Taxes are almost always the best way to implement "bans", you get huge benefits: 1. People feel less aggrieved if they still can technically access something a

Taxes are almost always the best way to implement "bans", you get huge benefits: 1. People feel less aggrieved if they still can technically access something at a price. ( Less accusation of Government overreach. ) 2. Economically nudging behaviour is extremely effective. People will do a surprisingly amount of work/effort to avoid even a small cost. 3. If people continue the behaviour you want to ban, you get a good revenue stream, and can escalate taxes ( e.g. Tobacco taxes ) 4. It reduces the size of a black market emerging for the banned goods ( i.e. Don't make the mistakes of USA during Prohibition. ) That California didn't realise this and naively implemented a concrete ban is screwing up implementing a ban.