The Instigator
MCDCBC
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Andromeda_Z
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

The United States Should Reinstate Prohibition

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Andromeda_Z
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/20/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,352 times Debate No: 17143
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (3)

 

MCDCBC

Pro

The first round is for acceptance only, the debate will take place in the following rounds.

Definitions

Reinstate: to put back or establish again, as in a former position or state.[1]

Prohibition: the legal prohibiting of the manufacture and sale of alcoholic drinks for common consumption.[2]

[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...
[2] http://dictionary.reference.com...
Andromeda_Z

Con

I accept the debate and definitions, thank you for the challenge!
Debate Round No. 1
MCDCBC

Pro

The United States should reinstate prohibition because,
1. It would eliminate drunk driving (except for those who break the law and drink any way).
2. There would be less car accidents.
3. Less money would be spent on alcohol so moree money could be spent to pay off debts.
Andromeda_Z

Con

Rebuttal

Contention 1:
You seem to have refuted your own point here. Even though it is illegal, it can happen anyway. That statement applies to both alcohol and drunk driving. Also, alcohol itself does not have to be illegal for drunk driving to be illegal. Prohibition of alcohol is overkill when the desired effect is the elimination of drunk driving.

Contention 2:
How so? Drunk driving is illegal now, and it still causes accidents. Making the alcohol itself illegal is not gong to change this.

Contention 3:
Alcohol production, sales, and consumption would be moved to the black market, which would actually drive up prices due to the considerable risk involved. The money, instead of going to debts, could still go towards alcohol.

Arguments

Argument 1:
Prohibition did not work to decrease crime in the 1920s and 1930's, there is no reason to believe that it would be an effective means of controlling alcohol consumption now. People stockpiled cases of alcohol before Prohibition went into effect and had alcohol prescribed by their doctors (which was legal). There was also a black market created to smuggle rum from the Caribbean and whiskey from Canada, produce liquor, and operate speakeasies. [1] Instead of decreasing crime, it increased it. Reinstating Prohibition would presumably cause the same effects as it caused in the 1920s.

Argument 2:
Prohibition of the consumption of alcohol limits personal freedom to as one wishes with one's own body. For those that consume alcohol responsibly (i.e. without committing crimes while drunk or becoming alcoholics), there is no reason not to allow them to drink.

Argument 3:
The is evidence to suggest that light to moderate consumption of alcohol (one to two drinks per day) reduces the risk of developing diseases such as coronary heart disease, ischemic stroke, and total stroke. [2] To prohibit moderate consumption of alcohol would negatively impact health.

Sources:
[1] http://history1900s.about.com...
[2] http://alcalc.oxfordjournals.org...
Debate Round No. 2
MCDCBC

Pro

MCDCBC forfeited this round.
Andromeda_Z

Con

MCDCBC has forfeited, please extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
MCDCBC

Pro

MCDCBC forfeited this round.
Andromeda_Z

Con

My opponent has forfeited again, and has failed to present any reasoning against my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Mirza 5 years ago
Mirza
Ok challenge me.
Posted by Andromeda_Z 5 years ago
Andromeda_Z
Mirza: Sure.
Posted by Mirza 5 years ago
Mirza
"To prohibit moderate consumption of alcohol would negatively impact health."

Debate?
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
Prohibition, as demonstrated in the Thirties, did not stop the rate of consumption of alcohol. As a matter of fact, it did lead to an increase in organized crime and the rise of the black market [bootlegging and speakeasies.]. Pro assumes that no alcohol means no accidents, &ct. False. He has considered the factor of the human condition in his argument....
Posted by mcc1789 5 years ago
mcc1789
It'll be interesting to see how you can argue for reinstating prohibition. Of course, drunk driving is illegal already, which has not stopped it. Nor did making the manufacture, transport or sale of alcohol illegal stop that. It simply created massive organized crime.
Posted by MCDCBC 5 years ago
MCDCBC
Now if my argument is shoved up my butt wouldn't that make it a sh!ty argument?
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
her*
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
MCDCBC better have one hell of an argument stuff up his butt.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
MCDCBCAndromeda_ZTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I just hate to see sisters fight, so conduct point for that. J/K forfeit.
Vote Placed by Yorble 5 years ago
Yorble
MCDCBCAndromeda_ZTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by headphonegut 5 years ago
headphonegut
MCDCBCAndromeda_ZTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Clear winner here