Yes, yes, obviously you are. 😉

So, do you maintain your position that this conversation was never about any debate about any prohibition and its actually not been about anything and started for no reason?

Thanks for picking it up.

Or would you like to answer these arguments I crafted for your level

1) Prohibition hasn't achieved its goal after a century
2) To achieve it you'd need 24/7 surveillance

@Dasus Yep.

See, you're not even trying to make up your own narrative.

You're like a dog on a leash, this is boring.

Like a TAME dog on a leash, not a newly accustoming dog.

Like, you'd only need one of those really thin leathery pink collars?

Geez.

@Dasus Sure is boring.

That is why I am in another conversation.

Its always like this when arguing against the prohibition of drugs, because people intuitively take the position that "drugs are bad = prohibition good".
It might be super hard for you to question your own mind, but imagine that the prohibition actually INCREASES the problems caused by prohibition, so "drug abuse = bad, prohibition = WAY WORSE"

>That ego stroking

@Deleted User sure, sure, but you still keep switching to this one, in which you keep replying with absolutely empty replies, because you're an intellectually pretentious asshole who's ego is too large to admit defeat in an honest debate on an anonymous server?

Did you end the other debate like this?

"like this"? Like what? Like me trying to present simple arguments for two hours in a row to a person who literally admits to not reading my messages yet maintains to "debate" me ?

1) Prohibition hasn't achieved its goal after a century
2) To achieve it you'd need 24/7 surveillance

What's the argument here

I think you should be able to discern it by glancing at log. I've stated it several times.

@Deleted User Literally nothing.

Something about prohibition

Wouldn't be an issue if people enforcing a restriction put maximum efforts into it.

@Dasus argues prohibition hasn't worked and is impossible to work

@Deleted User has absolutely nothing

Like if say you ban a Mexican product and you jail people for using

What does that do about the dealers

Or the growers

The mules?

@Deleted User It was supposed tk be for him, but I really did not care enough to debate about it.

You have to whack the entire supply chain

No exceptions

Hire criminals in Mexico to kill the drug lords and burn their fields

Well, I would maintain that I have tried, for two hours straight, to present formal, simple arguments and literally all of the peer reviewed published papers on the subject of drug policy reform, but @Deleted User keeps maintaing that his conversation has never had a start and just suddenly burst into existence and has no mentions of any arguments about anything.

In truth here in the U.S. politicians make money from illegal drug trade so those kikes want to jail people for abusing but keep the dealers and growers intact

@Deleted User Sorry, doesn't work, new ones will take their place, because of basic economic principles.
Literally the most basic form is here

1) Prohibition hasn't achieved its goal after a century
2) To achieve it you'd need 24/7 surveillance

@Dasus >peer reviewed published papers

From 420blazeit.com I bet

Okay new ones take their place and you continue hacking the head of the hydra off