New Rule, part 2

More examples.
If you believe that addictive drugs must all be banned, and remain banned, then you must also support banning alcohol and nicotine. No more booze, no more cigarettes.
If you compare AIDS from dirty needles to liver disease, then alcohol kills more people each year than all the opiates combined. Crime? Does vehicular homicide count?
Throw in the lung cancers that smoke, and second hand smoke, cause each year, and you'll see that the coca and poppy crops are a distant third to tobacco in the Bane of Mankind race.
The only things that keeps tobacco and alcohol possession out of the law books are the corporations that profit from their sales. If profits are a suitable reason to keep a drug lawfully on the market, then surely the crack sales alone justify legalization.
But if you think the damage narcotics do to our society require them to be banned, then you can't allow a couple to remain available just because American companies refuse to grow something else.
Finally, if you believe in the free market, then you must allow the sales of everything. You have to believe that the power of the free market will protect the people from porn and poison. You have to let the internet provider censor chinese sites, and let the foreign company work your ports. To do otherwise is to admit that corporations are run by people, who are occasionally stupid, crooked, or murderous, and to admit that the free market needs a watchdog to keep the rats out.