I'm confused by your statement. I am a professional (I write software for a living). I pay my bills, I invest in things I think are valuable with my free money, I give to charity, I care for and provide for my wife and my son, and occasionally family members and friends. I also (in moderation) drink alcohol, often on the weekends and at social events. Am I a part of some "dependent group"?
I hate to break it to you, but almost everyone in my peer group - that is to say, the people writing software and managing the IT infrastructure of my entire city - does the same. In fact, I get together with half a dozen or more of them every weekend at our hackerspace and make stuff; and often, that stuff is homebrew beer.
Now tell me something. If instead of beer and whiskey I enjoyed cannabis, what would be the difference to you, to my family, to society - other than that I'd be at slightly lower risk for long-term health problems (compared to alcohol)?
Hell, if all the above things were true and I was on methamphetamine or heroin, what would it matter? Now I grant you that's a difficult hypothetical to digest, given the downward spirals those drugs almost always initiate, but suppose it was true. Wouldn't I still deserve to be measured by my actions and my impacts on other people, and judged accordingly, rather than by your personal tastes in regard to mind and metabolism-altering substances? If your tastes alone matter, why not lock up people because they enjoy different art, music or food?