This is an absurd argument, obviously. This would be like saying that pedestrians hit by a car don't really have the right to talk about regulating cars because they can't understand the power that you feel when you drove your car. Drugs do not affect only to people doing drugs.
Yes, cars should be banned. People who have sex make loud noises ... so sex should be banned.
A few lines above, when you put as example "would be like trying to make laws against sky diving without experiencing sky diving". Making laws = regulating
I never talked about banning sex, or cars, I said that even people that do not drive can (and will) have a word about regulating car use, in their own interest, and also for the public interest. Same for drug use.
Regulating is not the same as banning, so please don't put words in my mouth trying to reduce the conversation to absurd. Is a cheap trick.
Drugs are not regulated but are illegal. If you don't understand the difference between regulating and illegality ... you are so intelligent.
illegal ∈ regulated
> Drugs are not regulated but are illegal
Drugs are strongly regulated (ask your pharmacist) AND some of them are strongly regulated AND are also illegal
Illegal by definition means that there was a regulation that created this status. Those drugs would be alegal otherwise.
Regulated means that for some special cases the use is allowed, even if is not ok for a recreational uses. A physicist can have solid reasons to give a morphine derivative to somebody in a perfectly legal situation
So they're not exactly illegal.
Some other classes of drugs are totally illegal for use in humans. (Limited to research only with extra hoops.) Not opiates.
Examples include: LSD, MDMA (changing), PCP, Psylocybin, Psilocin, Muscarine, a bunch of chemically similar drugs and a few other hallucinogens.
THC and CBD were in this class and are now legal in some countries and states of USA.