And the available evidence indicates that I am.
I don't need to get anyone "on my side"...you do.
................................................
And the available evidence indicates that I am.
Let us recap the argument.
The other side's arguement: MJ is illegal to use in states that have passed medical MJ laws because the feds say so.
The truth: The feds have no power to interfer legally with what goes on inside a state that has passed a medical MJ law.
The other side's arguement: The "commerce clause" comes into play and gives the feds the power to stop citizens from using medical MJ in a state that has a law saying this is legal.
The truth: The "commerce clause" gives no power to the feds where nothing has moved across state lines. It is perfectly legal for citizens of CA and other states to use medical MJ.
The other side's arguement: MJ has been rightfully and legally been banned by the feds.
The truth. The Constitution gives no authority to the feds to ban anything. In order to ban alcohol, the feds had to add a Constitutional Amendment to do so. The Supreme Court has said that the Constitution give no power to ban anything and has said that a Constitutional Amendment had to be added to ban alcohol across the land.
The truth: No Constitutional Amendment has been added to the Constitution to ban MJ. All power not granted to the feds by the Constitution rests with the state, and with the people.
The other side's arguement: MJ is dangerous and bad and has been rightfully banned.
The truth: No one can prove that a single death HAS EVER RESULTED FROM THE USE OF MJ. No one has ever proven that MJ causes cancer. No one has ever proven that MJ use so lessens the ability to driva a motor vehicle that its use is the cause of many accidents.
My side clearly wins. The anti-MJ people clearly lose.