Do we need another "prohibition"?

[Menerva Lindsen]

The prohibition of alcohol in the 1920's and 30's in the United States is one of most famous, or infamous, times in recent American history. The intention was to reduce the consumption of alcohol by eliminating businesses that manufactured, distributed and sold it. Considered by many as a failed social and political experiment, the era changed the way many Americans view alcoholic beverages, enhancing the realization that federal government control cannot always take the place of personal responsibility.
We associate the era with gangsters, bootleggers, speakeasies, rum-runners and an overall chaotic situation in respect to the social network of Americans. The period began in 1920 with general acceptance by the public and ended in 1933 as the result of the public's annoyance of the law and the ever-increasing enforcement nightmare.
We really know how many does the Government profit from the alchohol selling.
But...
The following statistics on alcoholics might surprise you. Some of them surprised us.

It is an alcoholism fact that:

• Alcohol is the number one drug problem in America.
  
• There are more than 12 million alcoholics in the U.S.
  
• Three-fourths of all adults drink alcohol, and 6% of them are alcoholics.
  
• Americans spend $197 million each day on alcohol.
  
• In the United States, a person is killed in an alcohol-related car accident every 30 minutes.
  
• A 2000 study found nearly 7 million persons age 12 to 20 were binge drinkers.
  
• Three-fourths of all high school seniors report being drunk at least once.
  
• Adolescents who begin drinking before the age of 15 are four times more likely to become alcoholics than their counterparts who do not begin drinking until the age of 21.
  
• People with a higher education are more likely to drink.
  
• Higher income people are more likely to drink.
  
  These statistics on alcoholics may surprise you. The alcoholism fact about how many alcoholics there are in the U.S. may come as a particular surprise. Alcoholism is much more prevalent than many people suspect.
  So what do you think about "prohibition"?

 

[aaronleland]

We still live in an era of prohibition. Only the substances being prohibited are different. This has led to the incarceration of millions of non-violent offenders, and the rise of violent black markets. Prohibition failed, and it's still failing.

 

[Asclepias]

Look at the failed War on Drugs for your answer. People are going to get their drug of choice no matter what. At least you can tax people that do it legally.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The prohibition of alcohol in the 1920's and 30's in the United States is one of most famous, or infamous, times in recent American history. The intention was to reduce the consumption of alcohol by eliminating businesses that manufactured, distributed and sold it. Considered by many as a failed social and political experiment, the era changed the way many Americans view alcoholic beverages, enhancing the realization that federal government control cannot always take the place of personal responsibility.
We associate the era with gangsters, bootleggers, speakeasies, rum-runners and an overall chaotic situation in respect to the social network of Americans. The period began in 1920 with general acceptance by the public and ended in 1933 as the result of the public's annoyance of the law and the ever-increasing enforcement nightmare.
We really know how many does the Government profit from the alchohol selling.
But...
The following statistics on alcoholics might surprise you. Some of them surprised us.

It is an alcoholism fact that:

• Alcohol is the number one drug problem in America.
  
• There are more than 12 million alcoholics in the U.S.
  
• Three-fourths of all adults drink alcohol, and 6% of them are alcoholics.
  
• Americans spend $197 million each day on alcohol.
  
• In the United States, a person is killed in an alcohol-related car accident every 30 minutes.
  
• A 2000 study found nearly 7 million persons age 12 to 20 were binge drinkers.
  
• Three-fourths of all high school seniors report being drunk at least once.
  
• Adolescents who begin drinking before the age of 15 are four times more likely to become alcoholics than their counterparts who do not begin drinking until the age of 21.
  
• People with a higher education are more likely to drink.
  
• Higher income people are more likely to drink.
  
  These statistics on alcoholics may surprise you. The alcoholism fact about how many alcoholics there are in the U.S. may come as a particular surprise. Alcoholism is much more prevalent than many people suspect.
  So what do you think about "prohibition"?

And, your post gives proof that cigarettes are not nearly as bad as alcohol. I was told once by an ambulance driver that in their 25 year career, never once were they called due to a cigarette. But, they lost count of the people they picked up as a result of alcohol. The ambulance drive told me that he had picked up people that had been beat, stabbed, or shot in bars and night clubs, many involved in domestic disputes, car accidents, work place accidents, and other alcohol related incidences. He also related spousal abuse and child abuse among some of the calls.

