Time for Alcohol Control?

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

Considering all the talk of gun control lately, let's review the facts around alcohol and consider some further restrictions around another "death causer."
That is alcohol.

CDC figures on alcohol related deaths.

CDC said:
Number of alcoholic liver disease deaths: 15,183

Number of alcohol-induced deaths, excluding accidents and homicides: 24,518

FASTSTATS - Alcohol Use

CDC said:
In 2010, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.

Of the 1,210 traffic deaths among children ages 0 to 14 years in 2010, 211 (17%) involved an alcohol-impaired driver.

In 2010, over 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics.

That's one percent of the 112 million self-reported episodes of alcohol-impaired driving among U.S. adults each year.

Drugs other than alcohol (e.g., marijuana and cocaine) are involved in about 18% of motor vehicle driver deaths. These other drugs are often used in combination with alcohol.

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

WHO said:
The harmful use of alcohol results in 2.5 million deaths each year.

320 000 young people between the age of 15 and 29 die from alcohol-related causes, resulting in 9% of all deaths in that age group.

Alcohol is the world’s third largest risk factor for disease burden; it is the leading risk factor in the Western Pacific and the Americas and the second largest in Europe.

Alcohol is associated with many serious social and developmental issues, including violence, child neglect and abuse, and absenteeism in the workplace.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs349/en/index.html

I propose,

A background check system, for all alcohol purchases, supported by a fee, probably $25 per purchase.

A limit to the amount of alcohol containers, that can be purchased per day.

The limiting of alcohol percentages per volume, probably 5% or less.

What say you?

lizzie · Jan 9, 2013

Excellent point, well made.

Fisher · Jan 9, 2013

I wish Americans abused less, but I think it is apples and oranges where each merit different discussions in a more serious way.

Vapor · Jan 9, 2013

I'd say no based on my opinion that it's every person's right to destroy their own bodies with that crap, but I'm concerned about drunk driving. It'd be awesome if they would develop an alcohol sensor on cars that would detect alcohol in your breath when you put they key in the ignition and then lock up the car, but I'm not sure that's possible, and it wouldn't change the millions of cars already on the road.

At the very least, we need to be smart about it. My high school health classes did a terrible job of explaining the negative effects of alcohol - or any drug. They seemed more concerned with telling us not to have sex than actually warning us about the dangers of drugs. That's Oklahoma for you.

Northern Light · Jan 9, 2013

Banning alcohol won't stop its use, anymore than banning guns will stop guns from being used.

Not to mention the war on drugs is a complete policy failure.

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

I am for lessening restrictions on alcohol for the same reasons I am for the legalization of marijuana and also the fact it played a major role in the founding of this country. Though I do think penalties for things like drunk driving should be greatly increased.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

Fisher said:
I wish Americans abused less, but I think it is apples and oranges where each merit different discussions in a more serious way.

The presumptive logic of many people is to save lives, reduce crime, etc.
Those things are directly related to alcohol consumption.

Lutherf · Jan 9, 2013

Vapor said:
I'd say no based on my opinion that it's every person's right to destroy their own bodies with that crap, but I'm concerned about drunk driving. It'd be awesome if they would develop an alcohol sensor on cars that would detect alcohol in your breath when you put they key in the ignition and then lock up the car, but I'm not sure that's possible, and it wouldn't change the millions of cars already on the road.

At the very least, we need to be smart about it. My high school health classes did a terrible job of explaining the negative effects of alcohol - or any drug. They seemed more concerned with telling us not to have sex than actually warning us about the dangers of drugs. That's Oklahoma for you.

How about just restricting the sale of alcohol to those 1oz shot bottles and requiring that everyone register every time they want to buy a bottle?

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Harry Guerrilla said:
The presumptive logic of many people is to save lives, reduce crime, etc.
Those things are directly related to alcohol consumption.

That was the exacts same argument used by prohibitionists and look how that turned out.

specklebang · Jan 9, 2013

WOD is indeed a massive, destructive policy failure. Do you ever see the slightest sign that that will change?

Just because policies fail, doesn't mean they will change. Making alcohol illegal will provide us with more employment at ATFE and maybe even a new agency could be created. It will certainly stimualte the prison business and guard jobs don't require a degree or citizenship or any of that stuff.

No wonder I liked the OP. Brilliant.

