A case is being made regarding relative punishments. I find this is an entirely appropriate time and location to bring this argument, given that the main criteria for comments is that they are substantive and contribute. I think this one contributes by starting an interesting side conversation, which are in my opinion one of the best parts of HN.

If you don't want to take part, just click the [-] to collapse the thread and ignore it. If you take issue with the actual content of the comment, a bit more information on why you think it has nothing to do with a case where a high placed executive might face relatively minor punishment for, as the GP puts it, getting "thousands addicted to your drug, take their money, ruin their families for years and eventually take their lives." might help clarify that stance.