>>>In any event, I don't see anything in Archie's post which indicates that his "theory" is that "a ban is the way to end drugs as opposed to education.

That is absolutely the point of what he said. He is making the argument that a ban is necessary because a ban is effective, where education is not. As far as my bad Grammar, well thats the fault of our public school system.

>>>My proposal (stolen in large part from Jim Episale and supported by Archie) would NOT be a BAN in the same sense that the drug laws "ban" the use of certain drugs. It would prohibit the sale of slabbed chips/tokens in club venues; nowhere else. More like use permit restrictions than outright prohibition.

I do understand that your ban is just a ban on sales at club venues, It is still a ban and not a permit system. You are not proposing to license slab dealers. The effect of your proposal will effectively operate as a ban. You wouldn't support the proposal if it didn't. That is the effect you are trying to achieve. When another poster pointed out that the days of the convention are the only significant days in chip dealing, you acknowledged that fact.

>>>Let's see if I understand your point here. Prohibiting the sale of tobacco to minors hasn't been very effective. So, let's go ahead and allow them to buy all the tobacco they want, while telling them they shouldn't. That would work wonders, I'm sure. (That's the functional equivalent of your position on slabbed chips.)

As far as tobacco goes, yes that is my position. In the case of tobacco, a ban on the sale to minors has been completely ineffective and since children will always be able to get tobacco, we should stop pretending that we can stop them from getting it.

BUT THAT IS NOT MY POINT. My point is that a ban does nothing to stop the underlying cause of teen smoking. As a ban on slabbed chips would do nothing to alleviate whatever concerns would drive someone to slab a chip.

Understand that the word education as far as I am using it has become shorthand for more than just education. I believe that collectors and potential collectors (those being targeted by the slabbers) need to be educated AND given an alternative to slabbing that fulfills the same need that slabbing does. This why I believe a uniform grading system which is descriptive, non-numerical, and easy to apply, is needed (thats probably bad grammar too). With the exception of the convention most chip sales are now probably being conducted by mail or online. This doesn't make it easy for buyers to examine the condition of chips, thus creating a marjet for third party grading. I believe the promotion of more in person trading and sales opportunities will help alleviate that problem. And that is happenening slowly, and I believe the club should take a more proactive approach to that.

>>>As I said last time we had this discussion, this is a false analogy. During prohibition, the sale of alcohol was illegal EVERYWHERE. The sale of most illicit drugs is illegal EVERYWHERE. I have not suggested, nor has anyone else, that the sale of slabbed chips be prohibited EVERYWHERE. Obviously, the club would have no authority to do so anyway.

I'm not the one who made the analogy, it came from your side of the fence. I don't analogize the two on their face, rather I analyze and extrapolate.

The point anyway is that the ban did not alleviate the underlying causes. The point is that a ban is not effective for that reason. I am working on the assumption that you support a ban because you believe that it will prevent slabbing from becoming popular in the hobby. If you don't believe that please tell me why you support a ban.

>>>Do you think the club can prohibit the sale of alcohol or drugs on the convention floor (separate and apart from the illegality of such sales)? Or at the club auction? Or through the club magazine? The answer should be obvious. Does the fact that prohibition failed and the war on drugs is failing mean that we should allow the sale of those things in our club venues?

Jim, I have never suggested that the club does not have the authority to ban the sale of slabbed chips at club venues. I agree that the club does have that authority. HOWEVER THE CLUB SHOULD NOT DO SO, BECAUSE IT IS A BAD POLICY.

Now it is my turn to ask you a question. I think you would agree that the Club as a voluntary association does have the authority to pass a rule which prohibits club members from selling slabbbed chips anywhere anytime.

However you and other proponents of your ban, repeatedly point out that your ban will only apply to club venues. My question to you, is why should the club not adopt the broader ban?