I'm also happy to know you read my posts in detail to notice all the grammar and spelling mistakes. Your replies give the impression that you didn't.
1) US can legally turn away anyone they want, as in: no lawyer would be able to get you access, as no laws were broken.
2) Canada can do that as well.
If 1) happens, 2) can be a response to that. Even though 1) is legal, that does not mean it is desired behaviour. As a method to prevent 1), Canada could implement 2). This would prevent law abiding Canadians from being "punished" by the US for no legal reason. In that case Canada would also do undesired behaviour. The tit-for-tat you mentioned. If that is the only way to get rid of 1), then so be it.
There is no contradiction in anything I've said. Merely a list of actions and reactions that could happen.
I never said people don't have a place in this discussion, only that they are not an objective party if they are using the US policy as an argument to defend an anti-marihuana stance in Canada. Try to figure out how logic works.No. I am pro pot, and I think its foolish the US is denying access to people, like me, who invest in weed. But, they can do what they want, as you have said, they have the legal right to turn anyone away for any random reason. However, seeing how you made this statement saying I have no place in this discussion if I did feel that way, and your horrid spelling in grammar, and contradictory grasping for straws debate style makes me believe you are a millennial of some sort.