[robertpaulsen]

"So we still have a choice between believing that relegalization would increase 21-to-29 marijuana use by 2-1/2 times,"

Only if we accept that illegality is the only factor in reducing use for this age group. I think illegality is one factor, yes.

But, I don't care about this age group when making the argument about teen use. Legal alcohol is used by twice as many teens as marijuana, despite the fact that alcohol is harder to get.

So, legalizing marijuana and making it as hard to get as alcohol holds no weight with me.

[headsonpikes]

So as I understand you, if marijuana was made 'harder to get', then more teens, possibly 'twice as many', would use marijuana.

Explain to me again, are you for or against teen use of marijuana?

But perhaps I drew the wrong conclusions because you were not making an argument, but merely having fun with non sequiturs.

[MrLeRoy]

21 to 29-year olds use alcohol 5:1 over marijuana [...]; the legal-for-adults drug is proportionately less used by teens. [...] If the only explanation for the disparity in the two alcohol-to-marijuana ratios is that adults steer away from the illegal substance, then it would follow that if marijuana was relegalized for adults, the adult alcohol-to-marijuana ratio would become the same as for teens---that is, [...] relegalization would increase 21-to-29 marijuana use by 2-¹/₂ times. [...]

That seems clearly ludicrous---leaving only the conclusion that the adult legality of alcohol does make it less used by kids than it otherwise would be.

Only if we accept that illegality is the only factor in reducing use for this age group. I think illegality is one factor, yes.

What are the others?