> Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? It's an interesting tidbit and gives a

> Sure, but why does something being illegal in the past matter without the reasoning of why it should be illegal again? It's an interesting tidbit and gives a jumping off point for the person who was asking about it to research further if they want. I wouldn't have guessed that they were illegal once, but after toomuchtodo's comment I looked it up. Now I know more! One shouldn't assume that just because someone chimed in with a fun fact they're an expert on it or have some opinion they want to push for unless they said or implied otherwise, which toomuchtodo didn't do. As an example: I have minimal interest in anything related to stocks or finance. My only interest here was your response seeming a bit out of place :)