>>21434528
>The efficacy of drug prohibition
People are less likely to do something if it's illegal, yes. There were criminal purchasers of ethanol during Prohibition, but the majority of the public didn't want, as the kids would say these days, "that smoke." Funnily enough, that was also literally true when Federal Laws regarding cannabis were upheld. Regardless, you also need to consider the near-century of technological advancement that occurred between 1933 and today.
>thinking that a government should set a moral standard and punish those who disobey
Better than letting ideological subversives run rampant through the media and education system with hardly any pushback, all fueled and partially-funded by both the illegal and currently-legal drug trade taking place throughout the country.
>even if the majority of citizens disagree
The majority of citizens once thought that same-sex marriage should be illegal throughout the US, and within a decade, the majority believed it should be recognized. Was the majority right the first time or the second time? Neither, because "the majority" is just the flavor of the moment, guided by whatever the current Authority is saying and filtered through a hardly-thinking mass Id. Its whims should have as much weight given to it as whatever you find at the bottom of one of the dozens of empty beer cans you doubtlessly have littered throughout your squalor of a living area.
>of course your opinion is more special and important than everybody else's
Because it's more correct and whatever drunken belches you'll transcribe to text in your next reply won't change my mind, yes.
>>21434559
>No states will be punished
I won't hold my breath, no, even with someone who considered doing just that in his first term now back in power.
>what you ignorantly deem delinquent
As far as I'm aware, cannabis is still classed as a Schedule I substance. That means no medical or recreational use allowed, Federally.
>old prude spinster temperance woman
Lol
