单选题 Do we need laws that prevent us from running risks with our lives? If so, then perhaps laws are needed prohibiting the sale of cigarettes and alcoholic drinks. Both products have been known to kill people. The hazards of drinking too much alcohol are as bad as or worse than the hazards of smoking too many cigarettes. All right then, let's pass a law closing the liquor stores and the bars in this country. Let's put an end once and for all to the ruinous disease from which as many as 10 million Americans currently suffer — alcoholism. But wait. We've already tried that. For 13 years, between 1920 and 1933, there were no liquor stores anywhere in the United States. They were shut down abolished by an amendment to the Constitution and by a law of Congress. After January 20, 1920, there was supposed to be no more manufacturing, selling, or transporting of " intoxicating liquors". Without any more liquor, people could not drink it. And if they did not drink it, how could they get drunk? There would be no more dangers to the public welfare from drunkenness and alcoholism. It was all very logical. And yet prohibition of liquor, beer, and wine did not work. Why? Because, law or no law, millions of people still liked to drink alcohol. And they were willing to take risks to get it. They were not about to change their tastes and habits just because of a change in the law. And gangs of liquor smugglers millions of gallons of the outlawed beverages across the Canadian and Mexican borders. Drinkers were lucky to know of an illegal bar that served Mexican or Canadian liquor. Crime and drunkenness were both supposed to decline as a result of prohibition. Instead, people drank more alcohol than ever — often poisoned alcohol.

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】解析：推理题。第二段中“Without any more liquor，people could not drink it．Andif they did not drink it，how could they get drunk?There would be no more dangers to thepublic welfare from drunkenness and alcoholism．”可知，政府设想通过禁酒以达到D选项中所述目的。D选项的意思是因为醉酒带来的社会威胁会下降。