Let me explain how civil conversation works. You put forth an assertion, and usually, a good response has a counterpoint, seriously or in jest to show you that your position may have not considered the whole thing.
When you draw an absolute line saying drug abuse has no victims, I laugh and point out other “crimes” that do and by your logic are thus different and must be banned.
Now, if you make another point about “forcing people to buy from violent underground marketplaces”, this is where your original comment becomes entirely irrelevant and you’re projecting some unsubstantiated paranoia of yours as a factual argument.
These are addictive substances. Many if not most of them leave permanent psychological scars and inhibit normal human functioning in ways that, unlike naturally occurring substances such as coffee are considered DETRIMENTAL to societal health and safety. By limiting exposure of society to synthetics or dangerous drugs, we limit their harm.
Your argument seems to be everyone in the US population wakes up everyday thinking “where can I get five ks of that sweet sweet Birria” ?
Stop acting like a dickhead if you don’t have any experience with rehabilitating the victims of these idiotic policies you’re proposing and go outside your moms basement once in a while.