For people who believe that legalization is a net good, there is a tendency to view any discussion of the (very real) drawbacks as an attempt to maintain the st

For people who believe that legalization is a net good, there is a tendency to view any discussion of the (very real) drawbacks as an attempt to maintain the status quo, which is causing enormous suffering, and is thus unethical. I myself have been guilty of this. > Lastly, unless marketing is highly restricted, You raise a good point. There is only one status quo, but legalization can take many forms. As an example, I mostly agree with the model presented here: https://transformdrugs.org/product/how-to-regulate-stimulants-a-practical-guide/ https://transformdrugs.org/product/how-to-regulate-stimulant... (See the "Balancing conflicting priorities" heading for some (admittedly sparse) discussion of drawbacks.) Drugs would be manufactured and sold only by government-licensed operators, in unattractive packaging with prominent warnings, and advertisement would be strictly forbidden. I also think that legalization and regulation can't happen in a vacuum. This may be an unpopular opinion in the United States, but I think that a social safety net (like welfare or even UBI) that allowed your friend to purchase legal heroin instead of mugging old ladies would be an excellent use of my taxes.