Well, that's openly irrational. "Maybe we can't do anything, maybe trying to do anything will just make it worse, but we should do it anyway- because drugs are bad!" Irrational. Strawman argument. Nobody is disputing that drugs are bad. They're saying there's nothing effective we can do.
With that out of the way, please tell me how wanting to keep certain classes of drugs illegal is irrational based on the reason they are pure poison. No, don't do that. Instead, tell me how my argument that "Certain drugs are too bad to be legal" is a strawman? Why is irrational to say, I'm sorry, openly irrational, "It's not OK to do meth"? Personally, I think it's a lot more irrational to have crack available to anyone who wants it.
"There's nothing effective we can do." Of course there is. We're not doing it, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. Now, I will concede lengthy jail sentences are not the answer. A combination of education and rehabilitation would be a better use of the war on drugs money. Possession would land a sentence of court ordered drying out somehow. Either in a clinic or some kind of outpatient system, like a secular 12 step program. Crimes committed related to drugs would be treated like whatever crime has been committed. Murder is still murder, stealing is still stealing. I also think if someone wants to clean themselves up, they should be able to with some sort of amnesty. Yes, I am on heroine, which is illegal, but I want to get off. So I should be able to without fear of legal consequence.
And if you go back and read what I said, not just what you wanted to see, I have never ever said "jail" or "keep thing the way they are" or any variation of that. Nor have I said anything resembling that our current system is working. You were putting words into my mouth. I am disappointed in you, Fred, for that. I thought you were better than that.