If you go to France (and aren't a French citizen), you are subject to their laws, but you are not subject to their jurisdiction. You can't be pressed into their armed services if there was a draft and you can't (legally) vote in their elections.
To be a U.S. "citizen", you must be born here AND subject to our jurisdiction (not just our laws as anyone visiting would be).
Your opinion here is starkly at odds with what has been stated by the U.S. Supreme Court:
Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin's Case, 7 Rep. 6a, "strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;" and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, "if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle." It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides[.] U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
The Supreme Court does not see the "difference" you claim to see. And it calls undeniable that which you are trying to deny.
Your opinion here is starkly at odds with what has been stated by the U.S. Supreme Court:
Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin's Case, 7 Rep. 6a, "strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;" and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, "if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle." It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides[.] U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
The Supreme Court does not see the "difference" you claim to see. And it calls undeniable that which you are trying to deny.