What's the measurement for success?

It seems, from a casual observer's perspective, we have fewer people trying hard drugs when the consequences are strict and known. We have more people trying hard drugs when the consequences are removed.

Neither system will achieve 0% drug usage - so which policy results in fewer people trying hard drugs?

We're trying the other way and failing right now. Perhaps we should figure out why...

There's very few if any fans of what played out in Portland, for instance. Overt drug usage exploded and became a much worse problem. The exact opposite of what proponents had hoped.

Some will say "but they didn't do it right" or similar - tired arguments we hear every time pet policies fail.