wWe have to consider the nature of anti drug laws. In essence they are nanny laws, like wearing a seat belt, intended to protect citizens from themselves. Protecting citizens from the intoxication effects of others (intoxicated driving, eetc) is a separate issue, as current laws surrounding alcohol show.

So then we must determine where the line is drawn. If alcohol is more harmful than weed, and we are creating laws based on the danger of the substance, then certainly weed should also be legal. Or if weed is too dangerous surely alcohol should be as well. How do we consider tobacco, which has less intoxicating effects but is more addictive and leads to more health issues? What about expanding the debate to substances like LSD which are non addictive, have little health concerns, but extremely strong intoxication effects?

The obvious conclusion is of course that current substance laws are based on societal norms,.not logical evaluations of the relevant factors. Thus IMHO the most relevant considerations for changing current substance laws is societal norms.