The problem with recreational drugs is that, being illegal, you are taking huge risks with your life in taking them. The money involved in the trade means that the suppliers prepare them in less than perfect surroundings and may stoop to adding things to the compounds. All the research that I've been able to find on the internet is sanctioned and uses pure grade material. In reality, you'll have drugs that are rarely that and will be mixed with all manner of material, the inter-reaction of which can be very nasty, sometimes fatal. So, if someone thinks it is intelligent to dabble in things such as cocaine and ecstacy, I'd argue that you'd have to question how intelligent they really are.
As for alcohol and tobacco, I've always found it faintly ironic that nicotine is banned while alcohol is not. There is no denying that tobacco is not all that beneficial to your health. Alcohol, depending on which piece of research you believe, has some benefits, mostly if it's red wine and taken in moderation, but creates huge social problems. It's a major contributor to domestic violence and costs the health system billions of dollars each year. Brewing companies do traditionally have strong political connections and, given the widespread use of alcohol, there would be a huge voter backlash if any governement tried to change the legaility of alcohol.
In terms of the issue, you do need to take into account the use of alcohol and nicotine in any argument on recreational drugs, regardless of the question of legality. Personally, I believe in someone's right to their own lifestyle and, if that extends to drug use, that is fine and their own business. The question is though, that if players have clauses in their contracts that prohibit them from using drugs, or drinking or smoking for that matter, then the employer has the right to test them on a regular basis in terms of that contract. If they test positive, then I have no sympathy with them and the club is entitled to take whatever action is considered appropriate in terms of their contract. As far as I am aware, the NRL contracts have these types of clauses. Alcohol, and specifically the misuse of alcohol, is probably captured under the clauses regarding bringing the game into disrepute and I can't see a problem with bans, fines and any other action specified in the contract.
The question of legality is one for the police and the legal system. If our law makers, as they have, pass laws that make it illegal to take things such as ecstacy, cocaine and heroin, then any positive tests should also be referred to the authorities. I disagree with the use of confidentiality clauses to protect people who have broken the law, regardless of whether I agree or disagree that the law is fair. If you want to change the laws, and I'm talking to those who regard the use of such drugs as acceptable, or you feel that something needs to be done about the use of alcohol in our society, write letters to your local Member, get together with other like minded individuals and put pressure on the Government to change things.
