Reducing late-night alcohol sales curbed all violent crimes by 23% in Baltimore
jamanetwork.com
jamanetwork.com
The main findings are suggesting a slope change, which when you incorporate standard errors are just below 1 (the yellow line in the above graph). The model to me though is very noisy (should clearly have seasonal monthly terms, this should make estimates somewhat more precise), and is suggestive that the matched areas are not quite the same (they are substantively lower, although to be fair do appear to have similar seasonal patterns).
Biased because I have written a bit on this (IMO the pub health literature is biased to only conclude alcohol is bad, a similar paper saying "no effect" would be rejected at JAMA or other health journals). It is an interesting idea, I think it could probably be made stronger though (control for the same area during daytime, or a better synthetic control area). As is the 23% reduction is a bit wishful thinking I believe.
Same thing with drunk driving. In fact, bars need to have some culpability as well if a lot of their patrons are causing destruction. Maybe this will encourage them to self-police and not over-serve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop
>Within the United States, laws that impose potential liability upon businesses that sell alcohol for injuries caused by their patrons are usually called dram shop laws or dram shop acts
By your reasoning, I should be able to sue a gas station that sells gas to someone without first checking to make sure their car is well maintained, that they have a valid drivers license and liability insurance, that they are sober, are mot impaired by medical issues, and that they do not have too many points on their license.
There outta be a law against registering people to vote if they want nanny-states. I mean, if it saves one child's life then it's worth a little infringement in your "rights." Your vote would not have made a difference. Now you can do something productive instead of standing in line at the polling place, like reading a civics textbook. I hear Ron Paul' Campaign for Liberty sells a good one.
hard pass. what nations need is more participation in democracy, not less. i agree that a law that makes the bar culpable for patrons actions is probably incredibly stupid, but a law that makes it illegal for people to vote because their opinions are different from yours? what?
> hard pass
I apologize that my sarcasm did not come through.
Other things changed in those years.
Also we're not too sure but at certain levels of nocturnal alcohol availability nearly everyone stayed at home for weeks on end and made microchips, like, hella expensive. Weird, right? More research required.
Not too sure how I feel about them using laws to conduct experiments as people supposedly have equal protection under the law. I also wonder how the business owners feel about this.
>Between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and midnight, for every million people watching a strongly violent movie, the number of violent crimes decreased 1.3 percent; for every million people watching a mildly violent movie, the rate declined 1.1 percent... "So, we thought, 'Oh, this is sort of like incapacitation,' if you put someone in a movie theater, they commit less assault because they can't really assault someone while they're in a movie theater."
>"What happens instead is that violent crime goes down a lot from midnight to 6:00 a.m. following the movie." For every million people who saw a strongly violent movie at the cinema, the rate of violent crime went down 1.9 percent in the six hours after midnight, and for every million people watching a mildly violent movie, the rate dipped 2.1 percent. That larger decrease after midnight might be puzzling until you remember the risk factors of committing violent acts: young, male, and drunk. The scenario is easy enough to imagine: Two dudes, neither of whom have yet learned how to process strong emotions in a constructive way; one decides to see Murdersuck 4: Buckets of Blood, the other goes to the bar. They meet up after the movie at 11:00 p.m. for drinks. One has a blood-alcohol content (BAC) of 0.00, the other's is around 0.07. They both proceed to have four drinks over the next three hours. It's now 2:00 a.m., and someone walks into the bar and starts getting seriously rude to the people with whom these two guys have been talking. Our moviegoer now has a BAC of about 0.07; his buddy is clocking in at 0.14. Which dude do you think is gonna throw the punch?
>All this to say that in a given year, the release of strongly violent movies has a net effect of about 52,000 assaults just not happening. Besides the human impact, that saves about $695 million in averted victimization costs, all because 4 to 8 percent of the US population saw a violent movie instead of getting drunk and committing assaults.