[microgood]

Pot should be legal for American teenagers because illegals get away with too much? Seriously, what kind of argument is that? Its certainly not a rational connection of related issues, nor is leveling the playing field to the lowest common denominator a good model for the justice system.

What this argument does is illustrate how screwed up our priorities are given limitied resources for law enforcement. In fact, the current Administration thinks that marijuana is a greater threat than even meth and have cut meth interdiction resources to go after pot smokers. The allocation of resources is a valid argument.

Think of a coherent argument, and then stick to it.

The most coherent argument is that is is noone else's business, and that claims that people that do not smoke pot are somehow victims of the scourge of pot is a false claim. This "I am a victim" mentality is not conservative.

If its unconstitutional for any government to regulate food and drugs, how do you keep all antibiotics from becoming worthless within ten years (due to overuse), or are the return of deadly epidemics simply the price that needs to be paid for getting good pot?

And you call my arguments incoherent. These two issues are not linked at all. Substitute milk for pot and it makes more sense.

[SampleMan]

And you call my arguments incoherent. These two issues are not linked at all. Substitute milk for pot and it makes more sense.

Please read my post #102, and I think my points will be clearer to you.

I think you either need to make a constitutional argument, or a practical legalization argument. Because frankly, if its a constitutional right, to argue the rest is pointless.

I've gotta go. I'd find it interesting to get your feedback on my #102.