If dopers ONLY affected themselves, I wouldn't care what they did, but they affect others and that is the problem with it
And if you would read what I wrote, you would find that Paul doesn't limit himself to securing the border, but also strengthening the economy. And he's never said he was against having a strong military - he's just against deploying it when we have many other extremely powerful tools of international influence that we can use before we risk our troops lives.
As for your anti-drug argument, it's just like when Clinton asked people how much of a limitation of rights that would accept to ensure their safety. It's a false question - the limiting of rights, itself, is the most profoundly dangerous possible thing that could happen in law.
Virtual terrorism has been unleashed in this country by the government, and endless war against the people, because people's basic rights to ingest whatever they want into the body only they own is denied by that government. Do you think the massive and deadly drug cartels would even exist if drugs were legal? Did you ever read about the effect of Prohibition on crime? The arguments were the same for protecting children, and alcohol is far more deadly overall than all the illicit drugs put together. Do you agitate for the banning of alcohol?
Of course, if currently illegal drugs were legalized, the same legal concept would make it pretty hard to restrict prescription meds too - which would seriously hurt the stranglehold of pharmaceutical companies. Not that you would be trying to protect that control, right?
Bah - you have no legal argument. You would jail the population to "keep them safe." And if you claim you wouldn't, I would reply - where would you stop? Where's your line? Someone might commit a crime while high? Well the Democrats believe that someone might be violated by something said on talk radio or Free Republic, and so they want to shut it down, too. Go talk to them about limiting rights.
It's one thing to make laws about people's actual criminal actions, it's another to make victimless crimes out of things that might happen somewhere to someone - that's just raw tyranny, and I reject it.