• xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    My argument is that since illegal drugs have significantly fewer users, prohibition does reduce usage.

    • papalonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That logic doesn’t flow, though. You need to compare number of current illegal users vs number of users before it was illegal.

      Have you heard of the US prohibition on alcohol? It’s a pretty famous counterexample to your argument showing that it absolutely does not reduce usage.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The same number of people, as a percentage, smoke marijuana as smoke cigarettes. Marijuana use is federally illegal and illegal in most states.

      So no, it really doesn’t reduce usage. Price and perceived risk are the two factors that reduce usage the most.