Comment by lolinder
2 months ago
If you followed this line of reasoning consistently you'd advocate for no additional regulations to ever be imposed by government and all existing regulations to be walked back. That is, to most of us, patently absurd. The answer to your objection is to enforce the laws that we have, not to never make new ones.
People do actually advocate for exactly that.
And as the poster said, that's patently absurd.
not every line of reasoning is intended to be followed to its fullest extent. one can advocate for regulation without advocating for prohibition without contradiction.