Resolved: Alcohol should be prohibited in the United States.

In response to my opponent's framework, I would like to offer a framework of my own. In evaluating today's round, we must weigh arguments against each other in order to decide which side wins the round. I agree with my opponents framework that the act of prohibiting alcohol is the act of eliminating all alcohol uses. My opponent states in his framework that we cannot look to the effects of drunk driving because because the actions of drunk drivers does not abide to the laws set out by the government. However, I disagree. If today's resolution were to deal with marijuana rather than alcohol, the debate would surely include the effects of the illegal uses of marijuana. Much like the marijuana debate, the debate surrounding the prohibition of alcohol must include all effects of alcohol; whether it abives to the laws set out by the government or not. Thus, all effects of alcohol must be taken into consideration in today's round. However, I would like to point out that the effects of the consumption of alcohol has the most weight in today's round. As my opponent stated in his second contention, 90% of alcohol is used in the form of drinking. Cleaning products and medical remedies for heart attacks that don't require alcohol exist; thus, these uses hold negligible weight in today's round. My opponent's first contention deals with the health benefits of alcohol. His contention evades logic twice; first of all, how many Americans drink alcohol as the solution to their heart problems? The reason we immediately assume alcohol with the abuse of alcohol is very evident; because the primary users of alcohol are also the primary abusers of alcohol. Secondly, my opponent also makes the naï¿½ve assumption that alcohol will somehow stop 600,000 deaths from occurring. Until he finds a link between his claim and this supposed effect, we cannot consider this argument in the round. Also, I would like to ask my opponent -- alcohol is currently legal; why are these heart attacks still occurring? My opponent's second contention holds no weight in today's round. Abusers of cocaine, meth, and other hard drugs feel pleasure as they abuse drugs. Should we legalize cocaine and meth? Rapists feel pleasure as they rape their victims; should we legalize rape? By voting for the neg, you vote for your cold glass of beer. By voting for the pro, you're preventing the 18 year old who lives down your street from dying in a alcohol-related accident; whether it be a car accident or a drunken fight. Finally, my opponent states in his final paragraph that banning alcohol is diverting the will of the American people. However, like many times in the past, a majority doesn't decide right from wrong, and in today's debate, we must consider the impacts of the pro and con in evaluating the round. If this were a debate around the controversial ground zero mosque, it would not be right to oppose it simply because two-thirds of Americans oppose it. Likewise, we must consider and weigh all impacts in today's round. Back to my own case, I would like to begin by offering a correction. In Contention 3, I stated the following; "Much like how drug use is fairly minimal within the United States, alcohol use will be the same." The statement I had intended to say was: "Much like how drug abuse is fairly minimal within the United States, alcohol use will be the same.". This statement looks holistically at the United States, keeping in mind that the percentage of Americans who regularly abuse drugs, the percentage that would likely evade the law if alcohol were prohibited, is very minimal. It does not include all drug users. Recently, in my hometown of Almaden, an 18-year-old graduate from the local high school was killed in a alcohol-related accident. The driver of the vehicle was drunk; the vehicle hit a light pole at an intersection and burst into flames. The driver somehow ran out of the vehicle, and in his drunken stupor was found by authorities hiding a few hundred yards away. The 18-year-old passenger was stuck in the car and burned to his death. Is this the price we must pay for everyday Americans to have their "cold glass of beer"? Must we resort to alcohol as a solution to heart problems when others exist? Are cleaning products a legitimate reason to legalize this dangerous drug? My opponent has yet to directly respond to any of my contentions, and thus, when we weigh the arguments on each side of today's round, it's clear that the harms alcohol inflicts on tens of thousands of lives every year far outweighs it's minimal benefits as a cleaning product.