I did not read his distinguishing statement as camoflaging an impulse to control.
Sample has made pretty clear that he believes the current drugs regime is injudicious, so I am prepared to believe that he is not being disingenuous or sophistical in this instance.
If the People are determined to install a tyrant, launching Constitution-based lawsuits will not stop them.
Indeed, it is my point that launching such lawsuits might be the means to an unanticipated installation of a tyrant. If we give away our legislative right to decide to the judiciary, what is then the appeal process when the judiciary makes decisions contrary to the Constitution? And how is that different from having a king? I prefer a process that is not only Constitutional (even if the outcome not always is), but also self-correcting. e.g. My lesson from the O.J. trial was not that we should get rid of trial by jury in favor of Roman Law, despite the fact that Roman Law would most certainly have found O.J. guilty.
Although I would not call them your allies, there are equally some real nut jobs arguing for legalization by any means. Should tpaine think that's a reference to him, its not.