Should alcohol be banned?

[Kodak]

Definitely not, atleast in my opinion. Although the general idea of a government is to protect its citizens to a point, its not its place to control our entire lives - especially in this matter.

Furthermore, its not even do-able as evidenced by prohibition.

 

[Honeo]

I would say no just because I enjoy it too much . But honestly, it shouldn't. It would turn into what Marijuana is today, and even more so because of the amount of people who drink opposed to the amount of people who smoke. Keeping it government regulated is a safe bet.

A better question is should we ban cigarettes, the harm is unavoidable. At least with alcohol you can drink responsibly and have a good time with no harm done.

 

[malakadang]

Hence the word; Rare.

Only lifelong side effects are rare.

These are only minor side affects, Alcohol's Effects are much worse and the proof is that over 10,000 People die yearly from Alcohol in the U.S only. I'm pretty sure Accutane's Side effects haven't done half what Alcohol did.

More people die from the Government as well.

peer pressure gets her to drink, she can have one drink and say ohh ive had enough she doesnt have to keep on drinking and tbh if someones paying attention to how much you drink at a party they're a fucking tool

Peer pressure keeps someone drinking. I also agree, if someone stalks someone seeing how much they drink, yes, they're a cunt.

Partially? I say entirely. And I swear I told you not to use the "peer pressure" excuse.
As for the "fitting in" part, it's because your society has grown far too reliant on alcohol, smoking and many other things "for a good time". Keep on going, and you'll just fuck yourselves over.

Peer pressure, social desirability are valid reasons.

You never look at the cause of the situation, do you?

Banning alcohol is breaching ones civil liberties. You have enforce rules onto others about what they can, or cannot do.

And I disagree.

This would be a different debate.

If this liberty means harming society, then NO THANK YOU.

Why don't you just worry about yourself, and let others take care of themselves?

Society is merely a term referring to the collective body of people. Freedom of such magnitude is not a bad thing. Why do you honestly care what other people do? How about just letting people choose what they want to do? Isn't that fair?

Pros and Cons of Alcohol:

Cons-
Impaires your judment, which can lead to bad choices such as... pregnancy, fights, alcohol-related car crashes, divorce, under-age drinking, liver disease, kills brain cells.
Those are only a few things alcohol can do you to

Pros-
?

Statistics-
In 2006, more than 19% of drivers ages 16 to 20 who died in motor vehicle crashes had been drinking alcohol.

Of the 1,746 traffic fatalities among children ages 0 to 14 years in 2006, about one out of every six (17%) involved an alcohol-impaired driver.


In Texas, There were 3,382 death related car incidents and 1,463 of them were caused by alcohol

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Ban Government.

 

[aus aaz]

After a hard days work there is not better feeling then a cold beer.

 

[Dave.]

After a hard days work there is not better feeling then a cold beer.

i would agree, but people who take it too far nocking back 10 pints+ just take the piss and they expect to get medical treatment

 

[WeRnIE]

Yes, it does not do anything good.

 

[Noam]

A nice little factoid for all those who say drunk driving is the worst thing alchohol can do: Drunk walking is eight times more dangerous than drunk driving ^_^ Source

Anyways, alchohol should not be banned. It's not as bad as people make it out to be. In fact, alchohol, like everything else, is perfectly fine when used in Moderation, Like everything else. Honestly, If you're retarded enough to start abusing substances, I couldn't care less whether or not you died. For every substance abuser that dies, the human race evolves a bit more . This is entirely something that people should decide on their own, and the government shouldn't interfere with these types of decisions. Just look at probation in the 20s, It's better this way.

Another little factoid: In ancient Greece and Rome, it was considered rude to drink pure water. Everybody drank diluted wine, from birth to death.

 

[malakadang]

Yes, it does not do anything good.

Alcohol is an intricate part to Western Society. It has been instilled into billions of people. One might think in a perfect society, alcohol may be prohibited. This disregards the pragmatic nature of the present. Criminalizing the billions in society will ultimately lead to more chaos. The US tried this in the 1920's. It was a complete disaster. Organized crime increased.

Revoking the right for one to drink is taking away their civil liberties by a large magnitude. Why can't you let people do what they want? Why would you claim to knows whats best for them? Most people don't even know what's best for themselves.

Alcohol is a billion dollar revenue raiser for the Government. It employs 1000's of people and is intertwined harmoniously with almost all industries. Banning alcohol would result in consequences of catastrophic proportions. Unemployment would rise; Government revenue would decrease; Civil revolt would increase; Organized crime would increase and so on.

Ultimately, alcohol is a biological and social problem. Alcohol has been drunken for generations, well into the times of Christ. Alcohol itself only slightly worsens natural human tendencies to have sex and instigate violence. Banning alcohol won't stop people drinking, just like making murder illegal stopping people murdering.

 

[Dave.]

