Also, what would the government do with all of the liquor, which they have now banned from the country? They could dump it, but that would take up a lot of space and so much money would be lost from the very expensive liquors. The government could sell the liquor to another country, but that would make us seem desperate to get rid of it and the value of all the liquor would drop considerably.
To conclude, prohibition has been tried before, and failed. If it were to be tried now, in all probability it would fail again. The government has to realize that they cannot halt the flow of liquor, they just have to go with the flow, prevent as much damage as possible, and try to make a few dollars along the way. 
What would happen if the government decided to institute prohibition in today’s society? This would probably not be seen as a very favourable move to the citizens. If the government were to put forward this law, they would probably have the same intentions as the government did 80 years ago. They would be attempting to limit crime, and as statistics show today, alcohol causes many crimes, such as murder from drunk driving, arson, and thefts. All of this amounts to a certain death toll, that it is believed alcohol could be held responsible for, but it is more the people who have committed the crimes that are the one’s who have dropped the responsibilities of liquor. These people would begin uproars and riots. Similar to the 1920’s, drinking will increase, almost as if the people drinking are taking revenge on the government. The black market and illegal smuggling, will sky rocket. Bootleggers will try absolutely anything to get their illegal goods into the country, and sell it making enormous profits. In order to prevent this from occurring, the government would have to spend fortunes on border control, and security to patrol all former drinking pubs. Keeping control over all of the liquor would be an extremely difficult task. To keep control over people brewing their own beer or wine would be even harder. The government is not going to begin random house checks, knock at the door, and ask of all the illegal activities the family may or may not be partaking in, involving liquor. Many families save up fine liquor over the years, so the quality and value improves. It would be almost impossible for the government to tell these families to just remove the liquor from their house, and they wouldn’t ever get a reimbursement. Even if they did try that process, how could they guarantee that everyone would follow?
If this were to occur, especially in Ontario, the government would lose a lot of money just from the alcohol itself. In Ontario, legally, only the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, or the LCBO, may sell liquor. In doing so, they have a monopoly of the business, and can charge any price they want, making large profits. LCBO contributes a large share of all the money, which the government earns, and to drop that business would be extremely risky and costly.
