Libers also support full advertising and marketing of the crack and heroin and future concoctions and combinations.
These problems mostly solve themselves as tragedies become lessons for others. Sometimes that's a person's only purpose -- to serve as a warning to others. Libertarians see government interference in these things as a waste of time at best.
But while the government is trying to fight these problems, innocent people are being shot in drug gang conflicts. People have their heads cut off as the members of drug empires send a message to rivals. And a police force militarized to combat these gangs have SWAT teams breaking in doors and shooting innocent people and pets.
This declaration of war against drugs has turned some cities into war zones and entire nations into battlefields.
The problem with people that want to maintain the war on drugs is that they're too eager to protect people from drugs.
But if the choice is between people dying from drug abuse and people being killed in drug war cross-fire, I'll pick people dying from drug abuse. I can avoid drug abuse much more easily than I can the consequences of the drug war.
I'm selfish that way. If a person wants to kill themselves with drugs, that's tragic, but I'm not going to sacrifice myself and my city and reasonable police power to help them.
Aside from your ridiculous but sick idea that death removes the problem of drug use which it clearly doesn’t, those people vote by the millions.
You don’t seem to realize that the ghetto social agenda of the libers, and open borders goal, produces liberal voters, not conservative voters.
The libertarian agenda listed in post 93 only creates a larger voter base for bigger government and more programs.
It all makes economic conservatism impossible.