I think Coulter drastically underestimates the cost incurred by criminalizing drugs. Violence, incarceration, etc. It has been catastrophically expensive in direct and indirect expenditures to maintain a war on drugs through direct enforcement and incarceration as well as indirect costs like rendering thousands of people unemployable for petty possession charges under three strikes laws. It’s no different than the catastrophic consequences seen during the prohibition of alcohol which was rightfully recognized as a giant failure though alcohol is far more dangerous than many of the drugs on the black market today.
Coulter is right that as long as we socialize the costs of bad behavior we must accept some regulation. I don’t like the Libertarian label much because they do seem to associate too much with themes like freedom to drug, abort and do whatever you want. I like to start from a non-coercion principle instead and apply it across the board. I don’t think we should be able to tell someone they can’t smoke pot or else we’ll jail them, shoot them, etc. But I don’t think if they sit around high all day they should be able to tax me or else jail me, shoot me, etc., so they can get food stamps, health care etc. In such a free market, bad behavior would be self limiting because of the costs. And under true freedom and justice people would behave better.
The cost is not incurred by the criminalizing. It is incurred by people’s soft attitude toward drugs—their own and other people’s. If people weren’t so durned wishy-washy on this subject, the demand would lessen. Make it uncool by public opinion.