The Open Access Publisher and Free Library
03-crime prevention.jpg

CRIME PREVENTION

CRIME PREVENTION-POLICING-CRIME REDUCTION-POLITICS

Posts tagged harm
When prohibition works: Comparing fireworks and cannabis regulations, markets, and harms

By Jonathan P. Caulkins, Kristina Vaia Reimer

Background: Nations wrestle with whether to prohibit products that can harm consumers and third parties but whose prohibition creates illegal markets. For example, cannabis is banned in most of the world, but supply for non-medical use has been legalized in Uruguay, Canada, and much of the United States and possession restrictions have been liberalized in other countries. Likewise, supply and possession of fireworks have been subject to varying degrees of prohibition in multiple countries, with those bans prompting significant evasion. Methods: Current and past history of fireworks regulations, sales, and harms are reviewed and contrasted with those for cannabis. The focus is on the United States, but literature from other countries is incorporated when possible and appropriate. This extends the insightful literature comparing drugs to other vices (such as gambling and prostitution) by comparing a drug to a risky pleasure that is not seen as a vice but which has been subject to prohibition. Results: There are many parallels between fireworks and cannabis in legal approaches, harms to “users”, harms to others, and other externalities. In the U.S. the timing of prohibitions were similar, with prohibitions on fireworks being imposed a little later and repealed a little sooner. Internationally, the countries that are strictest with fireworks are not always those that are strictest with drugs. By some measures, harms are of roughly similar magnitude. During the last years of U.S. cannabis prohibition, there were about 10 emergency department (ED) events per million dollars spent on both fireworks and illegal cannabis, but fireworks generated very roughly three times as many ED events per hour of use/enjoyment. There are also differences, e.g., punishments were less harsh for violating fireworks prohibitions, fireworks consumption is heavily concentrated in just a few days or weeks per year, and illegal distribution is primarily of diverted legal products, not of illegally produced materials. Conclusions: The absence of hysteria over fireworks problems and policies suggests that societies can address complex tradeoffs involving risky pleasures without excessive acrimony or divisiveness when that product or activity is not construed as a vice. However, the conflicted and time-varying history of fireworks bans also show that difficulty balancing freedoms and pleasure with harms to users and others is not restricted to drugs or other vices. Use-related harms fell when fireworks were banned and rose when those bans were repealed, so fireworks prohibitions can be seen as “working” from a public health perspective, but not well enough for bans to be employed in all times or places

International Journal of Drug Policy. Volume 118, August 2023,

Deadly by Design: TikTok Pushes Harmful Content Promoting Eating Disorders and Self-Harm into Users' Feeds

By Center For Countering Digital Hate

From the Introduction: "Two-thirds of American teenagers use TikTok, and the average viewer spends 80 minutes a day on the application. The app, which is owned by the Chinese company, Bytedance, rapidly delivers a series of short videos to users and has overtaken Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube in the bid for young people's hearts, minds, and screen time. [...] For our study, Center for Countering Digital Hate researchers set up new accounts in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia at the minimum age TikTok allows, 13 years old. These accounts paused briefly on videos about body image and mental health, and liked them. What we found was deeply disturbing. Within 2.6 minutes, TikTok recommended suicide content. Within 8 minutes, TikTok served content related to eating disorders. Every 39 seconds, TikTok recommended videos about body image and mental health to teens. The results are every parent's nightmare: young people's feeds are bombarded with harmful, harrowing content that can have a significant cumulative impact on their understanding of the world around them, and their physical and mental health."

Center for Countering Digital Hate. 2022. 48p.

More Harm Than Good: A super-complaint on the harms caused by ‘suspicion-less’ stop and searches and inadequate scrutiny of stop and search powers

By Amal Ali and Nina Champion

  It is widely accepted that policing is most effective when it secures the co-operation, trust, and confidence of the public. The police themselves recognise that these features are critical to their relationship with the public and form an important part of their day-to-day working culture. This co-operation, trust and confidence is being undermined by unfair and disproportionate stop and search practices. Such practices cause alarm and distress to members of the public, damage trust and confidence in policing, and make the police’s job more difficult overall. We therefore believe that due to the harms outlined in this report, the government must urgently repeal the harmful s.60 police power and instead invest in working with communities to improve trust and confidence and tackle the root causes of violent crime. Furthermore, insufficient scrutiny of stop and search powers means that the police are not effectively being held to account where there is evidence of unfair and discriminatory use of these powers. Fair and effective community scrutiny for all police forces should be mandated, adequately resourced and supported by an independent national body. Section 60 (s.60) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order (CJPO) Act 1994 allows a constable in uniform to stop and search any pedestrian, or any vehicle for offensive weapons or dangerous instruments. This legislation was originally introduced to tackle football hooliganism and the threat of serious violence at football games. Today, s.60 permits officers to search a person or vehicle in anticipation of violence if an officer of or above…..

  • the rank of inspector ‘reasonably believes that incidents involving serious violence may take place in any locality’. These powers are only to be authorised in a designated area for a specific period of time.

London: Criminal Justice Alliance, 2021.  38p.