Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
When you say legitimate source, do you just mean a source you agree with?
No one who is pro pot, smokes pot, or legally sells pot would deny that the illegal trade of pot and the organizations involved also partake in other illegal activities, some of which may be objectively immoral. But the conclusion you're coming to is complete nonsense.
|
The only reason why pot is even associated associated with criminals is BECAUSE it's still under Prohibition, so the only people who will get involved with illegal pot are the ones willing to break at least that law.
If dogs were illegal, the same thing would happen. Dogs would be illegally bred and sold in the "criminal" market (which can also include many legitimately criminal elements, such as dogfighting or abuse), and then notmeofficer would run around claiming that crime is inherent among dog owners (assuming that he was given a fat monetary incentive to also harass dog-lovers, of course
).
Sounds ridiculous? Yes. But only because it's currently legal to have a dog, so when we think of "dogs owners", we think of typically upstanding all-American citizens -- not criminals lurking in the underground world.