Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

alarimer

(16,976 posts)

3. Prohibition resulted in more deaths than not having Prohibition would have

Reply to Clouds Passing (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 3, 2025, 05:37 PM

Jan 3

They drank bathtub gin, wood alcohol and other things. Not to mention, it caused the rise of the mob and organized crime in a huge way.

So, a big fat "NO" to the new puritanism.

Face it, people will drink, one way or another. They have forever and no amount of finger-wagging by prim scolds will stop that.

And facing the Trump Adminstration without drinking is never going to happen. I'd rather die a few years earlier that live until Im 90 anyway,

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Rebl2 mentalsolstice

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Surgeon General calls for cancer warning on alcohol [View all] Tanuki Jan 3 OP

Alcohol is a scourge all across society in general. Clouds Passing Jan 3 #1

Congress should pass a constitutional amendment banning it. maxsolomon Jan 3 #2

Prohibition resulted in more deaths than not having Prohibition would have alarimer Jan 3 #3

Defensiveness is not a good sign. Clouds Passing Jan 3 #6

I know that. I'm not for a for a ban. They don't work. Clouds Passing Jan 3 #4

I think the younger generations drink less alcohol JI7 Jan 3 #5

Only when used to excess dickthegrouch Jan 3 #8

Can we put warning labels on dangerous cabinet members? dickthegrouch Jan 3 #7