The qustion could be a bit controversial, but I would like to ask about it to make sure about positions on stuff, so I would try to bowdlerize it and make it as general as possible to avoid pointing fingers, if the question is actually bad then maybe noting would be a need.
A govt somewhere establishes a law that bans a certain thing, omething like beer/coffee/jewels/violent media/weapons/strong medicines outside of hospitals/etc, with reasoning such as it causing violence or something. It is something that is ONLY done in that region (the ban), everywhere else the thing isn’t banned or is just regulated, and actually, most of the people that would have something to do with it don’t follow that law except by maybe hiding the stuff from enforcement.
OR for short: A Govt of a place makes a law, it bans a thing, it is not followed.
What would the position of pretty much everyone be in this sort of case now? what in the case where the reasoning of said law could be considered dubious or in the case it is refuted or something similar like the govt not being completely informed?