[tinyowl]

Saying something won't work and saying Oregon has every right to implement it are totally reconcilable positions.

You say 'Apparently you agree with their decision, since you don't support a ban.'

See what I said above. You are conflating two questions, and either you are doing it sloppily or because you are trying to be right. I suspect the latter. This will be my last comment.

[NobleFree]

No I don't support a ban on alcohol, which doesn't mean I think it's a net positive for individuals or society.

Humans in general have decided the cost/benefit is worth it, for whatever reason

Apparently you agree with their ["Humans in general"] decision ["the cost/benefit is worth it" re alcohol], since you don't support a ban ["I don't support a ban on alcohol"]. What is YOUR reason for deciding the cost/benefit [of alcohol] is worth it?

You are conflating two questions

Wrong. I've annotated my post, above, to aid your comprehension.