> If it's going to be made legal, it needs to be justified, rather than there needing to be justification for making it illegal.

Huh, why?

> It was banned most everywhere, then with no public debate on the subject, much less consensus, all of a sudden it was legal and in your face wherever you went.

They didn't change any laws, did they? So it was as legal earlier as it is now, isn't it? It's just that someone found the right loophole that was always there.

▲

pxeboot 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> They didn't change any laws, did they? So it was as legal earlier as it is now, isn't it? It's just that someone found the right loophole that was always there.

In the US, it was banned in most places until 2018. The Supreme Court invalidated the ban that had been in place until then.

	▲	eru 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The Supreme Court invalidated the ban that had been in place until then. The Supreme Court interprets existing law, don't they?

▲

nofriend 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Huh, why?

The opposite change was already justified, it would obviously be ridiculous to have to constantly rejustify every law in our society.

> They didn't change any laws, did they? So it was as legal earlier as it is now, isn't it? It's just that someone found the right loophole that was always there.

I do not know nor do I particularly care.

	▲	eru 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> The opposite change was already justified, it would obviously be ridiculous to have to constantly rejustify every law in our society. They didn't change any laws.