Northern Light said:
Banning alcohol won't stop its use, anymore than banning guns will stop guns from being used.

Not to mention the war on drugs is a complete policy failure.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

0bserver92 said:
That was the exacts same argument used by prohibitionists and look how that turned out.

It reduced consumption and potentially alcohol disease related deaths.

Vapor · Jan 9, 2013

Lutherf said:
How about just restricting the sale of alcohol to those 1oz shot bottles and requiring that everyone register every time they want to buy a bottle?

That's a lot of red tape for a solution that could easily lead to a revival of speak-easies and the return of alcohol to the black market. On the surface its a good idea, but just because there's a law on the books against something doesn't mean people won't do it. See: marijuana, gun violence, and (in my state) sodomy.

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Harry Guerrilla said:
It reduced consumption and potentially alcohol disease related deaths.

Well considering it was all underground and we have no way of calculating statistics, we have no idea if that is true.

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Vapor said:
That's a lot of red tape for a solution that could easily lead to a revival of speak-easies and the return of alcohol to the black market. On the surface its a good idea, but just because there's a law on the books against something doesn't mean people won't do it. See: marijuana, gun violence, and (in my state) sodomy.

I thought all anti-sodomy laws were overturned in the U.S.?

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

0bserver92 said:
Well considering it was all underground and we have no way of calculating statistics, we have no idea if that is true.

Orly?

First, the regime created in 1919 by the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act, which charged the Treasury Department with enforcement of the new restrictions, was far from all-embracing. The amendment prohibited the commercial manufacture and distribution of alcoholic beverages; it did not prohibit use, nor production for one's own consumption. Moreover, the provisions did not take effect until a year after passage -plenty of time for people to stockpile supplies.

Second, alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition. Cirrhosis death rates for men were 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 and 10.7 in 1929. Admissions to state mental hospitals for alcoholic psychosis declined from 10.1 per 100,000 in 1919 to 4.7 in 1928.

Arrests for public drunkennness and disorderly conduct declined 50 percent between 1916 and 1922. For the population as a whole, the best estimates are that consumption of alcohol declined by 30 percent to 50 percent.

Third, violent crime did not increase dramatically during Prohibition. Homicide rates rose dramatically from 1900 to 1910 but remained roughly constant during Prohibition's 14 year rule. Organized crime may have become more visible and lurid during Prohibition, but it existed before and after.

Fourth, following the repeal of Prohibition, alcohol consumption increased. Today, alcohol is estimated to be the cause of more than 23,000 motor vehicle deaths and is implicated in more than half of the nation's 20,000 homicides. In contrast, drugs have not yet been persuasively linked to highway fatalities and are believed to account for 10 percent to 20 percent of homicides.

Actually, Prohibition Was a Success - NYTimes.com

Lutherf · Jan 9, 2013

Vapor said:
That's a lot of red tape for a solution that could easily lead to a revival of speak-easies and the return of alcohol to the black market. On the surface its a good idea, but just because there's a law on the books against something doesn't mean people won't do it. See: marijuana, gun violence, and (in my state) sodomy.

Interesting....so if that's the case then how is registering all firearms and banning 30 round magazines going to stop gun violence?

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Harry Guerrilla said:
Orly?

Actually, Prohibition Was a Success - NYTimes.com

Now please tell me why if alcohol was illegal would people admit themselves or others to mental hospitals or risk going out in public to drunk? The other point is that is very profitable for governments especially if they are the ones selling the alcohol like they do here.

specklebang · Jan 9, 2013

It won't stop it but it will certainly reduce it

A lot of people are scared to commit crimes and alcohol is a bulky drug to transport.

Also, back in prohibition we didn't have Mandatory Minimums so in a few years they were out and committing crimes again. Nowadays, you could probably put a 25 year minimum and nobody will blink.

.

Vapor said:
That's a lot of red tape for a solution that could easily lead to a revival of speak-easies and the return of alcohol to the black market. On the surface its a good idea, but just because there's a law on the books against something doesn't mean people won't do it. See: marijuana, gun violence, and (in my state) sodomy.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

0bserver92 said:
Now please tell me why if alcohol was illegal would people admit themselves or others to mental hospitals or risk going out in public to drunk? The other point is that is very profitable for governments especially if they are the ones selling the alcohol like they do here.

