then either consume like that or let the water evaporate
in other words, testing a portion doesn't consume that portion, so you can literally test and then consume the same dose
You're being very optimistic there. For a lot of people "higher up", not just in law enforcement, extra deaths as a side effect of drug-handling is a feature, not a bug.
I always wonder where's the legal boundary of abetting. If I sell a cartel member a pack of chewing gum at a gas station, I'm probably not abetting. But what if I'm a book store owner, I know the customer is a chemist for the cartel, and I sell him a chemistry book? Is that criminal? Why/why not?
Conviction under Section 2(a) requires that a defendant embrace the crime of another and consciously do something to contribute to its success. Although its elements are variously described, it is often said that, “[i]n order to aid and abet another to commit a crime it is necessary [1] that a defendant in some sort associate himself with the venture, [2] that he participate in it as in something that he wishes to bring about, [3]that he seek by his action to make it succeed,” and [4] that someone commits the offense. Satisfying only one of these elements is not enough. Thus, presence at the commission of a crime or close association with the perpetrator does not constitute aiding and abetting, without more. Yet, a defendant’s level of participation may be relatively minimal and need not advance every element of the crime. As for seeking to make it succeed, the defendant must intend the commission of the underlying offense, and that intent requires that he be aware beforehand of the scope of the offense in order to permit him to disassociate himself. Thus, the defendant must know that the offense is afoot before it occurs if he is to be convicted of aiding and abetting.
--
So... it depends? If someone walks into your bookstore and says, "Hey, I want to cook up some meth" and you say "I know a great chemistry book but i'll have to special order it for you" that starts to look like association to me. But buying a book off the shelf, ehh, that's why you have books on the shelf. Guns are used in crimes. Cars are used in crimes. How often do you hear about car salesmen being arrested for aiding a bank robbery? Or gun salesman for a mass shooting?
I appreciate you pointing out that specific statue and sharing your interpretation. My idea would have non-criminal use cases as well, but I'm not clear if that is sufficient. Criminals can use Telegram to communicate about crimes. Does that mean that Telegram is aiding and abetting? I'm definitely out of my depth on the legal details, which is why I would get good legal advice before doing anything.
The Law is never perfect. Who the judge is, who the jury is, how they woke up on a given day, etc etc, can often be the difference between innocence and guilt, in the eyes of the system.
Book owner "looks shifty", smokes pot recreationally, is known by prostitutes? Guilty. Book owner wears tweed, went to Harvard, is well-liked in book-clubs? Innocent.
Yes, my main concern is the cartels themselves. The most likely outcome is that none of them would ever agree to meet me. There is a very small chance that one or two would meet me, love the idea, and agree to cooperate. There's also a non-zero chance that in the process of trying to get a meeting, I would upset them somehow and they would take some action against me.
Another possibility is that even if the cartels like my idea, it might upset other parties in the supply chain and they could take action.
Billboard is a good idea. I'll look into that. What should it say?
I have read a few things about cartel org structures, but most of my knowledge is based on The Wire and Breaking Bad, and obviously those probably aren't too close to reality. The El Chapo transcripts are a great suggestion. Much appreciated.
You should be watching Netflix’s Narcos instead. Or you can contact some reporter at Vice News who interviewed several capos in the cartel. Maybe get some intro from them.
You make several good points. One option I had considered was somehow working my way up the chain, but hadn't thought about local law enforcement. Thanks!
I still think it's a monumentally bad idea. There are no rational people on any side of that hot mess. To the point of others in this thread, if your intent could be perceived as aiding and abetting the cartels then the authorities would put you away unlike the cartel of whom they can not touch most of the time but I am not a lawyer and not an expert in these matters. I can only hope you talk to that Sheriff. I think they would help you see reason and are much less likely to drag you into the legal system than the other agents.
Why don't you just publish the idea and wait for the better angels of their nature to realize that being good is more in their long term interest than being bad? It's not like they don't do research or keep abreast of technology; if you just want to save humanity then go public and spread your idea as widely as possible while expecting nothing in return.
If you want to understand the sociopolitical dynamics of cartels and the strategic logic of their operations, I suggest this monograph: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA599872.pdf
It's obviously a super complicated and morally fraught issue, but if I could enable a future with fewer fentanyl deaths and less border violence, that seems like it would be good progress. The current war on drugs does not seem to be making much progress.
But your point about just publishing the idea is well taken. This would not be a money making venture for me. A big part of the challenge of getting a cartel meeting would be convincing people that I wasn't wasting their time. That would likely involve establishing credibility somehow. It's an interesting problem.
I appreciate the pointer to that report. It looks fascinating. I'll read through it.
If your idea is truly something that could have such big effects, I'd say the ethical thing to do would be to document and share it widely, so that any individuals from cartels to lawmakers, agencies, drug research centre's etc. could do as they wish with the data. Again, if it's that revolutionary then it's very likely this open sharing will see it taking off. Not to mention that it's morally questionable to keep such a potentially beneficial harm reduction technique to oneself.
Agreed. I plan to publish the details shortly. And to be clear, although I refer to it as a "startup", I don't actually want to make any money off of it.
Are you truly that stupid to think that the following is true:
1. That an actual cartel rep would be the person you are talking to, vs. someone undercover with law enforcement who is merely lining up facts with which to arrest and charge you?
2. That, assuming they do work for a cartel, they are going to tell you the truth, rather than just lying to you so you will give you the supposedly breakthrough idea, after which they will have you executed to ensure their competitors don’t get the same idea?
3. That, assuming you aren’t executed by the cartel, they don’t kidnap you to secure your ongoing help as their slave to flesh out the concept before executing you and putting your body in a hole in the desert? And while they hold you, they will show you photos of your daughter, who is under surveillance, while they torture you with the notion that any lack of ongoing full cooperation will result in her intentional poising and death?
I’ve been playing with Netbird lately and it’s been working well. They have a free plan for up to 20 nodes, and a self hosted option if you want to eject from their cloud offering.
Yeah having all my users have to be on github or sign up for a third service is a non-starter, but plain wireguard is just a bit much. Netbird looks like a good path.
I suspect mTLS adoption has been slow because it’s easier to reason about authentication when the mechanics are “closer” to your application code. The mental model of bearer tokens in HTTP headers is pretty easy. Using mTLS requires understanding a lot more moving parts, and TLS still feels like a magical black box in many ways.
Are there any libraries you would recommend that provide a good developer experience around using mTLS?
