I think that society's idea of what
pot (
grass,
hash,
ganja whatever) represents has changed radically since the
good old days when
they were publishing pamphlets on '
The Evils of Marijuana'. I think a lot of people (perhaps even some who voted for
Dubya) have come to accept that
pot is no worse for you than
alcohol.
So there has been a mindshift. Good Thing. However, the gap between a mindshift and a policy change is *huge*. Modern politics (and please dont believe anything else: Pot legalisation is a political issue, not a health and safety issue) is all about public perceptions and PR nonsense. The whole spy plane incident shows that all politicians are afraid of is public policy retractions or having to change their minds in front of the people. Politicians believe that having to apologise, or account for a mistake, is equivalent to political suicide. And hey, it probably is in this mad world we live in.
So, its my assertion that because legalising pot now would be the political equivalent of saying "Yes, all those longhaired hippies in the 60s were right, sorry for locking you all up. Peace?". And you show me one politician who is prepared to do that, and I'll show you someone who I would actually vote for... But, horribly enough, any politician who would say that is not really a politician as we know it, and would never really get into a position to even make such a statement.
So, forget trying to prove that pot is not as damaging (to individuals *and* to society) as alcohol is. This is not the issue. The issue is whether or not the global political climate can handle a radical policy change like that. I seriously doubt it.