> Drug sale and use is not victimless. The costs vary with the type of drug and the enforcement regime but the social costs never go to zero. You could substit

> Drug sale and use is not victimless. The costs vary with the type of drug and the enforcement regime but the social costs never go to zero. You could substitute 'drug' with just about anything and that would be true. Sell cars? They put out poisonous fumes. Sell electric cars? People still crash into each other with them. Sell kitchen knives? People stab each other with them. Sell toilet paper? People flush it into the municipal sewer system. Make a funny TV show? People will watch it when they should be spending time with their children. Drugs aren't special. There are societal costs to every technology. No product is victimless if the criteria you demand is that the societal cost is zero. I don't even disagree with you on practical matters. I just deeply resent how you have defined that word. When no action is victimless, there is nothing that cannot be outlawed. In fact, that's the same line of reasoning that is used to ban books (via 'corrupting public morals').