Technically, any occurring "federally illegal" activity is just not successfully policed criminal activity. (States can't actually make something legal the federal government says is not legal. They can just decline to use their own resources to police it.)
Generally speaking, most people would consider "not usable in crime" to be a feature rather than a bug. ;)
Widespread consensus doesn't determine what is and isn't a crime. The law does. Until the federal law changes, marijuana sales are a federal crime. Technically speaking, no state can actually "legalize" it.
> I don’t think there is as quite widespread consensus that all federal crimes are legitimately crime as you seem to think.
Your comment makes no sense at all. For something to be a crime it has to be explicitly defined in law. Consensus has zero to do with it. Either there is a law, or there isn't. The whole point of rule of law is that you don't get to pick and choose which law applies to you in a given day of the week.
There are many marijuana shops in the United States, and many millions of customers of those shops who disagree with you.
Also, Prohibition.
The law is not some inviolate thing in a society. Many millions will happily ignore unjust laws if they feel they shouldn’t be laws. More alcohol was consumed during Prohibition in the US than before it was banned.
> The whole point of rule of law is that you don't get to pick and choose which law applies to you in a given day of the week.
If the law is not enforced, then it does not exist. The only real law is the one that you see day-to-day. So shooting black people is fine (in the US), and you can buy weed in shops (in a few places).
Generally speaking, most people would consider "not usable in crime" to be a feature rather than a bug. ;)