You got 'it' on bikes, -- to bad you can't understand the same principle appies to booze, guns, -- and even drugs. - 324 by tpaine
That is because the majority of the state supports hard drug prohibition, therefore it is not arbitrary; and they support that position because they view it as too much of a threat, therefore it is not purposeless.
What can I say to that bit of nonsense? - I'll assume that you THINK you've made a point. -- In actuality I'd guess its a vaguely circular argument. -- Care to explain?