To be honest, this is a very internally conflicting topic.

The trained economist in me knows the wider positive benefits of drug legalization, the other side of me really thinks that if I had kids, I wouldn't want them getting a hold of these drugs.

I guess there's one aspect of who has lived with the idea of tobacco and alcohol in society, and that when dealing with these substances, it is critical to have awareness, self-control and respect for "how these habits can mess you up real bad". I'd say that we can "accept" tobacco and alcohol because we've been trained or desensitised to their presence and accept them as an inevitability.

On the other hand, if people are determined to do something, they will find a way no matter what you do to try and keep it out of their hands. If I had kids, I wouldn't want them getting their hands on any form of drugs or tobacco. Tobacco may be legal, but damn its filthy, and more of a social cost than anything else IMO.

Not that I think drug leaglisation is a positive thing, but this sounds exactly like the banning of anabolic steroids for recreational use in the US. The suicide of Taylor Hooton led to his father going on a rampage and blindly guiding congress to outlaw anabolics in the US for ANY use, despite then FDA recommendation NOT to ban them.

Great, today we have a US where anabolics are illegal and the people who'd probably want to use them are criminalized. Oh great, why doesn't the US ban chicken breast too? One could probably draw a teneous link between bodybuilding and gang members, and what do bodybuilders eat to get big? Chicken breast. Damn; them chicken breasts are a cost to society.

At the end of the day, I wouldn't say that Singapore is backwards in banning the substance, but its all about politics and interest groups when it comes to what should be illegal or not.