I would like to know what process is involved in justifying the prohibition and or control of a substance and how this varies from country to country.
For example, opiate based pain killers are a controlled substance, yet they are the most common form of pain killers used in hospitals, and the statistics regarding addiction and overdose are overwhelmingly negative, and I would think this would be justification for an inquiry into whether this choice is the best in regard to public health and safety, yet this practice seems to have not changed in decades.
In respect to prohibited substances, I have noticed that this prohibition is also not consistent with the actual danger to the public the substance poses, and even still, this prohibition has not been even remotely successful in preventing the illegal trafficking of these substances for the many decades over which they have been deemed illegal. This circumstance maintains their high prices for the end user, maximizing profit for organized crime syndicates, as well as employment in law enforcement. This has lead me to ask, could these syndicates have an intimate relationship with the public offices that have jurisdiction over these prohibition statuses?