I'd tend to disagree, because it was a factor among a huge number of others, and while violent, it's hard to call the various uncoordinated acts of men looking to get rich, often killing each other, to the proud, unabashed violence in defense of "the Southern Way of Life" that defined so many Southern whites during Reconstruction. People shot each other in the 1920s as a quick way to riches - the Redeemers did it for "honor."
I'm not sure the Prohibition example holds because you have a law that only had narrow support in the first place. It took highly adept pressure group poliitics, and simply ignoring the population shift that had taken place (the 1920 redistricting was straight up canceled, because it would give too many seats to "those" city people) in the early 20th C. to get Prohibition through. Scolding half of the population, making it damn clear that Prohibition had very little to do with booze and a whole hell of a lot to do with coming down on immigrants, Catholics, and every one else the WASP elite found undesirable, demonstrating a huge hypocrisy in the execution and then loading a ton of gangsters on top of it and you loose your majority right quick.
Wheras the end of Reconstruction allowed the white South to bring a boot down, again and again, on the face of people who were a majority in many cases.
The problem is that the South will be able to outwait the North every time unless the South REALLY pisses off the North somehow. The fact was that Southerners were far more concerned with keeping down Blacks than Northerners were about Black Civil Rights.