There is little new in the Prohibition argument. This is it: The substance in question (alcohol, tobacco, marijuana) is so obviously harmful when abused, so destructive of family bonds, so detrimental to youthful potential, so disruptive to the fabric of sober society, that its possession and sale should be illegal. Preventing intoxication is a public good, so make criminals of the intoxicated.
It’s partly true. Abuse of these substances is harmful. We have all seen it with our own eyes. But how can the law stop it? Did Prohibition reduce alcohol abuse, make it less costly to society, protect youth, reduce crime and corruption? No. Prohibition of alcohol is widely considered one of the most ineffective and misguided efforts in our history, multiplying criminality, violence, corruption and widening alcohol use simultaneously. It worked so poorly and weighed on society so heavily the effort didn’t last much more than a dozen years before it was discarded as a failure.