Yes we do, because to allow the unfettered use of drugs will result in a collapse of government. The first order of any governing system is to insure it's own survival, and any system which allows it's own citizens to kill themselves will not survive very long.
The law has standing to hold them accountable for their actions while under the influence but choosing one plant over another is not the role of a civil government.
So you are blatantly asserting that people have right to do heroine or crack. (both come from plants.)
Speak up. Tell us you support a right to Heroin and Crack so that we can recognize you as a kook, and thereafter ignore what you have to say on the subject.
They most certainly had the right for the first 150 years.
First, I’m not a kook. Redoubling your efforts in the face of an unremitting history of failure is the nature of a kook. Second, do you honestly believe drug laws prevent any appreciable number of users from using drugs? Without question their primary effect of such laws is to enrich dealers. Drinkers drank during prohibition and the law simply made the Mob rich. Drug users will continue to use drugs and our billions spent on enforcement will simply enrich the dealers and strengthen the cartels. Third, yes, let stupid users of heroin and crack meet their chosen fate; I no longer wish to spend billions to keep the fools from the consequences of their choices.
Wrong. You nor anyone has standing to tell another what they can put in their own body.
______________________________________
How strange it is that this argument is the same used by pro-aborts.
/s
Face it. Pro-dopers are equal to pro-abortion advocates. Their blathering are immoral.
—Yes we do, because to allow the unfettered use of drugs will result in a collapse of government.-—
Oh, dear Lord—then please explain: how did the Federal Government exist or survive from 1789 until the 1920s?