How to Tell a Prohibitionist
First, he or she is a correlationist, claiming that use of the intoxicant he or she wishes to prohibit causes ill effects where the alleged effects follow the alleged cause far far less than one hundred percent (and often even less than one percent) of the time, at least as expedient to the desired prohibition.
Second, he or she blames use of that intoxicant for ill effects of the prohibition itself, first and foremost the taking of the trade in that intoxicant out of the hands of legitimate and conscientious (for businesspeople) businesspeople and putting it into the hands of those who are always eager to take advantage of any prohibited trade, and well willing (to put it mildly) to deal with a situation in which (to put it mildly) they have no protection of the law for their property and no recourse to the courts over disputes ("Why don't US liquor-importers tommy-gun each other any more?").
Third, he or she has no objection whatsoever to the expansions of the numbers and powers of the kinds of "moralists" and "professionals" that no such totalitarian campaign ever has any difficulty in finding to run it.
And fourth, he or she has no objection whatsoever to the governmental monoculture arising from purging government of all except those who have no objection to all of the above.
Keywords: correlationism, Drug War, moralism, Prohibition, psychosociocracy, Tobacco War, theocracy, totalitarian studies