People in all cultures have been using mind altering substances for millennia. The not so magnificent seven , alcohol, tobacco, kava, ganja, coca, betel nut and opium come to mind and there are probably hundreds if not thousands more. Abusing any of these substances can have disastrous personal and social consequences. The legal status of each of them is probably more an accident of history rather than the result of rigorous pharmacological assessment.
The question I ask, is why should any of them be illegal?
Take kava for example. It's more of less legal. There are restriction on the import of large quantities and its use in medicinal preparations is currently banned by the TGA in Australia. If you want to import a few kilos for personal use, I think you still can. Like the rest of the not so magnificent seven, Kava causes its share of problems and the government has been slowly restricting its availability.
Does the legal status of Kava cause widespread social chaos? I think not.
I think, all of these sorts of substances and their derivatives should be legal but heavily limited in their availability via restrictions in supply, controlled locations for use and punitive tax regimes. Every one of them should be identified as potentially dangerous via the same kinds of public education campaigns that have changed attitudes to drink driving and are slowly decreasing tobacco use. , There will always be a demand for recreational mind altering substances. By recognising this demand and restricting rather than banning supply. we can eliminate or at least curtail the black markets and we can divert resources away from punishment and towards social support.
Prohibiting ganja, cocaine and heroin works as well today as prohibiting alcohol did for the USA in the 1920s.
