Not by the abortionist definition.
What are you, a relativist? They're wrong - and by no sane definition does Woody's inhalation of smoke affect any body other than Woody's.
The same people involved in marijuana trade are involved in heroine, cocaine, meth and transporting illegal immigrants into the U.S. They are predicate criminals who will engage in crime no matter.
But under legalization they'll bring in far less money for their criminal activities:
”The lush traffic in alcohol beverages during the violent years of 1920 to 1933 had laid the base of organization for a number of criminal gangs. The termination of the ban on liquor deprived these gangs of their most lucrative source of money” - Special Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce
Legalization of alcohol hasn't taken the profit out of alcohol nor will legalization take the profit out of drugs, it will just change the distribution of the money.
Even if the total profits don't drop - and basic economics says they will - moving money out of Al Capone's hands to Adolph Coors' was a clear win.
“What are you, a relativist? They’re wrong - and by no sane definition does Woody’s inhalation of smoke affect any body other than Woody’s”
That may be Woody’s opinion if he wants to justify drug use and if Woody sat on a mountain top alone he might be right but not otherwise.
“What are you, a relativist? They’re wrong”
Sure they’re wrong just as the legalize drugs crowd is wrong for thinking they can equate drug use and the harm it does with personal freedom.
By the way Capone went to jail for tax evasion not bootlegging.