No one starts from the right place on these arguments.
Start with the right of people to live in freedom, despite the fact that freedom is messy. If you want to outlaw the possession of a wild-growing plant, how can you argue that possessing a gun should be legal? Because some piece of paper says so. That piece of paper can be amended.
That’s why in America the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is inalienable. At least, that’s how we once thought about such things, before some us decided we should run other people’s lives.
There will always be some people who will use substances, guns, vehicles, tools, etc. in an irresponsible manner. That fact is not grounds for making the said substances, guns, vehicles, tools, etc. illegal to possess or use. In a free society that fact is ground for setting boundaries for the responsible use of said articles, and penalties for their misuse. Said boundaries are set due to the concept of “My right to swing my fist stops at your nose.”
You are free to have your drink. You are not free to drive drunk. You should be free to possess pot or any other drug.
You should not be free to drive stoned, or operate machinery, etc. while impaired on ANY substance, just as you have a right to a gun, but not to shoot it at signs along the roadway, or within ncity linits, etc.
Some so-called conservatives have a need to control others’ behavior for their “own good” and/or the “common good”.
Some so-called conservatives are nothing of the kind. And Carry Nation was no conservative. She was a busybody liberal determined to run the lives of others.