No need to be condescending, it seems that you are the one who is having trouble understanding. My argument is that the consequences of prohibition far outweigh the consequences of people using marijuana. I'm asking that you address the negative externalities of prohibition, which include the following: fiscal costs of pursuing, trying, and incarcerating marijuana users, especially given the current state of our country (healthcare, education, economy, etc.); personal and societal costs like jailing parents, hindering future job opportunities, and exposing non-violent marijuana users to violent, real criminals; lost potential tax revenue ($40 to $100 bil. if same rate as cigarettes); empowering and funding drug cartels...and so on.
The main concerns of those against legalization include the following: high driving, second-hand smoke, and inefficiency. There is no way a law legalizing marijuana would allow high driving. Even so, studies have shown that driving after smoking 3 joints in 15 minutes (a lot) is less dangerous than driving with a BAC of 0.08% (
Marijuana And Actual Driving Performance). As for second-hand smoke, public smoking would surely be illegal, and those irresponsible enough to smoke around their children likely don't care about the law and are doing so anyway. The argument for laziness and stupidity is, well, lazy and stupid, and it is based entirely on stereotypes. There are plenty of lazy, stupid non-smokers and plenty of brilliant, motivated smokers.
Even if we take these common concerns at face value (do you have others?), they are still, in my opinion, FAR worse than the consequences of prohibition. What do you think?
As for your argument for legalizing weak marijuana, don't you think that people would just continue to illegally grow and consume more potent strains? Either that or just smoke more of the weaker stuff?