The most playfully named neocon, Charles Krauthammer, just made some very asinine comments on The O'Reilly Factor. The discussion was about the vicious drug raid in Columbia, Missouri by militarized police in which one of the homeowner's dogs was killed in front of a 7-year-old. All this for a little bag of marijuana.
Allow me to paraphrase Charlie: Botched drug raids are an argument against drug laws as much as botched raids against car thieves are an argument against car theft laws.
Now, I never expect much in the way of moral logic from neoconservatives, but I don't expect utter stupidity, so I think the Hammer knows that his statement is purest form of bull.
Where is the comparison between a car thief and a drug user? The car thief steals the cars of other people, which is why the word thief is in the title. Despite all their other possible failings, the drug user likely paid for the drugs in a voluntary transaction (and if he stole for the money, he committed aggression, and is no more or less blameless than government thugs that commit aggression). The drugs are THEIR rightful property, unlike the car with the thief.
Oh Charlie, always full of gems.