The number of drug "addicts" are about 5% of users. So most users are not even addicts.
This one says 10% of users become addicts. I am sure it means 10% of illegal drug users.
First, medical science tells us that while the use of psychoactive substances always has the potential for harm, in practice most users will never experience any serious negative consequence from their drug use and may actually stop using at their own volition at some point in time. UNODC estimate that only about 10% of all drug users will ever develop a problematic pattern of drug use or become dependent on drugs. Of course, this doesn’t mean that drug use cannot be harmful, and indeed in many cases it is. But it does tell us that treatment is actually not necessary for the great majority of drug users. It should, therefore, be offered only to people who really need it, that is, those engaging in problematic drug use, who have become dependent on drugs. https://www.tni.org/en/article/will-myanmar-lead-drug-policy-reform-in-southeast-asia
This suggest that most criminalize drugs are not even addictive or have any significant downside in long terms.
Many states have legalized ganja.
California, Colorado, Washington. Even Malaysia and Thailand went along.
However, many drugs are safe too or at least many people think it is.
A quick search at google shows this graph
So why did ganja get legalized first?
MDMA and LSD also do not kill anyone, nor do DMT, kratom and many other drugs. Most meth users are not even addicts. Some organizations wish to legalize these as well.
Out of so many harmless drugs, why was cannabis the one that got legalized first?
I am aware that some organizations want to legalize other drugs too. Why the one wanting to legalize cannabis is successful?
What should other organizations that want to legalize other drugs do so they are successful too?
I asked in History.SE and they said I should ask in Politics.SE...