Alcohol is an intricate part to Western Society. It has been instilled into billions of people. One might think in a perfect society, alcohol may be prohibited. This disregards the pragmatic nature of the present. Criminalizing the billions in society will ultimately lead to more chaos. The US tried this in the 1920's. It was a complete disaster. Organized crime increased.

Revoking the right for one to drink is taking away their civil liberties by a large magnitude. Why can't you let people do what they want? Why would you claim to knows whats best for them? Most people don't even know what's best for themselves.

Alcohol is a billion dollar revenue raiser for the Government. It employs 1000's of people and is intertwined harmoniously with almost all industries. Banning alcohol would result in consequences of catastrophic proportions. Unemployment would rise; Government revenue would decrease; Civil revolt would increase; Organized crime would increase and so on.

Ultimately, alcohol is a biological and social problem. Alcohol has been drunken for generations, well into the times of Christ. Alcohol itself only slightly worsens natural human tendencies to have sex and instigate violence. Banning alcohol won't stop people drinking, just like making murder illegal stopping people murdering.

In a perfect society, i would see alcohol being legal, as they would know their limits, people wouldn't binge and then everything can be a lot better and people can enjoy themselves, but that will never happen.

 

[Templar]

Just because the taxes of Alcohol provide a good income for the government doesn't mean that Alcohol should be prohibited, Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[malakadang]

Just because the taxes of Alcohol provide a good income for the government doesn't mean that Alcohol should be prohibited, Two wrongs don't make a right.

Did you mean shouldn't be prohibited?

If you did, why would you impede on my natural rights? Why not tackle the people that are reckless with alcohol, instead of relinquishing my natural rights?

 

[Templar]

Yeah, Sorry about that. What I meant is that most people who do drink overuse it which leads a person to break other laws such as; Rape/Murder. it's a never ending chain.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[malakadang]

Yeah, Sorry about that. What I meant is that most people who do drink overuse it which leads a person to break other laws such as; Rape/Murder. it's a never ending chain.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Taking away one's natural liberties is a wrong.

Let's analyze this situation.

Let's say there are 1 million people. All of which drink. Maybe 10,000 at maximum will get into some sort of moderate altercation. Perhaps 30,000 in total will cause some form of altercation. (The numbers are fairly generous I feel).

What you propose it so relinquish the rights of the other 970,000. Why not just tackle the 30,000 directly?

 

[Templar]

Taking away one's natural liberties is a wrong.

Let's analyze this situation.

Let's say there are 1 million people. All of which drink. Maybe 10,000 at maximum will get into some sort of moderate altercation. Perhaps 30,000 in total will cause some form of altercation. (The numbers are fairly generous I feel).

What you propose it so relinquish the rights of the other 970,000. Why not just tackle the 30,000 directly?

You can't do that unless you pretty much ban it, yet again People would still drink but it'll cut it down the lives that are being lost due to Alcohol.

 

[malakadang]

You can't do that unless you pretty much ban it, yet again People would still drink but it'll cut it down the lives that are being lost due to Alcohol.

If 970,000 people can drink in moderation, yet only 30,000 lose self-control, not all to a major degree, I think it would make more sense in dealing with those 30,000. Many lives are lost due to smoking also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

0.16 people perish due to alcohol use disorder. 4x more people die from drowning. Perhaps we should ban people from setting foot in the water.

Natural rights. Let me drink what I want. Isn't this fair enough?

 

[Templar]

Hm, Fair enough on your side.

 

[Rebecca Black]

Even if it were people would still find ways to buy it and drink it in private places. I'd vote for a Canadian alcohol age restriction of 21+, Canadian kids are crazy while under the influence. Although regarding my first point my second would be completely useless.

Drinking is fun but it's the neanderthals that ruin it for others.

 

[Dave.]

Even if it were people would still find ways to buy it and drink it in private places. I'd vote for a Canadian alcohol age restriction of 21+, Canadian kids are crazy while under the influence. Although regarding my first point my second would be completely useless.

Drinking is fun but it's the neanderthals that ruin it for others.

alcohol would never be banned it makes too many people a lot of money lol, but if alcohol was like invented tomorrow i think it would be banned.

 

[Mantitz]

Everything about the Alcohol you buy reminds the buyer that after drinking it you will become impaired. That's why on every beer advertisement you see it says "Remember Drink Responsibly."

Now, after all the warnings if you still decide to make a stupid decision such as drive while drunk, have unprotected sex, fight, etc. then the real problem is the person who is drinking.

It should stay legal, because after all you are still you and you can control how much you drink, and what you do while your drunk. Don't let one bad apple spoil the bunch

 

[GoldTrader]

No ofcourse not! Why should everything that's enjoyable be banned?! If I want to drink alcohol, i fucking drink alcohol! Same goes for weed, if I want to smoke a joint, why shouldn't I be able to?! (I Live in Holland lol) I mean, it's your body, you should be the one that decides if you do something or not...