You know, I wonder how much the drug policy of the US and world really impacts on a lot of motives. Many groups will strike at a target primarily due to repression or unfair treatment.
For example, Florida produces a large number of Oranges; lots of people like them. If that product were to suddenly be made illegal(Maybe someone synthesizes a drug from the skins), a large amount of the farming population of Florida(companies inclusive) would either be out of work or forced to spend a lot of money investing in a new product. While in the US we can do this relatively easily, what about less highly civilized villages and countries? If a country's native crop(What they grew, know how to grow, and are set up to grow) is illegal, aren't they effectively being excluded from the free market system? It's like the marketplace stopping you at the door of an "equality" oriented plaza saying "We don't like your kind here".
My stance on drugs is that abuse of them can be harmful. We always call drug addicts "Drug abusers", but then what is a "Drug user"? I believe that would be anyone sufficiently educated in the effects of a substance to consume it safely without developing unfavorable dependencies or side effects, or someone who enjoys the effects or taste and does not concern the damage done, so long as it does not become excessive. I also take a libertarian stance on drugs; I believe what you do on your own time is your choice, just don't cause any problems for anyone else by doing it. If the supply of many drugs whom people are addicted to were readily and cheaply available, you wouldn't have the same breaking and stealing for money for their fix. I think usage should be fully legal and licensed for two reasons. One, an education and licensing system allows people to make their own choices; Teach what drugs do that's bad, what they do that's good, what the proper dosage is, and how to nutritionally compensate for their usage to avoid withdrawal and dependency, show some extreme cases in both directions. Two, when the substance is legal, you have control over its flow and distribution; If you choose to make it illegal, those who want it will still obtain it from those who are willing to break the law, and you have no control over the supply.
When you control the supply and the sale is legal, the money goes from buyer to seller to producer, all individuals who are in the country and can be paying taxes, when you do not control the supply and the sale is illegal, the money goes from buyer to middleman to criminal, often ending outside the country and with no taxes paid. You could even charge a license renewal fee.
I mean, if you had a product, and the world shut the door on you, what levels would you be pushed to when you cannot sale the product you can make nor take on a new product?