OK. I just think in any population, there is a high percentage of people that cannot keep themselves from getting addicted to things. Cheap and easy to get hard drugs would corrode any society in my opinion and I vote accordingly. I'm not the type that gets addicted to substances and you may not be either, we cound probably both have a little fun with this stuff and not be harmed in the long run. But we're different from a lot of people, most people don't contemplate this stuff like we do. When I go to work, I see a majority of people smoking at the breaks even though half of them are "trying to cut down" but can't. What if it'd been meth instead of tobacco? They wouldn't be working for one thing. Sorry, hard drugs are just too addictive to be made legal, most people don't have their defenses built up like we keep ours built up. In every society there's the 30-30-40 rule. 30% try to do right and stay clean, 30 percent purposely do wrong and 40 percent don't care. Those 70 percent are kept in line by the 30 percent that pay attention.I'm not really against Communities (like the Puritans), who together own all the Property in a Community, covenanting together whatever Moral Standards they please and even writing them into the Property Covenants.
But absent that sort of voluntary Covenant, I can't see home-invasion to prevent Opium usage as a Jesus-like Moral Action.
It's a Private Property thing. I've little or no objection to regulations on the Public Commons (I'm a Taxpayer, a part owner), but...
"Please Lord Jesus, bless and sanctify my breaking into this guy's home and putting a gun to his head so he won't smoke opium"...
...Is just a Prayer I can not see, as being something I could morally Pray to God.
And if I can't morally Pray for it, I can't morally Vote for it**.
As always, JMHO. Best, OP
** -- (unless by a Voluntary Unanimous Covenant of the Community, in which case I'm all for it).
They don't stay in their homes.