Amazon.com Widgets

Should governments prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol in an effort to fight crime?

  • This isn't the 1920's anymore.

    There is ample technology in the law enforcement field these days to secure any new laws prohibiting the sale and consumption of alcohol. SCRAM bracelets, GPS trackers, breathalizers, camera surveillance, etc. It is true that alcohol can be made in an individual's home and sold illegally but, alcohol is much harder to hide than other drugs. The bad thing about today's technology is now there is alcohol in powder form that can easily be hidden in a person's purse or pocket and be added to a non-alcoholic drink. There are organizations and education galore in modern day America that people can use to get themselves out of the alcohol lifestyle. I, myself, am now completely off of alcohol and I guarantee you all it is absolutely worth it to not drink anymore. A person's brain chemistry enhances for the better when there is no more alcohol in that person's system - it is a proven fact. There is no rationality in the human brain when there is alcohol in it. Anxiety almost ceases to exist when there are no remnants of alcohol in the brain. There is no "wise use" of alcohol on this earth. Alcohol is no better than cocaine...Period.

  • Harms Exceed Benefits

    Late studies have proved that alcohol is more harmful than any other drug, on both the users and society. So banning the sale and consumption of alcohol is definitely going to have positive consequences. It is just a matter of time for people to get used to it. Http://www.Theguardian.Com/society/2010/nov/01/alcohol-more-harmful-than-heroin-crack

  • Serious reform is needed

    While few people possess the ability to have two beers and stop lets be honest with ourselves most of us dont! Alcohol is proven to be the third leading cause of death behind smoking cigarettes and malnutrition about 40,000 innocent people are killed a year in alcohol related car accidents the other about 30,000 more from health issues and still there are who think there isnt a problem? Thats 70,000 maybe more who knows how the statistics are now and while there are plenty of arrogant people who refuse to acknowledge they have a problem if anything over 2 to 4 beverages is considered a problem then we are all doomed! In conclusion I think serious reform should be considered regarding alcohol sale not prohibiting it completely as that may be disastrous to our society but increased alcohol taxes is obviously not enough maybe consider Australias approach where they get stamped for every drink at social establishments and after 3 stamps your done or limit sales of hard liquor period but something must be done because our current approach is obviously a failure considering the appalling statistics!

  • Yes, it should, because alcohol is truly the root of many crimes.

    The invention and discovery of alcohol was probably one of the worst in the world. The problem with alcohol, and not other drugs, is that it is legal to consume (if the consumer is above the age of 21 in the U.S.). The accessibility and underage consumption of alcohol is out of hand. Many crimes can be attributed to alcohol consumption. The prohibition of alcohol would be a good thing. The only problem with alcohol prohibition is the possibility of illegal trafficking of the prohibited alcohol.

    Posted by: SkaterNoll
  • Alcohol makes people commit crime.

    Yes I agree that the governments should prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol in an effort to fight crime. When people drink or consume alcohol, they lose their mind and they are not aware of what's right or wrong and finally they commit crime. Alcohol is one of the causes of crime in the world. Sale and consumption of alcohol should be prohibited in an effort to fight crime.

    Posted by: I0rFashion
  • Prohibiting alcohol is crucial to fighting crime because of the negative behavior that accompanies being under the influence of alcohol.

    Prohibiting the use of alcohol is an important tool for fighting crime because those prohibitions can help to curtail all of the negative behavior that accompanies excessive drinking. The negative behavior that accompanies being under the influence of alcohol is well documented. It is a documented fact that drinking alcohol increases aggressive behavior, removes inhibitions, and impairs judgment. All things that can lead to crime and violence.

    Posted by: TasticBran
  • Not a feasible plan

    No Govt. Should prohibit. If one argues that by consumption of alcohol increase crimes because they(one who consumes) are intoxicated and loses control over themselves than it will be much easier for the criminal to be caught while intoxicated as their physical movement will be less active. It is hard to blame alcohol for crimes.

