Why Do Prohibitions Fail -- the reduction of undesired behaviors

     In January of 1919, the United States passed the 18th Amendment to the Constitution and, a year later, it went into effect. This Amendment prohibited the "manufacture, sale, and transportation" of drinking alcohol. Note that it did not prohibit the drinking of alcohol but, legally, the only alcohol a person could drink was from the stockpiles that were already in their possession. Although there was initially a drop in alcohol-associated problems such as driving under the influence and arrests for drunkenness, difficulties started to increasingly plague the movement. Enforcement was very difficult -- easier in rural and "pro-temperance" areas and harder in urban settings -- and there were increased costs both in policing as well as prisons. In addition, the now-illegal activities of "manufacture, sale, and transportation" increased both the price of drinking alcohol and the attractiveness of criminal (by definition, those participating in illegal activities are criminal) participation in "bootlegging". Al Capone was a very famous leader of such gang activity.
     By February of 1933, the Amendment was increasingly unpopular. The high price of bootleg liquor and alcohol primarily punished the middle and lower income people (remember that drinking was still legal). The reduction in tax revenue was a problem within the period of the Great Depression. The "temperance" (those who favored alcohol suppression) movement was being taken over by people whose primary motivation was their interpretation of religious documents. Police and government corruption and organized crime and violence was getting worse daily. AND, there was no success in the overall reduction in drinking alcohol by the general populace. Prohibition had failed. Upon the 21st Amendment being introduced in February, it was quickly ratified and became law on December 5, 1933 upon the signature of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
     In summary, the prohibition of drinking alcohol failed -- and failed badly. It did not achieve its primary purpose (reduction in drinking). In fact, the continued (now illegal) activity caused huge problems in police and government corruption, organized crime and violence,and general disregard of the law.
     Drinking alcohol is not a "victimless" activity. Overuse of alcohol causes problems for the individual as well as their family and other people who care about them. The effects of alcohol cause reduction in judgment and focus which, in combination with certain environments (such as driving), can cause "side-effect" problems such as accidents, fights, and job loss. Yet, it was emphatically proven that prohibition did not, and does not, work to reduce misuse.
     With such a dramatic, and relatively recent, knowledge of the failure of prohibition it would be reasonable to think that we would no longer try prohibition. Yet, that would be clearly incorrect. Among the many activities that have been, or currently are, prohibited include:

• Drinking alcohol
• Gambling
• Drugs currently categorized as illegal
• Socially disapproved sexual activity (adultery, masturbation, prostitution, pornography, public exhibition, ...)

     According to Lysander Spooner, the difference between vices and crimes is the direction of said action. "Vices are those acts by which a man harms himself or his property." "Crimes are those acts by which one man harms the person or property of another." As mentioned above, however, it is possible for a vice to harm others through side-effect (not the direct action but resulting from the effects of the action upon the person involved).
     Note also that the "harm" may be defined from a religious or societal basis and not from a measurable physical change. Thus, there may not be consensus -- nor may such attitudes be constant -- on what is of "harm" to people or to society. I am certain that there are other items that some people would add to the above list. I am equally certain that some people would remove some items.
    Recognizing that there is not full agreement as to what is of "harm" to an individual -- what can be done to reduce those behaviors? Both the experiment of Prohibition (focused on alcohol) and many other prohibitions (focused on other items, including the items on the above list), have shown -- over and over -- that prohibition of "vices" DOES NOT WORK. In fact, it is counter-productive in that reduction is minimal and the continued illegal activity increases crime and corruption with net loss in available tax money for more productive uses.
     Successful reduction of disapproved activities fall generally into two closely related categories -- education and expansion of alternate choices. Often, a third item is added -- regulation and oversight -- in order to keep track of the activities as well as to provide social recompense (tax revenue, for example) that is not involved in reduction of the activity.
     Education provides a mechanism to inform people of the effects of the activity. This is usually focused on the negative effects (there is little desire to increase the perception of positive effects). There will still be reasons for attraction to the activity for people so the base reason for the education is to have the choice to participate in the activity be an INFORMED choice.
     In order for there to be a choice, there must be more than one option. It is neccesary to provide OTHER, preferred, activities in which they can participate. If no other choice is available then the single, non-approved, choice is still the "best" choice for a person. Provide attractive alternatives!