13 points by Physkal about 17 hours ago | 8 comments | View on ycombinator
robocat about 6 hours ago |
duskdozer about 15 hours ago |
Yes, because drug dogs are largely a sham
>The report stated that prohibited drugs were found in only 26% of searches following an indication by a drug sniffer dog. Of these, 84% were for small amounts of cannabis deemed for personal use.
https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/reports/report-to-parliament/pol...
rawgabbit about 15 hours ago |
The-Old-Hacker about 17 hours ago |
Physkal about 15 hours ago |
Helloyello about 16 hours ago |
That explains:
Everyone is so money focused that they struggle to imagine other motivations than dollars. These are poor inmates with little hope, who are willing to try anything. And it seems that there is little societal response to inmate deaths, plus society's normal harm-reduction features don't function inside a prison.Follow the "NOT money": is it only the poor inmates that die? Presumably the richer inmates can source safer drugs for themselves.
Lethality might even be the goal: a simple signal that doesn't need covert back-channels. If you regularly send a drug test into prison then you might not even need to know who it was given to (assuming nobody hoards the drugs longer than the period between sending in the samples).
https://archive.ph/xiQzD