Prohibition Essay Research Paper Prohibition in the

Prohibition Essay, Research Paper

Prohibition in the 1920 s did not achieve its goals. Instead, it added to the problems it was intended to solve. It was originally meant to reduce the consumption of alcohol and thereby reduce crime, poverty, death rates, and improve the economy and quality of life. This however, failed to succeed. The prohibition amendment of the 1920 s was ineffective because it was unenforceable, it caused the explosive growth of crime, and it increased the amount of alcohol consumption. Not only was prohibition ineffective, but it was also damaging to the people and society it was meant to help.

Prohibition in the United States was a measure designed to reduce drinking by eliminating the businesses that manufactured, distributed, and sold alcoholic beverages. .On Midnight of January 16, 1920, one of the personal habits and customs of most Americans suddenly came to a halt x (Thorton, 15). The Eighteenth Amendment was put into effect and all importing, exporting, transporting, selling, and manufacturing of intoxicating liquor was put to an end (16). The prohibition leaders believed that once license to do business was removed from the liquor traffic, the churches and reform organizations would enjoy an opportunity to persuade Americans to give up drink. .This opportunity would occur unchallenged by the drink businesses (”the liquor traffic”) in whose interests it was to urge more Americans to drink, and to drink more beverage alcohol x (19).

Some prohibition leaders looked forward to an educational campaign that would greatly expand once the drink businesses became illegal, and would eventually, in about thirty years, lead to a .sober nation x (Bowen, 120). Other prohibition leaders looked forward to vigorous enforcement of prohibition in order to eliminate supplies of beverage alcohol. After 1920, neither group of leaders was especially successful. The educators never received the support for the campaign that they dreamed about, and the law enforcers were never able to persuade government officials to mount a wholehearted enforcement campaign against illegal suppliers of beverage alcohol (138).

The Volstead Act passed in October 1920 provided for federal enforcement of the constitutional amendment and defined any beverage containing 0.5 percent alcohol or more as intoxicating (Bowen, 134). After this act was put into place to determine specific laws and methods of enforcement, the Federal Prohibition Bureau was formulated in order to see that the Volstead Act was enforced. Nevertheless, bootleggers and commoners alike flagrantly violated these laws. Bootleggers smuggled liquor from overseas and Canada, stole it from government warehouses, and produced their own. Many people hid their liquor in hip flasks, false books, hollow canes, and anything else they could find (Bowen, 159). There were also illegal speak-easies, which replaced saloons after the start of prohibition. By 1925, there were over 100,000 speak-easies in New York City alone (Bowen, 160). As good as the ideal sounded, . prohibition was far easier to proclaim than to enforce x (Wenburn, 234). With only 1,550 federal agents and over 18,700 miles of .fast and virtually unpoliceable coastline x (Wenburn, 234), .it was clearly impossible to prevent immense quantities of liquor from entering the country x (Kobler, 162). Barely five percent of smuggles liquor was hindered from coming into the country in the 1920 s. Furthermore, the illegal liquor business fell under the control of organized gangs, which overpowered most of the authorities (Wenburm, 234). Many bootleggers secured their business by bribing the authorities, namely federal agents and persons of high political status (Bowen, 160). .No one who is intellectually honest will deny that there has not yet been effective nationwide enforcement x (Behr, 161).

As a result of the lack of enforcement of the Prohibition Act and the creation of an illegal industry, an increase in crime transpired. The Prohibitionists hoped that the Volstead Act would decrease drunkenness in America and thereby decrease the crime rate, especially in large cities. Although towards the beginning of Prohibition this purpose seemed to be fulfilled, the crime rate soon skyrocketed to nearly twice that of the pre-prohibition period. In large cities, the homicide went from 5.6 (per 100,000 population) in the pre-prohibition period, to nearly 10 (per 100,000 population) during prohibition, nearly a 78 percent increase. Serious crimes, such as homicides, assault, and battery, increased nearly 13 percent, while other crimes involving victims increased 9 percent (Encarta). Many supporters of prohibition argued that the crime rate decreased. This is true if one examining only minor crimes, such as swearing, mischief, and vagrancy, which did in fact decrease due to prohibition. The major crimes, however, such as homicides and burglaries, increased 24 percent between 1920 and 1921. In addition, the number of federal convicts over the course of the prohibition period increased 561 percent. .The crime rate increased because prohibition destroyed legal jobs, created black-market violence, diverted resources from enforcement of other laws, and increased prices people had to pay for prohibited goods x (Thorton, 10).

The contributing factor to the sudden increase of felonies was the organization of crime, especially in large cities. Because liquo