Resolved: Prohibition should be made law again

I also enjoy debating this topic, sir. Thank you.You stated that your main stance is that banning alcohol will only increase drunk driving rates because people will have to go out in search for it, and also it should not be taken away from those that drink responsibly. You also mentioned that alcohol has health benefits, which I whole-heartedly agree with. I apologize, I should have defined alcohol at the beginning of the debate and what exceptions there might be, that is my fault. I should have stated that alcohol for medicinal purposes is acceptable.The CDC article you mentioned stated that 1 drink per day for women and up to 2 drinks per day for men is considered moderate. I ask you, what is considered 1 drink? A tankard? A shot glass? Many people have different standards when it comes to size, and end up on the floor as a result."A majority of people consume an average amount of alcohol, or no alcohol at all." You did not attach a source to this, but if it is true it only supports my argument. If many people drink moderate to no alcohol, most people wouldn't miss alcohol once it would be illegal, thus making your argument for more drunk drivers void. "It is basically the same as banning knifes because some, but not all, abuse their rights to own knifes and hurt themselves or others."Knives, in my opinion, cannot be compared to alcohol. For one thing, knives have far more purposes than alchohol. Also, banning knives would be next to impossible to enforce. Practically anything short of a blunt stick would be considered a knife. I fail to see how that compares. "What I am getting at is that making alcohol illegal will put more people on the streets, drunk, because they must go out of their home in search of it."This goes back to my argument for enforcement. If we had more than 3,000 agents nationwide, and the government truly cared about enforcing new prohibition, those numbers would not be as high as you might think. Although I wouldn't know since this is only a prediction on what might happen. The same laws that apply to drunk drivers today would still apply, if not be even more strict. That would discourage drunk driving considerably in my opinion. "Banning alcohol would be an economic disaster. The alcohol industry makes billions each year. The tobacco industry also makes a quite a bit as well: "You seem to have the idea that banning alcohol would bring the country to a stand still, yet, sir, you have already stated that a majority of people consume little to no alcohol. This means that consumer taxing would not be that high to begin with. Tobacco on the other hand I can see as a considerable tax source. How many people do you see smoking on a day to day basis? And yet it kills many Americans. I won't quote the statistics, but we all know the numbers suffering and dying from lung cancer is far greater than we would care to know about. Why not raise the tax on tobacco and end the problem? If anything, this would drop the number of those with lung cancer and give hospitals the chance to treat others rather than those who abuse their bodies. If anything, I ask how tobacco companies can justify the production of tobacco to begin with since it holds zero health benefits."Now, how much exactly do you plan to tax this industry? Because if you take it too high, it will collapse as well - resulting in two huge industries falling."I'm not an economist, but in short taxing done in moderation and an increase in other sources would make up for the absence of alcohol."Yet, the policy of prohibition wasn't fully enforced in good times - how would we pay for it in times of a poor economy like the one today? If the riches of the 1920's couldn't afford to end the illegal sale of alcohol, how could we manage it now?"This goes back to those 3000 nationwide agents and enforcement. The riches of the 1920s had nothing to do with it. It was simply the number of those enforcers that weren't doing the job to begin with. If anything, prohibition mended families that were suffering from alcoholics and brought together broken homes. I believe the benefits would far outweight the cost involved. Alcohol does have health benefits, but people can live long happy productive lives without it. The old saying goes, eat right, stay fit, die anyway. I would rather stay away from the consumption of alcohol than say it is good for my health and become an addict. Also, the number of those suffering from "alcoholism" would drop to zero.Prohibition did work. It simply wasn't put into effect in the right way.