You seem oblivious to the fact that alcohol being available just about everywhere, unlike cannabis, is highly correlated to the amount of harm being done.
I say that to say this; I grew up here and it was significantly easier to get Cannabis (and other stuff) than it was to get alcohol as I grew up. At the time, I didn't keep up with geopolitics nor the drug trade in general. We just assumed our proximity to the border "was somehow related"... Although, this fact may have changed since then.
Further, I would also suspect that if there was major harm being done as a correlation with availability, Fire Service and EMS professionals would be reading about it in our trade journals. As some have pointed out, Cannabis is widely available in Colorado, Washington, and I believe Oregon.
I mean I am hardly ever further than a couple minutes away from a place where I can buy alcohol.
As for minors, I'd argue the problem lies more in the late access to alcohol in the US.
Then as of the effects of cannabis itself, it increases reaction time. So you could definitely pull the brakes one second too late in front of that kid and his balloon. But yeah, it might not make you as prone to think killing 3 people is an acceptable activity.
- Excessive consumption (which most people who consume alcohol don't do).
- Excessive consumption + driving
- Mental Illness
It's unclear to me that alcohol prohibition would dramatically reduce harm, when issues like mental health problems and building safer transit systems aren't addressed.
As it is often pointed out, prohibition seems to increase localized harm (as evidenced by the the 1920s prohibition, and the current drug war in Mexico and poor US inner cities), by driving the intoxicant trade into the criminal black market.