[Once again, regarding anti cannabis laws, what's the dangerous conduct there?]
Perhaps I am not giving my own writing enough consideration but I just don't see it.  I just don't see how you can ask me about specific cannabis crimes/laws without regards to the point about "crimes NEEDING VICTIMS."  Because your very question focuses solely on crimes and disregards the critical context of _victims_ leads me to conclude  you are functioning under an inductive reasoning failure (elephants have fleas versus fleas have elephants).
I have tried to explain that the point is about ALL laws (elephants) not just about one substance (fleas) but it seems to me that you only want to talk about one specific area of the law in disregard of my point about all areas of the law.  I'm talking about elephants so I don't see how you can ask me only about fleas and then blame me for not being clear enough about only talking about elephants.