Regulated/taxed recreational marijuana legal over the age of 25 & any age for validated medical use

For this round I will expose other arguments for my opinion, but first some rebuttals...1) Age I still believe that 25 is a rather extreme age. In my opinion 21 is fine. Why? Firstly, because at that age humans are mature enough. At 21 you can consume all of the common use drugs, you can get married, you can vote, you can go to a war, you can drive a car, you can use a gun, and so other activities and decision that only mature people can do. Notice that I am not referring only to the US but worldwide. If specialist all around the globe have set 21 as an age where men and women are mature enough (and sometimes even 18 instead of 21), how can we argue that 21 isn't mature enough? Secondly, scientific studies have exposed that the brain continues growing not till 25, but till your 40s, and some are convinced that actually the brain never stops the getting mature process. That being said is nonsense to wait for a fully developed brain, because then no one could smoke marijuana, you will just have skeletons smoking weed. Lastly, I don't think that anyone can decide for you but yourself, but this is something I will talk deeper later.2) Prescribed marijuanaI argue that 3 doctors is too much. To me, the 2 general doctors step is useless. A psychiatrist is fully prepared to make the decision of prescribing or not. I feel that having to go to 2 general doctors first is a waste of time and money, both for the patients and for the doctors.3) Surveillance I understand that marijuana growing facilities must have strong security, but I disagree with having the cameras send to the government in real time, neither not in real time. They must have security cameras but they have the right to have privacy. If I told you that the security cameras in your house are streaming to the government 24 hs, just for security, would you be happy? Wouldn't you feel a violation of your privacy?4) Area exclusionI get the school exclusion and church exclusion ( in a catholic state like US is logical, but as I'm not from there I didn't thought of that).Anyway, I believe that the high walls and all that stuff is way to much. It would be humiliating for consumers. It's like, if you do something I don't like you should do It in a jail like place. Doing so will go against the right of honor (because it would humiliate you) and free choice(because it will condition you not to do that). The free choice issueAs far as I'm concerned, this regulations attempt against the freedom of people to do whatever they want. I believe that the limit of one's rights and freedoms is the others' rights and freedoms. Marijuana can't hurt anyone but the one who consumes It, and if He/She does it because He/She wants to, then I don't see why should we stop him/her. I understand that the State role is to protect the citizens, and in order to do so you have to create some regulations. Anyway, government can't violate the rights of people. Government must regulate the growers and seller for the sake of having the best marijuana in the market, and It must warn citizens of the risks of drugs. But if some still wants to do drugs, no one must attempt against him/her will.That's why I0m against the limit of growing, the registration process, the THC and CBD proportion regulation and the prison like consuming facilities. This takes away free choice from the people directly and indirectly. Directly because you wouldn't let people to choose how much they want to consume or grow and how they want to do so. Indirectly because you make the consuming process an embarrassing one, where people are pointed out and identified, where they are separated and obligated to consume in jailish places, where you patrol and control them like they where criminals. This conditions people and doesn't allow them to use their rights.