And this is when the topic was published by a newspaper.
If memory serves, the fist scientific publications were from the 1880s.

Regulation is just one tool, and a blunt one at that, but individual choices matter and can operate with more nuance for better results.

I’ll grant that everything else you said were valid considerations but here I disagree.
We need regulation because relying on individual choice doesn’t work.

We wouldn’t need regulation for emissions if individuals would always chose emission free products.
We wouldn’t need regulation for animal welfare if individuals would always chose cruelty free animal product or become vegan.
We wouldn’t need speed limits if individuals would always drive safely.

But people are assholes and idiots. They make choices that hurt the environment, society and often even themselves.

As I’ve said before, why not try to reduce both?

And let’s be honest: Whenever someone post a sarcastic ‘good thing we banned plastic straws’ under a topic about CO2 emissions, they’re not doing it as a good faith argument that one pollution might avoid the other.

Plastic bags have the lowest carbon footprint

Why do people only ever talk about the carbon footprint when plastic bans are discussed?
Plastic waste is lying around everywhere, microplastics have been found in placentas and brain stems, the great pacific garbage patch is larger than some micro states.

The environment consists of more than just the atmosphere and we should reduce both greenhouse gases and plastic waste.

Also

plastic bags (including small produce bags) can be recycled at the grocery store (two near me do but it’s easy to miss). I also found plastic very easy to reuse.

That may be so but many people do not recycle or reuse their plastic bags. I would assume this measure is aimed more at them then at you.