That is an ignorant statement, albeit widely spread by Libertarians for the last forty years.
Pray tell, what are the consequences of *NOT* having a war on drugs? Do you have any idea what those look like?
Do you have any examples in history to point at to show us a nation that didn't have a war on drugs, and how much better they turned out than what we have?
How about you give us an example in history of a nation that didn't have a war on drugs, but everything turned out better? How about that?
You see, the only example in history of which *I* am aware, was an unmitigated disaster. Millions dead, massive civil unrest and distress, and eventually a collapse into a dictatorship.
But i'm willing to look at an example where none of this happened, so how about you just point out this imaginary country where they did better without a war on drugs?
For the first century-and-a-half or so of its history, the USA didn't have a war on drugs.
Yes, for over 100 years, there were no laws against the use of recreational drugs yet somehow we managed to muddle through. You are obviously a proponent of the nanny state that needs to control everyone with your idea of what is acceptable.
There was no war on drugs before Prohibition. The country prospered.