  • No, it would not stop it.

    No, governments should not prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol in an effort to fight crime, because it would be impossible to effectively enforce. Prohibition did not stop alcohol consumption. Those who are intent on consuming it and committing crimes will find a way to do so, regardless of whether it is legal.

  • I do not believe the sale and consumption of alcohol will have any positive effect on fighting crime.

    Even if the consumption and sale of alcohol was prohibited, there would be crime. Even if it was prohibited, it would still occur. It was prohibited in the 1920's, and it was still purchased and consumed, even if not legally. Plenty of crimes are committed without the influence of alcohol. I believe that prohibition of alcohol may even make things worse, rather than helping with the crime situation.

    Posted by: ChildlikeJarvis90
  • No, because alcohol prohibition would only increase crime.

    The government would be fools to prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol. That would be an outright threat to national security. We have so many limitations on us already, taking that away would create chaos. Plus, I doubt the lobby of alcohol would allow it. It would increase crime, not fight it. They should, however, be more strict with drunk driving, and local governments, no matter how small, have to step up with after-bar-hours public transportation systems and ideas.

    Posted by: PointlessElbert47
  • I oppose the government further prohibiting the sale and consumption of alcohol, because the laws currently in place are sufficient when corruption of the laws is controlled.

    The government has interceded before with the sale and consumption of alcohol, with disastrous results. The National Prohibition Act of 1919 only served to foster a boom in organized crime, which revolved primarily around the illegal production, transportation, sale and consumption of alcohol. Currently, the majority of crimes committed as a result of the sale and consumption of alcohol revolve around selling to minors and car accidents where the driver's blood alcohol content is over the legal limit. The laws are in place to protect the public from these crimes. However, the enforcement of the law is lax. Only when the punishment for the crime is harsh enough to prevent the crime will the laws be followed more closely.

    Posted by: NappyMariano33
  • The government has no right to prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol.

    I do not believe the government should have the ability to prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol. People should be allowed to make their own decisions, but this does not mean they are not to be held accountable for their actions. If someone breaks the law while under the influence, they should still be punished; however, simply prohibiting the sale and consumption of alcohol will do nothing to fight crime.

    Posted by: DailyBrooks61
  • I do not believe the government should prohibit the sale and consumption of alcohol as a means to fight crime, because alcohol is a legal product and, when used wisely, causes no harm to others, and the banning of alcohol will not result in fighting crime

    Prohibiting alcohol by the government will not contribute to fighting crime. I feel that would bring about even more crime. During the prohibition era, people found ways to drink alcoholic beverages, regardless of the law, and people will resort to other crimes just to get the alcohol. There are many people who use alcohol responsibly, and they shouldn't be penalized due to those who use poor judgment while drinking. I am also against the ban because of the effect it would have on our economy. The alcohol industry provides millions of jobs for people, and those citizens would suffer with the loss of these jobs.

    Posted by: SilentIgnacio
  • It was a complete disaster during Prohibition, and would be again.

    The banning of alcohol during the 1920's in the era known as Prohibition was a failure. People still drank alcohol and it led to a huge underground criminal movement smuggling in liquor and selling it illegally. Instead of the government reaping benefits in the form of taxes on alcohol and controlling the purity of the substance, only the criminals made money.

    Posted by: NettN355
  • People have been using alcohol for ages.

    Changing things now won't make a difference. People are too used to being allowed to obtain alcohol that they would become irrational trying to obtain it when it is made illegal. Just look at the actions people took to obtain it during the 1920s.

  • I am opposed to the government prohibiting sale and consumption of alcohol; it is a responsibility issue.

    If the government prohibits the sale of alcohol, people will go back to the days of moonshine and start making their own alcohol. The issue is making people take responsibility for their own actions and know when enough is enough. Being overweight is a very big problem in this country, but controlling alcohol would be like controlling food. People have to learn to know when to stop.

    Posted by: P03tKerm

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.