In the short term, some banning will have traction and work. The possibility of legal or moral infractions does reduce the likelihood of continued engagement in unwanted behavior. Its aim is to absolve the individual of any responsibility associated with indulging in any “evil” behavior and puts enforcement into the hands of the law.
But do we need governmental oversite to determine what are the right values for us? Being able to decide this for ourselves is something very powerful in our human toolbox. Most of the governmental influences that do work are designed to reduce the need for intervention (think seatbelts and minimal ages for driving) and potential negative consequences that governmental agencies will have to intervene and use costly resources to fix. But the government is not designed to determine what is right for an individual based on their unique humanness.
When any social problem becomes more of an individual action in a private space, the ability of the government to intervene to solve the problem becomes more difficult. A better option might be to consider something a “public health issue” and not a criminal issue and ban it. This allows each person to make decisions for themselves and doesn’t cause visceral reactions to moral issues.
The best practice would be to educate yourself about the issue. Find reliable sources that provide you with information to make the most informed decisions for you. Your decision may not be the best practice for someone else, but remember you are deciding for you and are responsible for your decisions….what someone else chooses is their responsibility and so are the outcomes.