Rules, laws and regulations won't do it, but they are needed. Remember the 10 Commandments?
The goal of rules, laws and regulations should be to protect one citizen from having harm done to him or her by another citizen.
That's why we have laws against driving under the influence, discharging a firearm on a crowded city street, speeding, public nuisances, etc.
Sure some laws, rules and regulations are needed. The examples you gave are good ones. I certainly cannot argue against these laws. However, one feature these laws all share is that the intent of the laws you cite is to prevent on citizen from causing harm to another. Laws against possession or use of drugs do not share this feature. The only person directly harmed by use of drugs is the user. Why should we have laws to protect us from ourselves? I would also argue against things like helmet laws for motorcycle riders and seatbelt use laws in cars under the same principle.
If you support laws such as those making drug use illegal, then why would you oppose hypothetical laws such as one limiting your daily caloric intake? Can the government really tell you how much food you can eat? If you don’t support such a law, then why would you oppose it? I can’t see a reason to oppose such a law that doesn’t apply equally well to a law against drug use.
Even granting for the sake of argument that laws against possession and use are desirable, surely you could agree with me on the cases where the federal government has raided marijuana dispensaries in states where such dispensaries are legal under state law. If not, why even bother with the tenth ammendment? I have yet to see anything in the Constitution allowing the federal government to regulate or criminalize drugs. Since that power isn’t granted to the feds, by the tenth it must be reserved to the states or the people. If a state legalizes drugs, how can you support continued enforcement of federal drug laws in that state?
Finally, please realize that I am in no way arguing in favor of drug use. Drug use is stupid and harmful to the user. However, government legislation is not the answer. Tobacco use is stupid and harmful to the user, yet it’s not illegal. Ditto alcohol use. Ditto eating excessively. Why should drug use be treated differently. I would argue that much harm is done to drug addicts (in addition to their self-inflicted harm) by criminalizing drug use. If a person wishes to stop smoking, he can openly seek the help of a doctor, hypnotist, psychiatrist, or purchase any of a number of products designed to help him quit. He can do so openly without fear of prosecution. A drug addict has no such recourse. I have no data, but I am sure that there are numerous drug addicts who don’t seek treatment for their addiction based on their fear of prosecution and incarceration if they try to get help. I suspect that addicts wishing to seek treatment form a minority of all addicts, but why should we have laws discouraging them from seeking help?