[alan-hn]

The US forced their system of controlling psychoactive substances on the rest of the world through treaties primarily. Perhaps you should learn about the history of drug use and control.

You also didn't answer my question about alcohol. Why is it legal and not cannabis?

[koonsolo]

Because alcohol is more interwoven into our society than cannabis.

If I had a magic wand and had to pick 1 legal one, I would go for cannabis. I think it has less negative effect on society than alcohol. But here we are, and my standpoint is to no approve new drugs and try to phase out the current ones.

I like my beer, wine and tequila, but I also see youth doesn't flock to it as much as my and previous generations. If properly done, it can be phased out.

[soulofmischief]

> I like my beer, wine and tequila

Then your argument is moot, as you engage in drug use. Just because it's a liquid in a glass bottle doesn't mean it isn't a drug.

Furthermore, the simple fact is that not everyone agrees with your take on personal freedom.

You have quite a lot of work ahead of you to prove that an adult from consuming a substance in their own home should be arrested and fined/jailed under threat of State violence.

This argument is so hard to make, that Harry Anslinger and William Randolph Hearst, two of the leading forces behind the criminalization of cannabis in the US a century ago, opted instead to rest their argument atop racism, political fearmongering and subterfuge (calling it marijuana instead of cannabis).

https://www.chieftain.com/story/news/2010/03/22/marijuana-s-...

I, for one, am glad that you don't have a magic wand to wave around and create law without due legislative process. That sounds like an incredibly autocratic method of governance. It would be good to consider that yours isn't the only valid opinion on this matter, and to reflect upon the arguments others are making.

[alan-hn]

Whose society? Western society? What about Mexican society? South america? The native Americans used psychedelic cactus and mushrooms. You seem to be drawing relatively arbitrary lines based on your own biased upbringing

And we don't have to choose only one, that's arbitrary too. We can easily dismantle the current prohibitory system to allow for a system of regulated production and access which would improve safety and reduce overdose deaths. Most overdoses happen because of the nature of the black market. There is no regulation or testing so substances, particularly opioids, can get cut to unknown potencies depending on the person handling it. This makes it a gamble every time a person were to use rather than consuming a measured amount of a pure substance. Prohibition objectively increases harm to individuals, society, and the economy.

[koonsolo]

You claim overdosis happpen because of "bad product"?

Prevention needs to be the main driver to prevent addicts.

Edit: And it's pretty absurd to believe functioning societies are built on drug addicts.

[alan-hn]

You're using a lot of hyperbole. Nobody said anything about building societies on drug addicts. Overdoses primarily happen due to users not knowing how strong their mixture is, they also happen frequently in new settings and after a period of abstinence. These are all things that have been shown in the literature.

I love how you also ignored the rest of my points about whose society you're referencing.

Do you work in the drug or addiction field?