I strongly doubt that there are many people who are not deterred by the threat of addiction and fatal overdose but are deterred by legal penalty.
For another, you have a guarantee of increased drug use because the people you would have arrested pre-legalization are not arrested and continue to use it.
How does continuation of use become an increase?
Alcohol can be consumed for reasons having nothing to do with intoxication. I have never been "buzzed,"
Many people have; is their use of alcohol not legitimate?
I agree, but there are literally hundreds of people on here that disagree.
Which makes them a minority; I'm not concerned.
>>I strongly doubt that there are many people who are not deterred by the threat of addiction and fatal overdose but are deterred by legal penalty.<<
Then you would be seriously wrong. I know for a fact this is true, as I have asked people. Most beginning drug users do not think they will become addicted nor do they worry about an overdoes. "That happens to junkies, not to me."
>>How does continuation of use become an increase?<<
Um, if they are in jail, they aren't using it, right? I'm sure there is some drug abuse in prisons, but not to the extent there would be if the prisoners were not prisoners.
>>is their use of alcohol not legitimate<<
Whether it is or not isn't an issue. Alcohol servers other purposes. Cooking. Even to some extent, medicinal, but not due to the intoxication aspect of it.
>>Which makes them a minority<<
I wouldn't bet on that.