alcohol

Setup: Full|Condensed[1]: . https://talbottcampus.com... | Full “2015 Alcoholism Statistics You Need to Know. ” Talbott Recovery, 4 Oct. 2017, talbottcampus. com/2015-alcoholism-statistics/. [2]: . http://www.bbc.com... | Full Black, Richard. “Species Count Put at 8.7 Million. ” BBC News, BBC, 23 Aug. 2011, www. bbc. com/news/science-environment-14616161. [3]: . https://teens.drugabuse.gov... | “Prescription Depressant Medications. ” NIDA for Teens, 1 Mar. 2017, teens. drugabuse. gov/drug-facts/prescription-depressant-medications. [4]: . http://polyticks.com... | USA Homicide Rates, polyticks. com/polyticks/beararms/liars/usa. htm. Alright it's been a while since I've done this but you've yet to state your position and come up with a solid argument in the first round, Alcohol is and always will be a touchy subject for most people. In a 2015 study conducted by Talbott Recovery it was determined that: - 100,000 people per year die from alcohol related causes- Approximately 17 percent of men and 9 percent of women in their lifetimes will become dependent on alcohol- And alcohol abuse is the third highest cause of death in the US [I1]Interesting little fact about that last one the highest cause of death being traffic collisions to which a direct correlation to alcohol is most definitely prevalent. Now onto the fun part: should alcohol be banned? Absolutely not. "But Scrin, the statistics you've shown would argue that you would be for the idea of banning the once contraband depressant" Actually rather the opposite, personally I am against the idea of alcohol becoming an influential force on anybody's life but that doesn't change the fact that it is someone's choice, just like it is someone's choice to engage in illicit activity, or someone's choice to physically exercise. Four things correlate to alcohol's unbannable nature:I: It is a natural instinct for animals (humans) to resist changeII: Alcohol has been banned before (prohibition)III: Alcohol is arguably as much a part of human nature as humans are (culture)IV: Banning a substance will not necessarily alleviate the problem (MI)Contention I: Instinct Humans are and will always be part of the Mammalia class, we know this and no diffusal of logic or reshaping of the facts will EVER change this, It is as set in stone as Copernicus' Heliocentric Model or Newton's Laws. Being animals we are no different than the rest of the other '8.7 million species'[2] of animals that inhabit this planet, we resist change as if it were a plague. Biologically we are mechanisms of change, psychologically we are denizens of familiarity. The reason people will resist change is the encroachment of one's territory or if you want to you could say their personal 'safe spaces' this is why in an average 60 year lifespan you will likely never see macro-ideological change of someone. It's also why some people feel threatened and become aggressive in what are at their origin supposed to be peaceful debates. Alcohol is a depressant, a depressant defined by the National Institute of Health as: "Drugs that 'depress' or slow down the processes of the brain. "[3]For most people the fact that these depressants are mass produced and readily avaliable without any legal reprecussion provide an: affordable way to numb if only temporarily the stresses of everday life. Banning or re-banning alcohol as we'll witness soon would engage the 'fight' drive in most humans, or those dependent on it will find less savory methods to obtain the substance. Contention II: ProhibitionProbably the most brilliant screw-up in US history, pardon my language if that offends anyone, was Prohibition. From 1920-1933 theUS government enacted a TOTAL ban on alcoholic beverages. Following this was the largest surge in crime the US had ever seen sinceit's formation. In 1920 the US Homicide Rate Per 100,000 was: 6.8 on average if we take the data from 1920-1933 we find the US Homicde Rate during prohibition was: 9 per 100,000 citizens. Now we take the average of both the 1920 and 1930 US cenus population and that gets us about. .. ≈ 114,398,292 citizens but waitwe're still not done if we want to figure out how many homicides there were we have to take that number and multiply it by 9/100000:≈ 10,296And yet there's one last thing we can do to this number, if we want to figure out how much of the population of the US was snuffedout in the time of prohibition we simply take the [Mass Killed/Mass Estimated] * 100And we get about. .. .009% which admittedly low, is still a number we should NEVER be okay with. The most probable and logical cause for these deaths being the gangs that thrived off of prohibition I mean ask yourself this why after FDR takes office and ends prohibition do we see an end to these trends until the late 60s? Why does the graph shoot down nearly an entire 4%[4]Because without the sale of alcohol being contraband anymore less and less people relied on illicit action to get their fix. Less money in the business usually equates to less murder on a whole.