So much for "shall not be infringed", eh?
You are just telling us things we already know. My point was not about the idiosyncrasies of the laws, but the creation of criminals simply because of them. With pot being legal(yes, by state law) in many states for over two decades, do we insist on fooling ourselves than one of those folks that have taken advantage of the new laws, have not since bought a new firearm from an FFL and had to answer question 21E? did they answer it correctly or intentionally and fraudulently answer it incorrectly? Apparently, it could be both? Pot is classified as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substance Act. This means it is considered to have a high potential for dependency and no recognized medical use. Yet the FDA has approved numerous prescription drugs that are made with components of pot, because it is recognized and identifies many times, that there is a medical use. In 2013, the Department of Justice (DOJ), formally announced that it would not interfere with marijuana operations that strictly complied with state regulations. Why? This sums it up well.
...as for this,
This is no different than the use of alcohol or prescription drugs. Those same places already have policies in place about those, as well as policies in place about the use of pot, whether it is legal or not. Many of those same places have policies against the smoking of cigarettes because of liability from second hand smoke. As well they should.
Like a lot of gun control, the antiquated laws against the use of pot has it origins in racial bias. Even tho pot was legal back then, it was not popular or used regularly until the early 1900s, when there was a huge influx of Mexicans fleeing political unrest in their home country. With them, they brought the practice of smoking cannabis recreationally. And it took off. Next, it was Black Musicians. In 1936, a propaganda film called Reefer Madness was released. In the movie, teenagers smoke weed for the first time and this leads to a series of horrific events involving hallucination, attempted rape, and murder. A year later, the Marihuana Tax Act was passed(notice the Mexican spelling?). A huge instigator of that fear-mongering was the man behind the Marihuana Tax Act, Harry Anslinger. Anslinger was named the Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics during the prohibition era. But once national prohibition ended in 1933, Anslinger turned his focus to marijuana. This is when racism and xenophobia really kicked in.
Harry Anslinger took the scientifically unsupported idea of marijuana as a violence-inducing drug, connected it to black and Hispanic people, and created a perfect package of terror to sell to the American media and public. By emphasizing the Spanish word marihuana instead of cannabis, he created a strong association between the drug and the newly arrived Mexican immigrants who helped popularize it in the States. He also created a narrative around the idea that cannabis made black people forget their place in society. He pushed the idea that jazz was evil music created by people under the influence of marijuana.
....the more things change, the more they stay the same.