Regulate cannabis or keep prohibiting it? The answer seems obvious: it is better to regulate than to prohibit. If the plant and its derivatives were regulated, the State would have control over production, distribution, and consumption. Today, under prohibition, that control belongs to traffickers.
The State could implement health controls, guarantee product quality, and provide information about composition, dosage, and possible adverse effects; traffickers avoid these guarantees.
On the other hand, state control would mean subjecting production and consumption to taxation and, even though this is not the main argument for advocating a regulatory framework, it is not negligible either. Naturally, traffickers do not pay taxes or collect VAT, pocketing the entire premium of prohibition.
Special mention should be made of prevention and harm reduction: for the State, it is easier to implement a policy of preventing undesirable consumption under a regulatory framework than through repression; for example, by using distributors as messengers of prevention.
Within a very precarious legal framework, Cannabis Associations like ours have already been carrying out many of these functions: such as guaranteeing the quality of our cannabis, which is exclusively available to ADULT members, while also promoting a harm reduction policy.