I don't know.
I strongly suspect that it is the result of indoctrination to blindly accept the authority claimed by someone in a position of authority as pushed by our public schooling system. — The acceptance of the War on Drugs (WOD) illustrates this perfectly.
The federal government claims the authority by way regulating the intrastate commerce which comes from its regulation of interstate commerce… it even accepts that non-commerce can be regulated by the interstate commerce clause — this completely ignores that the similar federal prohibition on alcohol required a Constitutional amendment. Oddly enough, though they claim the authority via the interstate commerce clause there is no notice that the full clause cites the power as the same regarding foreign nations: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
This means that the power to regulate interstate commerce is the same power as to regulate commerce with foreign countries. This in turn means that the actions the federal government does to enforce their intrastate commerce ought to be regarded on the same level as if they tried to do it in a foreign country: this would be an act of war, and it's enforcement would be the waging thereof. — The constitution defines this as a crime: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
Therefore, to support the WOD is to support treason against the States. — I have never encountered a coherent defense against this argument because to do so is to defend the indefensible.
(The above mentality is also illustrated in things like the particulars of Fast & Furious, as well as the [lack of] consequence to those responsible for it.)
The police state is here even if they legalized ALL drugs.
This isn’t happening because of the sweaty night dreams of WOD, we are growing a tyranny in this country.