my two cents:
it should be legal for the same reason booze is,
and treated the same.
theoretical, nonresearched, nonsmoker pros and cons:

Pros: huge cash crop, tons of new jobs and a new competitive export. Less stigma on the medical application for less overt issues, like stress management. (Actual medical application, not smoke two and call me in the morning- which, by the way would be another source of cash flow- private pharm. research), near elimination of illegal grow farms, which would negatively impact the drug trade, as significant source of capital is removed.

Cons: larger efforts from drug traffickers to push the harder product, which would have a larger market with the growing “gateway drug” crowd. (This is not to say that pot makes you use harder drugs, or even *need* harder drugs- i reference beer and vodka in an very not to scale comparison. However, just like getting drunk, tolerances go up, and the harder stuff is more acceptable, for booze anyway- for drugs, it’s more personally acceptable: “I’m already here- lets go one further”) Taxation on product, cheap/mass production product would almost certainly be inferior, probably with additives which could lead to unforseen health issues and a rerun of the Cigarette nightmare, and a certain increase of related crime, though almost certainly nonviolent- likely a significant increase in DUI, and other similar fines, which would actually, when one factors in the relatively low collateral/insurance damage, would be rather good for taxpayers.

again, I’m not passionate on the subject, except for that I can’t see one reason from nearly ANY point of view why pot is illegal when booze is.
Anyway- just some simple thoughts on the subject- fact finders and fanatics feel free to point out. . . stuff.