OP is rolling two separate claims into one. The first claim is that there is a problem. Yes, I agree. There is. The second claim is that the solution is proh

OP is rolling two separate claims into one. The first claim is that there is a problem. Yes, I agree. There is. The second claim is that the solution is prohibition. The results of applying that solution to alcohol addiction and then drug addiction were... 'more harmful than beneficial' is much too mild a way to put it. 'Society-wrecking catastrophe' would be more accurate. Given those precedents, any argument that another round of prohibition is the right answer here requires far more justification than OP gives.