Comment on Had to buy a certain product to use a certain substance and there's a really stupid new law.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 months agoAgain, that is not evidence that PACT was intended to restrict minors from using cannabis. It doesn’t sound like you have evidence.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 7 months ago
……
Do you seriously want them to make a second law when tobacco already covers the sale to minor part? I’m sure most other people can draw this parallel…
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I understand this is your opinion. Opinions are not evidence. And yes, laws are supposed to be very precise, especially when dealing with commerce.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 7 months ago
It’s not my opinion, it’s a waste of taxpayer dollars when the laws already cover themselves. It’s illegal because it’s illegal for tobacco, and tobacco and cannabis have the same restrictions. So to restrict one with a law, automatically restricts the other, which is an extremely efficient way to make laws and legislation.
I’m sorry you seem to have a misunderstanding of how laws work. Sober up and reread this dude, seriously.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Sorry, commerce laws are supposed to be vague and apply to things not specified in them? Because that sounds like a really good thing for corporations and a really bad thing for everyone else, especially when the government uses those law loopholes to its own ends.