The prohibitionists have been framing the questions for too long. It is time to go on the attack. There are cogent arguments that can be easily put forth. For example, if they say that they want to maintain prohibition to keep drugs away from children, the reply could be; The current system makes it easier for kids to get drugs. Why do you support a system that does that? If they say that drugs are connected to crime, the response is Yes, the fact that drugs are illegal does fund gangs. Why do you support a system that funds gangs? You get the drift. Reframe the question, make them squirm. Show them that this is an unreasonable restriction on all of us, and that it leads to bad outcomes, which are often the opposite of what people say they want. Any other examples?