"Nice and vague....How many people died because of Prohibition vs. the deaths caused by legal alcohol?"
No more vague than your question, I posit. Admittedly, I don't know the answer to that one, but the right answer should 1) attribute to Prohibition the deaths caused by gangsters' control of alcohol, and 2) include deaths caused directly by alcohol that were not prevented by its prohibition, and 3) NOT include deaths caused by DWI and related "under-the-influence" crimes, since they ARE illegal and are NOT being advocated for decriminalization.
This comparison doesn't even take into consideration other "societal effects", like the diversion of money from the economy into the black market and enforcement (how many BILLIONS is that, anyway?), or normalizing the practice of liberty revocation. A small point I know, but some of us are kind of sticklers for liberty.
"Now, what's more grievous -- Prohibition or legalization?
A truly objective thinker knows the answer to that."
On that, we agree.
Definitely Prohibition.
I mean, if we're going to be objective about this, we need to examine the effect of ridding ourselves of that truly horrible thing called "Prohibition", yes?
"This comparison doesn't even take into consideration other "societal effects", like the diversion of money from the economy into the black market and enforcement (how many BILLIONS is that, anyway?), or normalizing the practice of liberty revocation."
Oh, of course. Can't forget about those other "societal effects", now can we?
But we should ignore the "societal effects" of alcoholism and the abuse of alcohol? The countless deaths and injury caused by DUI? The lost productivity? Increased medical costs?
"On that, we agree."
"Definitely Prohibition."
Without any admitted factual evidence, I wouldn't even call that "subjective" thinking. I call that deliberate propaganda (a nice way of saying "bull$hit".)