Practically, and in most cases, that's really all it boils down to: legalizing pot. The enormous potential of the human soul is distilled down to one meager nugget of "getting high."
In any event, as is true with all laws, citizens are not absolutely compelled to obey the drug laws. They are entirely free to disobey (and certainly all dopers do).
What the laws do is create a risk of substantial costs and unpleasant consequences if a citizen is caught disobeying the drug laws. Many citizens weigh the costs and freely choose not to risk getting caught. Others freely choose to indulge, are caught, and are persuaded by the unpleasant consequences not to take further risks. In all cases free will is preserved.
It is entirely proper for society to impose these risks of punishment in light of the very real and enormous external costs that drug abuse imposes on other citizens. Contrary to the pro-doper delusion, drug abusers do not live in hermetic seclusion from other citizens. Their idiot self-obsessed behavior inflicts costly damages throughout society that the taxpayer is left to pay for.
Finally, the libertarian who offered up this half-baked anarchist lasagna either has no understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition and laws or is disingenuously ignoring them. The Old Testament comprises chapter after chapter of very clear laws with very severe penalties attached. Most libertarians--especially atheist libertarians--would never tolerate the laws of the Old Testament.
The New Testament demands even more perfect and comprehensive obedience, not by rote submission to the letter of the law, but from the very heart and soul in complete submission to the will of God. It is hardly an invitation to live one's life as one pleases.
The model of perfect behavior and obedience, Jesus Christ, did not lead a libertarian life railing against the Roman authorities. There were libertarian-leaning rabblerousers that followed him around demanding that he denounce the Roman authorities and that he even lead an insurrection against the Romans. Jesus steadfastly refused their entreaties, castigated them on more than one occasion, and commanded them to "render unto Caesar" the obedience due Caesar. At his trial Jesus was accused of sponsoring an insurrection but the reigning Roman authority, Pilate, judged him not merely not guilty but completely innocent of that offense.
Libertarians who fall for the sophistry of equating Christianity with secular libertarianism are guilty of mixing church and state to a degree that would outrage their athiest libertarian comrades. They have confused the perfectly obedient (to secular AND spiritual authority) Jeus Christ with the libertarian zealot Barabbas.
Licentiousness is not liberty--not in the secular sphere, and certainly not in the spiritual sphere.