War on drugs versus gun control - Inconsistent thinking?

Yesterday evening, during my commute, I suddenly had a puzzling thought.

Why are there so many (conservative) people in favor of the “war” on drugs, but at the same time against strict gun control?

We all know the argument: “Guns don’t kill people. People do.”

But isn’t this also true for: “Drugs don’t kill people. People taking them do.”

Do you see the inconsistency?

People could be allowed to stockpile their house with morphine, cocaine, heroin, meth, LSD, ecstasy and so forth. And it could all be legal. Actually using them would be illegal, unless there’s a legal reason for it.

Same for having guns at home. You can’t shoot your husband or the postman, unless there’s a legal reason for it (which usually is self defense).

Does the legality of the possession of heavy guns entail the legality of the possession of hard drugs?

Does the illegality of the possession of hard drugs entail the illegality of the possession of heavy guns?

Perhaps conservatives and liberals could make a deal. Legality of soft drugs (including cannabis) in exchange for legality of light weapons. Illegality of hard drugs in exchange for illegality of heavy weapons (such as assault rifles).