You won’t ban alcohol, but it can be credibly argued that alcohol use and abuse has the greatest detrimental impact upon society, if only through its prevalence.
Personally, I consider most of the anti-pot arguments to be government-sponsored BS. There isn’t a week the goes by where they don’t find yet another adverse effect of marijuana. Low testosterone, low sperm count, etc., etc., etc.
Seriously, anything with that many side effects should be fatal ON CONTACT. The fact that it can be easily grown and used, without industrial-level processing, and as such remains resistant to taxation, surely has nothing to do with it, right?
Now, let’s start talking about the adverse effects of the “War On (Some) Drugs”.
“it can be credibly argued that alcohol use and abuse has the greatest detrimental impact upon society, if only through its prevalence.”
No, it can be credibly argued that alcohol ABUSE alone (drunkenness) has the greatest detrimental impact upon society. Moderate alcohol use, without drunkenness, is no problem. Caffeine use is actually a boon to society; and tobacco use truly harms only the user, if that. Second hand smoke arguments are a crock.
As for arguments against pot being government sponsored BS, I am not leaning on any government sponsored BS. I am relying on my own personal experience and observations.
My list of side affects is not all-inclusive, i.e., not every drug does every side effect to its nth degree every time. Indeed then they would be fatal ON CONTACT.
Instead, they destroy by degrees, harming the user as well as innocent people in their wake - unless the user stops before serious damage(s) are done. And so they are touted as somehow “harmless,” just because we all don’t instantly drop dead at the moment of first use.