I would agree, for a myrid of reasons. Making pot legal has two effects, both at odds with each other. On the one hand, a law abiding legal pot user, like today's alcohol user, will be less likely to gateway to illegal heroin.
I agree again.
On the other hand, there is a percentage who will gateway to illegal heroin (either from alcohol or legal pot). If the legalization of pot will increase the number of pot users (and I've always contended that pot use could at least double or triple), and a given percentage of those will gateway to heroin, we will have more heroin users.
That's if you buy the theory that a person using a drug of any kind is more inclined to use a drug like heroin. I don't believe that is necessarily the case. I do know with prohibition, you tend to cut off the milder drugs and increase the harder drugs. I find it amazing that heroin is a much more available drug in the US than, say, raw opium, which was a staple in this country in the mid to late 1800's, yet a far less addictive drug than heroin.
I thought we both agreed that the vast majority of heroin users did use other drugs before heroin. Mere coincidence?
I meant to add this to my other post. When I say "more inclined", I mean an existing drug user is more inclined to gateway to heroin than a non-user.