[Hasu]

> What's the measurement for success?

It's not "the number of people who try hard drugs", which isn't a particularly interesting or meaningful number (lots of people, including myself, try hard drugs but never end up hooked on them and are productive members of society).

Try "the amount of harm caused to society". The drug war destroys more lives than hard drugs. It's a policy failure.

[Alupis]

> The drug war destroys more lives than hard drugs. It's a policy failure.

Again, this does not seem as clear as you attempt to present it.

In areas with decriminalized hard drugs, drug usage dramatically increased. It has a direct impact on the lives of the users, and also secondary impacts on the lives of everyone around them and/or has to deal with them.

Drug usage is not the so-called "victimless" crime some position it as. It has a lot of effects on society as a whole.

[NegativeLatency]

Are you familiar with prohibition and its effects in the US?

It wasn’t successful and massively contributed to the proliferation of organized crime.

[Hasu]

> In areas with decriminalized hard drugs, drug usage dramatically increased. It has a direct impact on the lives of the users, and also secondary impacts on the lives of everyone around them and/or has to deal with them.

Absolutely. I'm no stranger to the impact of drug abuse, as I've had family and close friends become addicts.

Even so, the drug war is way worse. It adds violence and danger to drug use, making it more dangerous for users and those in their proximity. It increases policing and police militarization and violence. Punishments for possession destroy families and career prospects.

Every ounce of prevention bought by the drug war costs a pound of pain.

> Drug usage is not the so-called "victimless" crime some position it as. It has a lot of effects on society as a whole.

Responsible drug use is pretty victimless. Drug abuse has victims. But that's no different than alcohol, and banning that also caused way more harm than it prevented.