Originally posted by Hawkwind.
Whether people like it or not our societies would be less violent without alcahol and there'd be less accidental death caused by it, this is an undeniable fact. I repeat, an undeniable fact. With that in mind I don't know why the op is being scorned for his views. I like a bit of a drink and enjoy it but no one can reasonably deny the havoc that drink causes, if you do then you're in denial.

No, it is not an undeniable fact.
Actually, in the times when it was illegal, crime rates skyrocketed.
Although those deaths were not accidents...
They were inflicted by:

A. Bad brewing saftey - Eliminated by it being legal
B. AK47s and the mob - No need for one if you dont have to drug traffic the booze


You guys need to read up on history.. Or at least just watch the history channel once in a while.

Why am I getting a "Sophmore year self help class" feeling from this thread?
You guys are spewing the same crap my guidence counslers did in highschool.
They are one of the main reasons I went to online school for my last few credits, please don't re-invoke them here.

If the government wants to continue to make a profit from alcohol sales they should be responsible for placing ignition interlock devices on All vehicles the same way seatbelts are mandatory are on All vehicles and spend more on educating our youth on moderation and more money spent on treatment centres . Ottawa Canada , where I live has approx 1 million people , and facilities for less than 60 teenagers with drug and alcohol addictions !! Pretty pitiful for the capital of Canada !!!!

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Originally posted by Enderdog

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Originally posted by eyesdown
This is one of those moments someone pipes in with "everything in moderation" and I'd like to be that person, but if that were the case I wouldn't spend every sunday feeling like death, waiting for the world to swallow me up.

That was funny, thank you. I have spent many a sunday feeling like death also, thats my point though is it is a poison , a lethal one at that and it is allowed, I just dont get it

The same can be said of cell phones. Should they be banned?

Stay well.

Ok, so heres a perfect example of what I have tried to explain. Cell phones, masturbation, should we ban tose to? Seriously? Are there any victims of abuse, or deaths from these things? Are there innocent victims because of these things? NO!!!! Your masturbation has no effect on someone elses well being, unless your driving and doing it as to where you kill someone! Again, Ill ask that you re-evaluate your responses as they are not relevant to this thread.good day

Oh sure there are. I used that example because I am a firefighter/EMT and go to automobile accidents almost every day I work. Far more are caused by cell phone use than by alcohol. The point is that banning something does not make it less likely to cause problems. It merely reduces the chances of anyone else intervening in your behavior that is harmful, because you either hide it, or they don't want to get you in any trouble. I know it isn't that simple in reality...but, in practical terms, it is. With "drunk driving" for instance, in the past, if someone was obviously and seriously impaired, Almost no one would let them leave and drive, simply because everyone knows it is dangerous. Now, with it illegal to be above some arbitrary blood alcohol limits, most people of good mind and spirit stay out of it, because any interference may well result in in several thousands of dollars of fines and punishments. The cost/benefit of "helpling/Interferring" has been changed.

You can't "ban" alcohol. It's too easy to make. We tried that, and the unintended consequence was that it became profitable enough that organized crime because viable. Too many people want it. When something is made illegal, that enough people want, the result is inevitably that it only gets supplied by people with no moral compunctions about providing it and protecting their revenue stream. When something is legal, then normal social interactions are the rule of the day. There is far less at stake for someone to help someone else, who needs it, when the legal and expensive ramifications are absent.

I'm sorry that you had the experience you did. But, banning alcohol doesn't make something like that less likely. It makes it more likely.

Be well.

Originally posted by AllUrChips

Originally posted by dasman888
...while we're at it, let's outlaw "stupid people" too. They are responsible for far more mayhem than alcohol.

But yeah, let's outlaw alcohol... then we can start a black market and build some organized crime empires based on alcohol vice... Oh... wait... we did that already.

Oh well, what the hell. If the "War on Drugs" can generate about 1 Trillion in cash into the economy of the U.S. every year, why not booze, right? I mean, so long as you don't piss of The Mob, or a drug cartel, what is there to fear?

Black bag agencies can get involved in the illegal alcohol trade, and make even MORE money than they have with various drug smuggling ops.

Yeah... great idea... if you love criminal syndicates.

why not? whats a black market hurt? Organized crime, this aint the the 1930;s Tell me why it would be bad? Plus there would be almost no underage drinking if it were too hard to get.

Do you seriously not understand that Drug Cartels are the same thing as Organized Crime?! It ain't the suits that determines what is organized crime. It's the structure of the organization.This is probably a worthless thread, simply because you do not, and are not going to, understand that the answer to social ills, is not to punish most people for doing things they want to do. You think that problems will magically go away, if enough force is used on anyone who even contemplates using something that someone else has blamed for their own lack of judgement. When "I was drunk." rates the same as "The Devil made me do it." on the acceptability scale of trying to avoid responsibility, we won't have any alcohol problems. But, we will still have responsibility problems. And those are a completely different matter.

why is alcohol and tabacco not on the list of the war on drugs. Is it because if items on the war on drug list would be legal they would cut into the profits of alcohol and tabacco? legally and illegally?

Originally posted by yaluk
why is alcohol and tabacco not on the list of the war on drugs. Is it because if items on the war on drug list would be legal they would cut into the profits of alcohol and tabacco? legally and illegally?

edit on 7-11-2011 by yaluk because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-11-2011 by yaluk because: (no reason given)

Cigarettes are not a mind altering substance and that is just for starters. That said, i do not recommends smoking cigarettes. Course, someone can use grow their own tobacco.

Interesting that we have the ATF. Alcohol , Tobacco and Firearms. America and its people would be so much more beautiful and healthy with out those three. No debate there and we all know it.

you might change your mind on the alcoholic wine "buckfast" it is made from the benedectine monks and it puts you in some form ........please look it up and get yourself a bottle

the only difference/problem with alcohol is that there's the Fermented and Distilled types for consumption

now IF either kind is not normally unhealthy for a person to consume, then it is allowed & permitted in the normal course of life.


it seems that the Distilled type of Alcohol is the one that wreaks the damage to the physical and mental state of individuals...and only by over-consumtion,
not because it is inherently harmful or unhealthy in even the smallest doses to a general population of European lineage


debate all you like...'beers' to you