Yet, cigarettes continue to be highly taxed in hopes of reducing usage and preventing health issues. And, yet, law makers seemingly leave alcohol alone when attempting to tax bad habits to the point of being too expensive to buy. Cigarettes are bad, and in some cases, deadly. But we can check the stats on health issues and deaths due to alcohol and find that alcohol is just as bad and just as deadly. We can see beer commercials on TV, but we can't see cigarette commercials. We can eat at restaurants where alcohol is served, sit next to a person drinking, but cigarettes are not allowed in restaurants. We can watch them get drunk, but we can't watch them smoke.

We have health warning labels on cigarettes, but not on a fifth of hard liquor. I had rather be in a room with smokers than be in a room full of alcoholics. I had rather drive on the highways where drivers are smoking rather than drive on highways where drivers are drinking alcohol. I had rather work with smokers than work with alcoholics. I had rather my children be around smokers than for them to be around alcoholics. Lets be fair if were going to come down hard on smokers, and do the same where alcohol is concerned. I had rather take my kids to a baseball game and sit next to a smoker than to take them and sit next to someone drinking beer the whole game.

 

[whitehall]

Unless you change the laws of nature you can't eliminate alcohol or stop the consumption of alcohol. It would be a good idea if parents took more responsibility for their high school age children and people obeyed the law and stopped driving while intoxicated. It's ironic that the same people who decry the incarceration rate and prison population in the U.S. are willing to create laws that would put 3/4 of the Country in the slammer.

 

[aaronleland]

Liberals are more offended by cigarettes and alcohol, and social conservatives are more offended by drugs like marijuana. The prohibition debate will never end, because both extremes are retarded.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm only offended by cigarettes. Second hand smoke will kill you. I dont care if people drink as long as they dont do anything stupid around me or my loved ones. Same with weed.

 

[aaronleland]

It's ironic that the same people who decry the incarceration rate and prison population in the U.S. are willing to create laws that would put 3/4 of the Country in the slammer.

You mention alcohol, but nothing else. Where do you stand on letting millions of non-violent drug offenders free?

 

[g5000]

. I was told once by an ambulance driver that in their 25 year career, never once were they called due to a cigarette. But, they lost count of the people they picked up as a result of alcohol.

I bet they picked up even more people in their ambulance because of fat. You wanna prohibit fat?

 

[aaronleland]

I'm only offended by cigarettes. Second hand smoke will kill you. I dont care if people drink as long as they dont do anything stupid around me or my loved ones. Same with weed.

I admit, I questioned myself when I used alcohol as an example, but it is the liberals who are more easily offended by cigarettes.

I agree with the second hand smoke thing to a degree. Some people take it a bit far. I can walk past somebody on the street with a cigarette, and they react like I just coughed in their face.

 

[Sonny Clark]

. I was told once by an ambulance driver that in their 25 year career, never once were they called due to a cigarette. But, they lost count of the people they picked up as a result of alcohol.

I bet they picked up even more people in their ambulance because of fat. You wanna prohibit fat?

I don't want to prohibit any of it. People are responsible for themselves when it comes to fat, cigarettes, and alcohol. If we're not going to prohibit all of it, then we shouldn't prohibit any of it. I believe in fair play across the board.

 

[g5000]

If we're not going to prohibit all of it, then we shouldn't prohibit any of it.

So should we allow private citizens to possess nukes? After all, if we are not going to prohibit all arms, then we shouldn't prohibit any of them.

You see, there is a point where a line must be drawn when it comes to the possession of arms. Just so with drugs. Heroin and crack and the like are the nuclear weapons of drugs.

I'm perfectly fine with legalizing pot. I use alcohol and cigarettes as benchmarks. Pot is no more addictive or destructive than alcohol or nicotine.

 

[bendog]

the definition of insanity.

 

[BlindBoo]

No. We need less government intrusion and more personal responsibility.

 

[aaronleland]

If we're not going to prohibit all of it, then we shouldn't prohibit any of it.

So should we allow private citizens to possess nukes? After all, if we are not going to prohibit all arms, then we shouldn't prohibit any of them.

You see, there is a point where a line must be drawn when it comes to the possession of arms. Just so with drugs. Heroin and crack and the like are the nuclear weapons of drugs.