It wasn't illegal to consume under prohibition, it was illegal to make and sell.
Most alcohol here is done through private sales.

Although there are some areas, that do the gov alcohol shop.

Lukas105 · Jan 9, 2013

I see it as a choice if we use it or not. Your still responsible for your actions even after you drink 8 beers then decide to drive drunk. Restrictions will lead to a repressed era in the U.S. and America was founded on the beliefs of Democracy; choice, representation, and an open society.

Please don't ask for a total ban, another Prohibition will spike crime rates as it did during the 20s-30s. Remember Al Capone and other Prohibition Era Mobsters that smuggled alcohol from places such as the Caribbean and Canada; This lead to Mob Warfare, Massacres such as the "Valentines Day Massacre", and resentment for not having the ability to have the cold beer after a day of work.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

Lukas105 said:
I see it as a choice if we use it or not. Your still responsible for your actions even after you drink 8 beers then decide to drive drunk. Restrictions will lead to a repressed era in the U.S. and America was founded on the beliefs of Democracy; choice, representation, and an open society.

Please don't ask for a total ban, another Prohibition will spike crime rates as it did during the 20s-30s. Remember Al Capone and other Prohibition Era Mobsters that smuggled alcohol from places such as the Caribbean and Canada; This lead to Mob Warfare, Massacres such as the "Valentines Day Massacre", and resentment for not having the ability to have the cold beer after a day of work.

Crime was level during prohibition, at least the the NY Times article says so.

Third, violent crime did not increase dramatically during Prohibition. Homicide rates rose dramatically from 1900 to 1910 but remained roughly constant during Prohibition's 14 year rule. Organized crime may have become more visible and lurid during Prohibition, but it existed before and after.

Actually, Prohibition Was a Success - NYTimes.com

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Harry Guerrilla said:
It wasn't illegal to consume under prohibition, it was illegal to make and sell.
Most alcohol here is done through private sales.

Although there are some areas, that do the gov alcohol shop.

That was one of the conditions of the repeal of prohibition is that the provinces had to have Liquor Control Boards to sell alcohol and very province but Alberta I believe still controls alcohol sales. THopugh here in Onatrio beer is sold at private stores but anything with a higher alcohol content or is foreign can usually only be bought at government stores.

Harry Guerrilla · Jan 9, 2013

0bserver92 said:
That was one of the conditions of the repeal of prohibition is that the provinces had to have Liquor Control Boards to sell alcohol and very province but Alberta I believe still controls alcohol sales. THopugh here in Onatrio beer is sold at private stores but anything with a higher alcohol content or is foreign can usually only be bought at government stores.

Well the point here is that the effects of legal alcohol on society, are arguably worse than many others.
It's directly related to many causes of death, accidents, disease, etc and poses a large externality on society.

Limiting sales, alcohol by volume and prohibiting law violators from purchasing, via background checks, is meant to control the ugly aspects of alcohol consumption.

Carjosse · Jan 9, 2013

Harry Guerrilla said:
Well the point here is that the effects of legal alcohol on society, are arguably worse than many others.
It's directly related to many causes of death, accidents, disease, etc and poses a large externality on society.

Limiting sales, alcohol by volume and prohibiting law violators from purchasing, via background checks, is meant to control the ugly aspects of alcohol consumption.

Alcohol serves far more of a purpose in society than guns will at least here. If a mentally ill person drinks a lot of alcohol they were probably become incapacitated, not go shoot up a school let alone hold a gun. Alcohol can be controlled by public awareness and not placing restrictions on alcohol though like I said things like drunk driving should be heavily punished.

Lukas105 · Jan 9, 2013

@Harry Guerrilla

But is it morally right to ban alcohol for everyone, just because a certain amount abuse it. It seems like we are punishing the wrong people again. I drink, but I don't binge drink.

Alcohol has been around mankind for as long as we could farm, heck its practicality apart of us. To deny someone of it, is to deny a human right of choice. You're a Libertarian, You should see this point of view.

Time for Alcohol Control?

Should we propose further alcohol control?

Yes

No

Other

Member

The Light of Truth

Sit Nomine Digna

Sit Nomine Digna

Discount Philosopher

Member

Sit Nomine Digna

Sit Nomine Digna

Sit Nomine Digna

Discount Philosopher

Active member

Sit Nomine Digna

Sit Nomine Digna

Active member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency