Like I said, I never said you couldn't bring up the risk factors, you simply choose not to. And if risk factors are not a consideration, why did your duly elected representatives spend your money on research specifically to gauge what those factors are, for the purpose of determining legal status?
In post #137 you said:
"Considering the constitutional issues involved, can you make a case for continuting prohibition without introducing risk as an factor in the argument?"
What's up with that?
"..research specifically to gauge what those factors are, for the purpose of determining legal status?"
I am aware of research being conducted on the potential medical benefits of marijuana. Can you cite the research being done "for the purpose of determining legal status"?
It's not up to the researchers to determine legal status. That decision is made by the lawmakers.