I'm perfectly fine with legalizing pot. I use alcohol and cigarettes as benchmarks. Pot is no more addictive or destructive than alcohol or nicotine.

I have easily gone months without pot or alcohol. I do them because they are fun. I haven't gone over 12 hours without a cigarettes in years, because I need it. Whether legal or illegal, pot should be at least of the same classification as tobacco.

 

[westwall]

The prohibition of alcohol in the 1920's and 30's in the United States is one of most famous, or infamous, times in recent American history. The intention was to reduce the consumption of alcohol by eliminating businesses that manufactured, distributed and sold it. Considered by many as a failed social and political experiment, the era changed the way many Americans view alcoholic beverages, enhancing the realization that federal government control cannot always take the place of personal responsibility.
We associate the era with gangsters, bootleggers, speakeasies, rum-runners and an overall chaotic situation in respect to the social network of Americans. The period began in 1920 with general acceptance by the public and ended in 1933 as the result of the public's annoyance of the law and the ever-increasing enforcement nightmare.
We really know how many does the Government profit from the alchohol selling.
But...
The following statistics on alcoholics might surprise you. Some of them surprised us.

It is an alcoholism fact that:

• Alcohol is the number one drug problem in America.
  
• There are more than 12 million alcoholics in the U.S.
  
• Three-fourths of all adults drink alcohol, and 6% of them are alcoholics.
  
• Americans spend $197 million each day on alcohol.
  
• In the United States, a person is killed in an alcohol-related car accident every 30 minutes.
  
• A 2000 study found nearly 7 million persons age 12 to 20 were binge drinkers.
  
• Three-fourths of all high school seniors report being drunk at least once.
  
• Adolescents who begin drinking before the age of 15 are four times more likely to become alcoholics than their counterparts who do not begin drinking until the age of 21.
  
• People with a higher education are more likely to drink.
  
• Higher income people are more likely to drink.
  
  These statistics on alcoholics may surprise you. The alcoholism fact about how many alcoholics there are in the U.S. may come as a particular surprise. Alcoholism is much more prevalent than many people suspect.
  So what do you think about "prohibition"?

Yeah, it worked so well the first time we should definitely do it again I mean the birth of organized crime, widespread governmental corruption, just imagine how screwed up this country can really get!

 

[whitehall]

Prohibition is an example of the expansion of government power typically turning into a disaster. Anti-German sentiment was high after WW1 and most breweries were run by Germans so it seemed like a good idea to shut them down and that was an issue. Typically the federal government didn't have a plan of enforcement other than signing the freaking law and the creation of both the Mafia and the FBI were unintended consequences. The elite never had a problem finding alcoholic drinks and the graft from organized crime was hard to resist. The Canadians laughed all the way to the bank and Americans treated the law as a joke. It's alleged that the Kennedy dynasty got it's start from rum running.The feds got smart after prohibition and found that vices could be a lucrative source of taxation. When I was a kid cigarettes were .20 cents in a vending machine. Now they are over $5 and the federal government is raking in the dough. You almost gotta laugh that the argument by democrat progressives for dumbing down our kids with marijuana is that it is a lucrative source of taxation.

 

[Sonny Clark]

If we're not going to prohibit all of it, then we shouldn't prohibit any of it.

So should we allow private citizens to possess nukes? After all, if we are not going to prohibit all arms, then we shouldn't prohibit any of them.

You see, there is a point where a line must be drawn when it comes to the possession of arms. Just so with drugs. Heroin and crack and the like are the nuclear weapons of drugs.

I'm perfectly fine with legalizing pot. I use alcohol and cigarettes as benchmarks. Pot is no more addictive or destructive than alcohol or nicotine.

Arms and weapons are totally different from alcohol and cigarettes. I smoke cigarettes also. Of course John Q. Public shouldn't own nukes. That's a silly question.

 

[g5000]

Whether legal or illegal, pot should be at least of the same classification as tobacco.

I am for the legalization of pot.

However, while cigarettes may be more addictive than pot, they are not an intoxicant. They do not inhibit your ability to drive or your judgment. Pot should therefore not be in the same classification as tobacco.

 

[Kosh]

No. We need less government intrusion and more personal responsibility.

Then why vote far left like you always do?