How a person uses his body affects other people who live in the same civilization. This is even true where no government exists.
There are many ways drug abuse affects other people. Traffic safety is just one example.
I do not think these laws were necessary in earlier days in this country. There were no cars and freeways. There was a stronger work ethic and general acceptance of personal responsibility.
Our nation was also strongly influenced by broad participation in the voluntarily observance of Biblical morality. Those who did not were often ashamed due to both being shunned by the community as well as the guilt from their own conscience (due to an awareness of God's laws).
When large numbers of people abuse freedom burdensome laws become inevitable.
If this nation were to return to its Christian heritage people would abstain from drugs like marijuana without the need for government to codify it. If a small number of people did use these drugs, laws regulating them would not be necessary either.
How so, exactly? Please limit your examples to those which do not involve overt, external action on the part of one individual, i.e., a "drug addict robbing a convenience store in order to get money to buy drugs."
There are many ways drug abuse affects other people. Traffic safety is just one example.
In what way are existing traffic laws ineffective unless the possession, ingestion, or distribution of certain substances are criminalized? In other words, why do you assume existing traffic laws are not enough to ensure a baseline of traffic safety?
If this nation were to return to its Christian heritage people would abstain from drugs like marijuana without the need for government to codify it. If a small number of people did use these drugs, laws regulating them would not be necessary either.
I'm beginning to sense your true ideology . . .