[supercat]

For example with drugs, you decriminalize them, but at the same time require drug screenings for any social services, mandate that any company who does business with the state screens their employees, quadruple the fines & penalties for traffic incidents & crimes where drugs are involved, etc. Essentially, make it a real pain in the neck for the users thereby reducing the demand.

So you advocate nanny statism. I don't.

If someone doesn't do their job adequately, what difference should it make whether it's because they're lazy, or it's because addicted to alcohol, cannabis, 4am wild sex orgies, or something else? Likewise, if someone uses some drugs on the weekend but does so in such a fashion that their work performance is not noticeably affected, what's the problem?

If a particular company thinks that drug testing will work to its advantage, that should be its prerogative. I see no legitimate reason for the government to mandate such policies for all employers, however. Let the free market take care of it.