Was Prohibition a Failure

318 Words2 Pages
Was Prohibition a Failure?” 1) David E. Kyvig argument was that prohibition was a failure. Although, admitting that alcohol consumption declined sharply in that era, nonetheless federal actions were useless and failed to impose abstinence. • One piece of evidence that supports his argument was the Volstead Act. It did not specifically prohibit the use or purchase of alcoholic beverages and liquor was continuing to be provided. Despite efforts to enforce the law, federal government failed to create a working system to insure compliance. • 2nd piece of evidence was the crime that occurred during the prohibition. /in Chicago, rival gangs competed with each other over supply. Between 1923 and 1926, an estimated 215 criminals died and police killed 160 gangsters. This prohibition was hurting America society 2) J.C Burnham argument was prohibition was more a success than failure. It caused lower consumption of liquor. It also reduced arrests for alcoholism. • One piece of evidence was that the Volstead Act reduced liquor and alcohol consumption in America during the prohibition era. • 2nd piece of evidence was that there were no evidence to a spurge or crime rate. Two criminologists, at the end of the decade reviewed the available crime statistics, and what they could conclude was there was no crime wave but a small increase. There are four primary sources of crimes committed with transporting alcohol during prohibition. These primary sources were written in newspaper articles or court case files and testimonies taken during trial. The argument is against those who committed theses crimes, they knew what they were doing was wrong and instead they continued to break the law. It does not support my position nor does it negate from it. I believe that these primary sources were not that reliable because they were just court case files. I think that no
Open Document