Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
My reference to Budweiser was to point out the lack of violence associated with the sale of alcohol today when it is legal and contrast that to how much violence was associated with the sale of alcohol under prohibition. Much violence was associated with bootleg alcohol under prohibition as organized crime ran a large part of the bootleg business in this country back then. You may have heard of this man, his name was Al Capone. He had alot of people killed to protect his business.
|
Yes, there was certainly increased crime and violence associated with the sale of alcohol under Prohibition. However, IIRC, the best available statistical measures (not great) also suggest that there was a drastic decline in alcohol consumption during Prohibition. Any argument to legalize various drugs should take into account the strong likelihood that the comsumption of said drug(s) would drastically increase if they were legal and readily available.
It is easy to see many of the negative social effects and apparent failure of the "War on Drugs". Our current drug policies could probably be changed for the better in many ways. Still, there would probably be substantial costs associated with the legalization of (for example) heroin, or cocaine, or crack.
It is a mistake to be purely libertarian on a subject where the poor judgment of one person imposes substantial costs on others.
S_A_M
