I think an analogy can be drawn with copyright violation. When VCRs were first introduced, their sale was challenged in court on the grounds that they led to copyright violations. The court (U.S. Supreme Court? I can't remember) ruled that they were legal because they had significant non-infringing functions. Can/should a similar standard be applied here? Does the Whizzinator have a significant legal use?
I'm not sold on the idea of these being legal if their only use is in breaking the law. Then again, I'm opposed to those laws in the first place, so my opposition is half-hearted.
Quote:
|
The only use for a handgun is to kill humans. Handguns are legal, killing humans isnīt.
|
Handguns are useful in preventing crime, as well as killing pests. And killing humans isn't always illegal (self-defense)