The basic argument for banning rather than taxing harder drugs is that they cause people to act irrationally, so drug users can no longer be treated as rational actors. Therefore just removing externalities will not necessarily lead to an optimum level of consumption. I have no idea how strong this really is but it seems plausible to me.

I would suggest, for instance, that the optimum level of heroin consumption is zero. We can’t achieve that due to inability to enforce the law, but that’s a different issue.

Its always the harms that are measured, never the obvious utility that users gain from using them recreationally.

Of course its kinda hard to quantify a good relaxing evening on the buds, or an unforgettable night pilling out of ones eyeballs.

And thats before we even get to say, the obvious pychological benfits for say MDMA in some situations, or industrial uses of hemp.

Sorry for forgetting the links. I’ve added them in to the post now.