Yeah, the libertarian argument is basically that people ought to be able to do what they want with their own bodies, including consuming drugs, and that it's not the government's business if they endanger themselves.

If drugs become legalized, the system that gets created will not fit the libertarian vision.

Well, I support an experiment to test your claims. The limited ones of decriminalizing seems to support the libertarian claims.

At least the bellwethers in Colorado et al seem pretty consistent with what libertarians might think ok.

Thats because weed does not destroy peoples minds and bodies like crack and heroin do. There is therefore no need for public health interventions on the scale of what would happen if more dangerous drugs were legalized.

Can't speak to crack/meth but junkies seem to be able to last a good long while. Dr. Carl Hart has interesting things to say on the whole subject.

One of his ideas - most addicts just quit.

There is much that is unknown on the subject.

I didn't mean to insinuate that libertarian-leaning individuals universally abhor substance abuse and believe that the government should do something about it. I mean that the argument is if the government wants to reduce substance abuse, any attempts to accomplish this through force of law are futile.