# Life without Prohibition - what would be different today? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 4, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642 "2010-01-04T17:47:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2010, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642/21 "2010-01-09T02:24:30Z")
> [@Susanann](#): > > Kennedy would not have gotten rich from prohibition, therefore not have been able to make a fortune from the stock market, which means John Kennedy would never have been president. John Kennedy would live to a ripe old age, and so would Bobby Kennedy. There’s no evidence that Joe Kennedy got rich from prohibition, and your timeline is off. His wealthy endeavors in the film industry and stock market pre-dated prohibition. Also, Jack Kennedy was a very sickly man, so there’s no good reason to believe he’d live to a ripe old age, even if he was not shot and killed and 1963. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2010, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642/22 "2010-01-09T03:14:50Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Most people would think “Eliot Ness” was a monster in Scotland. There’s also no (or at least a lot less) need for the FBI or J Edgar Hoover. That’s going to be a pretty big change. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2010, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642/23 "2010-01-09T18:29:00Z")
> [@](#): > > There’s also no (or at least a lot less) need for the FBI or J Edgar Hoover. That’s going to be a pretty big change. The FBI was originally set up (as the Bureau of Investigation) to keep track of political radicals. Hoover considered pursuing organized crime figures as a distraction from what he saw as the more important mission. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2010, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642/24 "2010-01-11T07:33:48Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > State and country dry laws might have remained more common if national Prohibition hadn’t been such a failure. A question: if one state bans alcohol and another doesn’t, causing massive smuggling from wet state to dry, is that purely a state matter or does it drag in “interstate commerce”? IOW, even if there wasn’t a nationwide Prohibition, could the Fed get involved in suppressing the illicit booze trade? The 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition states in Section 2: > [@](#): > > The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. This seems to imply that such smuggling would be a Federal issue, although I’m not sure how much in the way of resources the national government has been willing to expend in this effort. A few years before Prohibition came into effect, the [Webb-Kenyon Act](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webb-Kenyon_Act) was passed. The section I quoted above seems to acknowledge that Webb-Kenyon was to remain in force. But as the Wikipedia article points out, the lack of any stated punishment somewhat diminishes the effect of the law. I suspect that the purpose of the section is merely to say that anyone convicted of smuggling into a dry state would not be able to appeal to the Federal courts. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2010, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642/25 "2010-01-11T13:14:11Z")
One thing that’s not often recognized is that Prohibition _did_ considerably lower drinking in the US. Folks in the United States were champion drinkers, especially of whiskey – there was a reason for all of those temperance unions and folks like Carrie Nation. There may have been a lot of clandestine drinking under Prohibition, but it did cut down considerably on the per capita consumption. If Prohibition hadn’t existed, I suspect there still might have been some sort of social action to restrict alcohol. As mentioned above, Prohibitoion gave rise to mixed drinks, but according to this paper, it also resulted, through pop culture, in a more positive attitude towards drinking. It was a complete about-face from the Temperance culture that had prevailed. Without Prohibition, would we have had Nick and Nora Charles? [http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/full/96/2/233](http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/full/96/2/233) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/life-without-prohibition-what-would-be-different-today/523642.md?page=1)