Yes, well that is what I was addressing, that the cost to society is less if it is a regulated commodity, then if it is kept in its current status. There are studies done on government spending in regards to the law enforcement portion of my statment, they tend to show large decreases in costs when penalties are reduced. The cost of treatment show less evidence of declining costs. But, the main point of my argument was less that that overall costs would decline, though I believe they would, and more so that changing it to a taxable commodity provides increased revenue. It is this increase in revenue that reduces the social burden of its use.

The problem with drug use/abuse is that it is under most circumstances impossible or at least impractical to enforce prohibition. If we accept this fact, then it is my opinion that looking for alternative less costly methods of control makes more sense. Again, I think drug use is bad and those that part take in it are doing themselves a disservice. I just don't believe that this problem is best handled by criminalizing it.

As for use being "unchecked" I did not say for it to be sold like penny candy, but controled, like alcohol and tobacco, substances that can be of course abused by any who use them, but the prevailing sentiment is that is a personal choice to do so. Personally, I believe most people that want to smoke marijuana and do drugs in general do so, drugs in general are not hard to come by if you wish them, thats the nature of the market for them. And thus, while legalizing would probably come along with an increase in general use, the question would be is this increase causing a greater social cost then any benefits. I doubt this as I mentioned in my previous post, I feel most people that do decided to partake in such potentially harmful activities do so responsibly (That being drink/gamble).

Sorry for the long ass posts, I'm bored at work, and have read to much on this subject.