Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: jdjtcagle on August 29, 2004, 08:10:29 pm
-
What would you think if the government were get rid of alcohol?
With all the death tolls and want not because of drunk driving...
I'm pretty sure it will never happen, but it's not very fair to be driving and all of the sudden before you can blink your life is over...
-
tried it already in the early 1900's, called prohibition, didnt work
-
But just think about all the possibilities of prohibition........ :drevil:
:devil:
-
no!
i kinda like alcohol :p
-
Like all things like this, be it acohol, drugs, tobacco, prostitution etc, if you ban it, it will only move underground and become all the worse for it. In fact, pushing it underground and making it out to be a menace only increases the substances infamy and often leads to more people experimenting with it, especially younger people who tend to smoke dope for as much of the thrill of breaking the law as for being high.
As mentioned before, this has been tried through the prohibition, but all it managed to do was place power in the hands of moonshine dealers and gangsters, the public will follow it's vices, regardless of who is holding them.
That's why I think Holland has the best idea, most Dutch kids go through a phase of coffee shops, I'm sure, but then it just becomes mundane and normal, that's why the coffee shops are usually stuffed with British, German and US tourists ;)
-
[color=66ff00]There's an old saying that goes:
God invented alcohol to stop the Irish taking over the world. ;)
[/color]
-
I thought God invented the Irish to stop Alcohol taking over the world, you are our last best hope, get to it man! ;)
-
They'll never ban alcohol again for several reasons
a) The government taxes it quite heavily, which brings in lots of money.
b) People woud never stand for it.
c)Traditionally, those substances assosciated with the poor classes have been heavily restricted, while those that are also used by the upper classes have been left alone. For example, marijuana was banned back in the days of segregation and racial discrimination, when it was mostly used by the evil, Black, jass musicians and their distreputable kind, and also by Mexican labourers. When in the 60s and 70s, middle-class white kids starting smoking it, the demcriminalization movement really got into full swing, to the point where it is now only a misdemenour in around 10 states.
The same is true to with crack cocaine. For the past 35 or so years, crack has carried with it a punishment 100 times greater than normail cocaine, despite being more or less equally harmful. Thats because crack is most commonly used by poor people and ethnic minorities, while cocaine is the drug of choice for rich, white America.
err, I'll stop my preaching now.
-
Alcohol.... hmm... if I wasn't such a bad boy I'd say ban it.
-
I say tax it heavily, not ban it.
-
It was the 1920s...prohibition was in full swing...and so were the gangsters.
You can't legislate personal morality, you can, however, legislate public morality.
Example: Murder is illegal in every state in the nation.
It is not, and should not be illegal to possess or imbibe alcholic beverages. It is, in most places, illegal to be intoxicated in public.
Alcohol is one thing, Amphetimines and Narcotics are a whole differnet horse entirely. If you're an alkie, your life sucks but you can function when you're sober and I don't know of a case where an alkie killed someone for a drink. Junkies on the other hand are a public menace when their sober. The will do anything for another hit, even kill. That's why drugs are illegal where alcohol is not.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
You can't legislate personal morality, you can, however, legislate public morality.
For once, you and I fully agree.
Though my case for marijuana still stands. Not only are the personal negtive effects much less than with alchohol, but the agressive tedencies that one experiences with alchohol are non-existant. In fact, marijuana has the opposite effect, it relaxes you and makes you less violent. If something that is known to cause hightened violence in people is legal, I don't see why something that basically makes you mellow and sleepy shouldn't be.
-
I would shrivel up and die without the promise of the occasional margarita.
-
Ive never had alcohol, so I don't care.
-
Alchohaul is very much a cultural phenomenon that seems to be very pervasive in european cultures (and elsewhere). Its spread to North America obviously because of history.
Banning such a well known, relatively safe substance such as alchohaul that brings in boatloads of money through taxation and government license would be ludicris.
I'm no real drinker (not fufilling that Irish call to arms I guess :D) but the occasional beer, wine, or other type of beverage is a nice thing to have plus its entirely healthy to have a little achohaul as tests have shown.
-
It's all in how it works on the brain Rictor. Marijuana can cause a violent outburst as much as alcohol. The difference is you can't monitor marijuana usage like you can alcohol.
To produce drinkable alcohol requires a large mechanical device, for marijuana all you need is pot and some soil.
Not mention that recent studies have shown that marijuana smoke has more cancer causing agents in it than unfiltered tobacco.
-
what exactly would be the point of banning alcohol? people would just find something else to get pissed on.
-
It's still impairing a persons moral choice by denying them a right to smoke it as long as they make sure it is an isolated environment.
As for violence, I don't know about there, but I hear a damn site more about children and families being mown down by drunk drivers or people being stabbed to death in drunken brawls than I hear about people killed in drug related incidents, and most of those are between dealers, which wouldn't happen if it were regulated. To say marijuana is bad when there is maybe one person badly affected by it in every thousand when there is a fight in the local pub most weekends strikes me as kind of crazy :)
-
No. I don't use much alcohol only when I'am with my friends in night club or some big party etc.
-
Libetator: Your arguement about drug violence is similar to what happened during the prohibition.
People killed for alcohol and were killed by impure product, and gangsters (drug lords) were getting a lot of money.
Now, you can't legislate personal morality, but with proper regulation and restriction soft drugs could be legalized in the US and limited to use in your own home. That's to avoid health hazards, drunk driving, etc. There should also be extrordinarily stiff penalties for those commiting crimes under the influence as there is with alcohol.
In fact, I think that the US needs to be a little stiffer on drinking and driving like Canada is. If we're serious about solving this problem, make it a felony.
By legalizing these things, the "war on drugs" can be over, a source of funds for terrorist organizations is lost, and FDA regulated companies can ensure that the risk to public health is as minimal as possible. Plus with the societal stigma removed, less people will try drugs in the firstplace as an act of rebellion against authority.
-
Originally posted by Liberator
Alcohol is one thing, Amphetimines and Narcotics are a whole differnet horse entirely. If you're an alkie, your life sucks but you can function when you're sober and I don't know of a case where an alkie killed someone for a drink. Junkies on the other hand are a public menace when their sober. The will do anything for another hit, even kill. That's why drugs are illegal where alcohol is not.
That's a rather poor arguement Lib. Junkies kill for a hit cause the drugs are expensive due to the fact that they are illegal. Make them available as cheaply as alcohol and the problem wouldn't be much worse than with alcohol.
Biggest mistake the government ever made was to start this stupid "War on drugs" In the 50s opiates were semi-legal and they weren't anywhere near the problem they are now. Criminalising drugs is the cause of the problems we have now. Not the drugs themselves.
Legalise heroin and let the morons who take it breed themselves out of the human race.
-
Yeah, its just a question of who would you rather see money going to: druglords or the government (or am I repeating myself ;) ;) ).
People who use drugs aren't going to stop because you ask them politely, or even due to the fear of punishment, so you might as well sell the stuff, at least that way the purity, dosage and chemical makeup can be controlled, unlike most of the crap you find on the streets. It would not only eliminate the violence involved in drug deals, but aslo be a huge source of revenue for the government, which could then go to education, healthcare or whatever.
-
please oh please oh please don't let this turn into another anti-smoking-nazi argument. That always happens.
-
Originally posted by icespeed
what exactly would be the point of banning alcohol? people would just find something else to get pissed on.
lol icespeed is back. tiara is no longer the only girl. haha