What do you want to know? It addressed a real problem: Alcohol was ruining American life--it still does.
Was it working well?
Of course. The conventional wisdom championed by the Democrat Party over the years was that it wasn't, but outside of a few lawbreakers, it improved things tremendously.
Is prohibition a valid government aim?
Sure. That's why they put it in the Constitution. You know, the document you folks think supports your claim?
After repeal, a great many states continued prohibition, and many counties, especially in the more law-abiding, more religious South, continue that law.
So I would ask YOU: If it is legal for a county in, say, Alabama or Louisiana, to prohibit the sale of alcohol, then why is it NOT legal to have laws against dope?
LOVE to hear you answer that one (if you do, you'll be the first dope-champion I've heard do so).
There shouldn't be federal anti-drug laws. It should be left up to the states. I've heard many people answer this question.
Oh, you mean those few lawbreakers like Al Capone, Meyer Lansky and pesky little incidents like the Valentine's day massacre?
The war on alcohol created big city gangs, extortion, murder, increased potentcy of the drug, and corrupted law enforcement.
The war on drugs created....
The definition of stupidity is trying the same thing again and again and expecting a different result.
Prohibition was a bad idea, as was evidenced by it's repeal. The system worked. Just because some uptight power-tripping egos like yourself didn't think so doesn't make it so. Other people have other ideas. Other people seem reasonable when confronted with reality. I can't fathom why you have difficulty with that.
Whenever I encounter people like you who, not content to live their own lives, seemingly want to live everyone else's for them, I get the heebie-jeebies.
The simple fact of the matter is, any time you have government enacting moral legislation, under whatever rationale, you will have underground cottage industries springing to fill the market demand for whatever is being legislated out of existence. That's human nature, and the template has been employed for as long as people have lived under governments.
I don't do drugs - never have. I know people who have. I feel sad for them, but it's not my place to judge them, live their lives for them, or kill them because of their addiction. If they ask help, I do what I can, but taking society's percieved (by someone else) weaknesses on my shoulders is not my definition of living a good life.
The might of government, in any age, let alone today's, usually works to our benefit. But when excesses occur in it's name, it must be brought to heel just as would any excess by private citizenry. Knocking people off under the guise of enforcing "the law" is not what employees of a republican form of government should be doing.
Unless you think "Judge Dredd" type behavior (judge, jury, executioner all in one package, all at one moment) is acceptable.
Yes, drug abuse is a serious problem. However, under the current M.O. of the WoD, drug usage has almost become peripheral. The real question seems to be, "Who shall guard the Guardians?".
CA....