I read your argument in two parts - one that appeals to my own emotions and one that hides behind the law to demonize illegal trade.
Let's ignore the emotional part because that is highly subjective.
I'd argue that the current legislation is not effective in representing the best interests of the general public, which is what I understand the spirit of all laws to be. It takes too long to change, and for change to even be considered it takes a significant amount of money or collective effort which is not always practical.
Let's ignore the emotional part because that is highly subjective.
I'd argue that the current legislation is not effective in representing the best interests of the general public, which is what I understand the spirit of all laws to be. It takes too long to change, and for change to even be considered it takes a significant amount of money or collective effort which is not always practical.