Your analogy to airport security screenings is a poor one. At the airport, we are attempting to keep those determined to commit murder from getting on airplanes. They are bent upon doing something that the vast majority of people consider evil and immoral. Acts such as murder are immoral in and of themselves and require no laws to define them as such. Drug use, on the other hand, is not so universally condemned. Some drug use, such as alcohol consumption, is even socially acceptable. Drug use is not an act that is immoral in and of itself. It is only "evil" because the law says so. Take away the law, and the definition as "evil" goes away too. Not so with murder. Murder is evil with or without a law saying so. (In legalese, this is the difference between Malum in se and Malum prohibitum.)
Thus in your case, you are not being told to pee in a jar because a few bad apples are intent upon doing some horrible evil, but because some politicians didn't like their choice of a recreational intoxicant. (Do you suppose said politicians toasted the passage of their drug laws with a few adult beverages?)
“Good citizenship means obeying the laws, even those you don’t like.”
;^)