>>>>That's absurd. You see teenagers buying booze from the Italian mafia? You see bunch of moonshine runners? Sure don't and duhh it's because booze is legal. Now when it was illegal where did teenagers get their booze? Same place as everyone else - from the only other option - the criminals. This is no different and dude it's not that complicated to figure out...geeze man.
>>>>
>>>
>>>"Dude" I figured it out when I read the name of your company. You like drugs, so whatever it takes you want them, and you want them now. We will have to agree to disagree, however my argument is backed by the law, yours by deadheads.
>>
>>mmmm...well you're kind of jumping to conclusions there John. The name of my biz actually was created because I figured that most of the potential clients I would have would be of the baby-boomer-hippie age and I figured that it would it would be interesting/funny enough that I might get a call or two just because of the name - which has happened. So that being said - picking on the name of my biz didn't address what I'd said at all...which I assume is because there isn't a valid argument against it?
>
>I didn't "pick on" the name of your business, I merely made an observation that my first impression was that you considered yourself a hippie, and your affinity for dope confirmed it.

Well I admit I have hair like a hippie but I sure as heck don't live like one :)
Not sure where you came up with me having an affinity for dope - my interest here, as pointed out in the 1st thread and even the title, is that the drug war has failed and that this major drug panel has determined the best thing to do is legalize marijuana. Trying to say my point of view is backed by "deadheads" despite the membership list of the panel is wrong - take a look at who's on the panel. It's world leaders not Willie Nelson.
I'm interested in hearing the other side of the argument (if there is one) but John I honestly don't see anything here you've said that offers support for you side other than the fact it's already the law - and the point of all this was to talk about why or why not to change the law.