Hat-tip to Tim of An Englishman’s Castle and his wonderfully titled post Sex and Drugs and Rock and Roll.

“Prohibitions” – There is much to recommend a scientific research publication that covers topics from drug-use to boxing, from firearms to the nexus of alcohol-prostitution-and-pornography, and even includes Advertising along with the subject of human body-parts for transplantation.

iea ::: Prohibitions
John Meadowcroft et al.

The ‘nanny state’ has expanded in recent years. Politicians and bureaucrats have increasingly sought to restrict what individuals are permitted to do with their own bodies on their own property. Prohibitions is a corrective to the prevailing support for such authoritarianism.

This collection examines the outlawing of the manufacture, distribution, sale or provision of particular goods and services by consenting adults. It begins with an overview of the economics of prohibition and subsequently analyses particular prohibition issues including gambling, prostitution, recreational drugs and trade in body parts.

The authors find that in most cases prohibition imposes significant costs on individuals and society as a whole and produces few benefits in return. Prohibition places markets into the hands of criminal enterprises and criminalises people who would not otherwise come into conflict with the law. It makes risky behaviour even more risky, increases public ignorance and often encourages the behaviour it seeks to prevent. Given the substantial costs and minimal benefits, it is clear that prohibition is bad public policy.

Download full publication

Students of firearm legislation maybe particularly interested in the chapter on firearms which states (p. 110):
This review of violent crime trends in the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada found that in the years following the introduction of British-style gun laws, despite massive increases in governmental bureaucracy, total homicide rates either increased or remained stable. Similar trends were observed in total violent crime. Importantly, in not one of these countries did the new gun laws appear to result in a decrease in total homicide rates despite the enormous costs to taxpayers. The situation is even clearer in the Republic of Ireland and Jamaica, where violent crime, particularly murder, became much worse after the bans in both countries. Clearly, the factors driving the increasing rates of violent crime, for example organised crime or terrorism, were not curtailed by British-style gun laws.
The failure of British-style firearm laws to influence the total homicide rate in any of the jurisdictions examined here is suggestive but not conclusive. The causal link remains unproven. The British Home Office argues that crime would have increased even more rapidly had the gun laws not been imposed. That explanation is problematic, given the failure of British-style gun laws in other countries.
These trends contrast with the situation in the United States, where there was an impressive drop in the American homicide and violent crime rates…

Whatever the reason, the upshot is that violent crime in the USA, and homicide in particular, has plummeted over the past fifteen years.27 This chapter merely scratches the surface in attempting to understand the link between firearm laws and crime rates. But the study corroborates American research that has been unable to identify any gun law that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents (Hahn et al., 2003; Wellford et al., 2004).

About NotClauswitz

The semi-sprawling adventures of a culturally hegemonic former flat-lander and anti-idiotarian individualist, fleeing the toxic cultural smug emitted by self-satisfied lotus-eating low-land Tesla-driving floppy-hat wearing lizadroid-Leftbat Califorganic eco-tofuistas ~

4 thoughts on “Prohibitions

  1. What a neat premise for a magazine!BTW, the lefties say that the reduction in our crime rate is a direct result of legalizing abortion.


  2. Funny that Thud brings up the part, “incidents where never reported so the official crime figures here do not represent in any real way the danger from armed criminals on England’s streets…” as I remember reading something a year or two ago about the methodology of how England’s Home Office even compiles these figures. Suffice it to say that these methods for their figures in no way match the way the FBI gathers theirs, so <>any<> type of comparison is essentially useless. This is important from our perspective, as it illuminates the critical differences that the Left keeps nattering on about. It’s apples and oranges, or even more different than that, and even when you show them why, you wind up with what you were talking about in your previous post; the Blind Rage Activist, who can’t stand that you’ve torn down their idol that they’ve always worshipped, the god-almighty statistics.It’s a lie by omission and half-truths. That’s what makes them such good politicians.


  3. Remember: There is no such thing as negative/bad publicity. If you “ban”, “prohibit”, or otherwise control anything, the interest in it will increase proportionally. Then, if your attempts at control are as ineffective as they have been in the UK… well, you get the problems they are having now.


  4. for the last 18 years in England i ran a security company.since the gun ban the number of incidents involving illegal guns went up so much I couldn’t even calculate the percentage.Many of the incidents where never reported so the official crime figures here do not represent in any real way the danger from armed criminals on England’s streets.conversely I feel much safer in america when visiting although the media here would have us all believe in the myth of the gun happy yank…sod em!


Comments are closed.