[MrLeRoy]

Typically, the argument will go something like, "We don't support legalizing dope because we're in favor of dope, it's, er, the, uh, Constitution. Yeah, that's it! It's against the Constitution to prohibit anything!"

I don't think that argument is "typical" of FR drug-freedom advocates---although there are a few who hold that it's against the Constitution to prohibit anything. And what is your basis for claiming that their interpretation of the Constitution is insincere?

[Roscoe]

I don't think that argument is "typical" of FR drug-freedom advocates---

Not enough spelling errors and personal attacks?

although there are a few who hold that it's against the Constitution to prohibit anything.

Find one authority in support.

[freeeee]

what is your basis for claiming that their interpretation of the Constitution is insincere?

I can't speak for Roscoe, but the fed holds that its WoD is constitutional because of FDR's commerce clause.

Interesting position for a "conservative", no?