Some here say that any ***-control law would turn against law abiding citizens 'cause criminals don't follow the law. Fair enough. What about ***** ?
***** are *******. Still, criminals do *****. And they sell *****.
So, basically, the law only affects law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
Then, if no ***-control law should be ****** 'cause it would affect only law-abiding citizens, why isn't it the same for ***** ?
Also, if you say "Guns don't **** people, people **** people" then, you could also say "***** don't **** people, people **** people".
People who die because of ***** die because they didn't do it well (overdose, using a HIV infected needle, etc...) the way some people die from *** accident
So, banning ***** and refusing any ***-control law is totally illogical. Both should be ******. Or both should be legal. Banning one and legalising the other is clearly a double-standard.
To me, both should be ****** 'cause both are dangerous
