Well, it's not all or nothing. If you legalized cannabis for example, you may find that users switch to that from more harmful drugs such as alcohol, or opiates. In particular, by buying from controlled suppliers, rather than the black-market, makes them less likely to be offered worse stuff as alternatives.
By then reducing the size of the black market, you drain it of customers and money, and make it easier to police. But banning stuff that large segments of the population already do, even while suffering legal risk, is a harder policy to enforce.
There's also the fact that horse-riding, backyard pools, gun ownership, rock climbing, not eating well or excercising enough as likely to kill you as some drugs, so a consistent approach to that would be welcome too.
> There's also the fact that horse-riding, backyard pools, gun ownership, rock climbing, not eating well or excercising enough as likely to kill you as some drugs, so a consistent approach to that would be welcome too.
Unlike the use of drugs, almost all of the things you mentioned fall under category of "exercise", which (correct me if I'm wrong) I believe is medically accepted to have immense benefits, whereas I'm not sure the case is the same with the drugs under consideration here...
>I believe is medically accepted to have immense benefits, whereas I'm not sure the case is the same with the drugs under consideration here...
Another flaw of your "the dangerous ones" generalization.
Does MDMA count as one of the dangerous ones? It has promising potential for the treatment of depression, PTSD, etc. Or other psychadelics such as mushrooms or LSD.
What about ketamine? It's used recreationally, but it's also commonly administered in hospitals and may also be beneficial for those suffering from depresson.
There are undoubtedly others.
Ironically, good research into these "dangeorus" drugs has been hindered largely because of the widespread perception among the public and policymakers that they are dangerous, whether or not that is actually the case.
Unless they all are, you don't really have a point. But, for the sake of argument, pretend the list was "gun ownership, not eating well, not exercising enough" - i.e. 3 out of the original 6 (which, apparently, is "almost all"). Feel free to add any of the many, many activities which aren't "exercise" but are more likely to decrease your life expectancy such as driving, sitting, crossing the road, ...
By then reducing the size of the black market, you drain it of customers and money, and make it easier to police. But banning stuff that large segments of the population already do, even while suffering legal risk, is a harder policy to enforce.
There's also the fact that horse-riding, backyard pools, gun ownership, rock climbing, not eating well or excercising enough as likely to kill you as some drugs, so a consistent approach to that would be welcome too.