There are, indeed, differences. But ANYONE who calls for laws to repress the private, non-coercive behaviors of others is a statist in my book. There is no place in a free society for such bullbleep. If you don’t like drugs, do as I do and LEAVE THEM ALONE. I promise you, no one will come along and force you to smoke a joint or snort some coke or anything of the kind... unless you’re a young male child and your government propaganda center has determined that you need to be doped up for the convenience of the teacher and administrators. It is just as wrong to forcibly drug someone as it is to forcibly PREVENT someone from taking a recreational substance IN THEIR OWN HOME (public behaviors are a whole ‘nother topic) as it is to prevent someone from buying a firearm to protect themselves as it is to REQUIRE them to own a weapon they do not want... It’s all part and parcel of the SAME thing... something called INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, something the Founders went to great lengths to ensure we would have unless we keep on the road we’re on and piss it all away.
How many people now smoke as compared to 20 years ago? Smoking is legal, but somehow the government managed to keep it to a minimum by advertising and making laws confining places where one can smoke. Alcohol is legal, yet drunk driving is punished. Could we not do the same thing with drugs? If the use of drugs is confined and made socially unacceptable, wouldn't that eventually cause a decrease in use? Just asking for the sake of debate.
There is always going to be people who choose to destroy their lives. We can offer as much help to them as possible in order to improve their chances of becoming useful citizens, but ultimately, I believe that we all live lives that are determined by the choices we make. Those who choose Jesus Christ have the best chance of having a good and fruitful life, and are equipped to give the maximum help to those who make poor choices.