# Are people less likely to get into fisticuffs today? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 26, 2014, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222 "2014-12-26T17:39:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/21 "2014-12-27T14:54:53Z")
For the broad historical sweep question that LOHD is asking concealed carry is but a blip. Lead, as mentioned, is a possible additional factor beyond the cultural and hard-wired evolutionarily selected game-theory factors noted by LOHD and in the article cited. Lead has [been around](http://rachel.org/files/document/Lead_Poisoning_in_Historical_Perspective.pdf) for over 6000 years, including ancient Rome, in wines and ciders in the Middle Ages, to industrial uses well before leaded gasoline. Certainly leaded gasoline and its removal were correlated with [a bump up and back down in environmental exposures and in rates of violence](http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline) … I do wonder how broad lead exposures correlates with the rates of violence documented in the cited article from 1400 on. How significant of a factor has lead exposure been on rates of interpersonal violence over the centuries in comparison to cultural ones like confidence in the state’s ability to punish cheaters and to punish you if you take on that role (and less likelihood to be rewarded for being the punisher)? OTOH, lead exposures are thought to be increasing over the decades [in China](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11694262) while reported rates of violent crime, especially [murders](http://www.economist.com/news/china/21575767-official-figures-showing-sharp-drop-chinas-murder-rate-are-misleading-murder-mysteries) are going down. (That said, both lead exposure rates and violent crime rates are considered unreliable figures from China.) ---
**Author:** ![BOOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c4cdca/32.png) [@BOOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BOOM)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/22 "2014-12-27T15:08:35Z")
Fisticuffs I dunno, but the ridiculously high correlation between crime and lead in petrol/gas seemingly cannot be disproved: > **[Did removing lead from petrol spark a decline in crime?](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27067615)** > > Many Western nations have experienced significant declines in crime in recent decades, but could the removal of lead from petrol explain that? > **[Yes, lead poisoning could really be a cause of violent crime | George Monbiot](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violent-crime-lead-poisoning-british-export)** > > George Monbiot: It seems crazy, but the evidence about lead is stacking up. Behind crimes that have destroyed so many lives, is there a much greater crime? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/23 "2014-12-27T15:41:34Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Seems to me that the legal consequences of a fistfight are taken more seriously than they were in decades past. You get into a fight with someone, you could get sued, arrested, or both. Yep. A couple years ago a twenty-something client was angry at me, a fifty-something guy. He was nose to nose with me, screaming that he was gonna kick my ass. There were many witnesses. I calmly told him he was too much of a pussy to lay a hand on me, because he wouldn’t do well in prison. He backed down. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/24 "2014-12-27T15:47:06Z")
> [@BOOM](#): > > Fisticuffs I dunno, but the ridiculously high correlation between crime and lead in petrol/gas seemingly cannot be disproved: > > [Did removing lead from petrol spark a decline in crime? - BBC News](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27067615) > > [Yes, lead poisoning could really be a cause of violent crime | George Monbiot | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violent-crime-lead-poisoning-british-export) Intriguing; but the [Spurious Correlations](http://tylervigen.com/) site is a reminder that correlation is not causation. ---
**Author:** ![get\_lives](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ecb155/32.png) [@get\_lives](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/get_lives)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/25 "2014-12-27T16:04:58Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Intriguing; but the [Spurious Correlations](http://tylervigen.com/) site is a reminder that correlation is not causation. Whatever. I challenge you to find even one hole in the data. ---
**Author:** ![BOOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c4cdca/32.png) [@BOOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BOOM)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/26 "2014-12-27T16:10:27Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Intriguing; but the [Spurious Correlations](http://tylervigen.com/) site is a reminder that correlation is not causation. No one said it was. In fact, IIRC, The Gurdian article mkes that point (or the comments below do). The CLAIM is correlation that can’t be disproved. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/27 "2014-12-27T16:14:24Z")
> [@BOOM](#): > > Fisticuffs I dunno, but the ridiculously high correlation between crime and lead in petrol/gas seemingly cannot be disproved: > > [Did removing lead from petrol spark a decline in crime? - BBC News](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27067615) > > [Yes, lead poisoning could really be a cause of violent crime | George Monbiot | The Guardian](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violent-crime-lead-poisoning-british-export) I get lead in paint–or the theory anyway, since kids could eat flecks of paint. But who was consuming petrol? ---
**Author:** ![BOOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c4cdca/32.png) [@BOOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BOOM)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/28 "2014-12-27T16:15:53Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > I get lead in paint–or the theory anyway, since kids could eat flecks of paint. But who was consuming petrol? It’s the 20-year lag. It happens in the womb. The more you think about it, the more si-fi it gets. Really extraordinary. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/29 "2014-12-27T16:43:22Z")
The [skeptic’s view](http://www.skepticblog.org/2013/01/14/lead-and-crime/) of the lead data (which was mainly brought into to the public sphere with an article summarizing the literature by Kevin Drum published in Mother Jones): > [@](#): > > The Mother Jones articles centers around the rise and fall of crime from the 1960s to early 1990s in the US, and discusses research that argues that this rise and fall in the crime rate closely mirrors (although shifted by 23 years) the rise and fall of the use of leaded gasoline. > The article correctly points out that such ecological data is very difficulty to interpret. There are many potential factors that could correlate with the rise and fall in the crime rate. Confidence increases, however, when the correlation holds up in many possible ways. The article cites research by Rick Nevin and others showing that the correlation with environmental lead levels, mostly from leaded gasoline usage, holds up when compared state by state, city by city, and even by neighborhood. and also in countries other than the US. This makes the correlation much more compelling. > > The literature seems to support a real connection between lead and crime. … > > … Also a connection has been demonstrated with a prospective study, which partly controls for such confounding factors. > > The lead connection is also biologically plausible, as it is well established that lead causes neurological changes including and increase in violence and decreased executive function. > > While it is difficult to account for all possible confounding factors, the story that environmental lead exposure increases crime by causing chronic symptoms of violence and attention deficit is plausible and reasonably supported by existing evidence. The real question, it seems to me, is the magnitude of this effect, especially compared to other effects on crime. Yes a single correlation may be spurious. Correlations that hold up across many multiple regions and in prospective studies are however more likely to be true associations. Yes, it is possible that it may be a marker that correlates consistently with some other factor, even when the explanation makes perfect biologic sense based on what we know about the effects of lead. That possibility however becomes even less likely however when we also have experimental [animal](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393510200083X) [models](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dev.20076/abstract;jsessionid=5842B599637369CE514DCF2B90AED9CD.f03t04) demonstrating increased aggressive behavior resulting from moderately increased lead exposure. Short of intentionally exposing matched group of children to high and low lead levels as they grow up, the case is as conclusively demonstrated as is possible. Lead from petrol comes out in the exhaust, is breathed in, and settles in the dirt in yards, playgrounds, and other play spaces. And yes, exposure begins prenatally. That lead levels rise and fall had something to do with the rise and fall of violence during the last 100 years seems well established. Has it also been a significant contributing factor in the long term (measured over multiple centuries) trends to less male on male interpersonal violence? ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/30 "2014-12-27T16:57:23Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > I get lead in paint–or the theory anyway, since kids could eat flecks of paint. But who was consuming petrol? They or their pregnant mother were breathing it. ---
**Author:** ![BOOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c4cdca/32.png) [@BOOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BOOM)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/31 "2014-12-27T17:01:52Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > The [skeptic’s view](http://www.skepticblog.org/2013/01/14/lead-and-crime/) Always good to have a skeptical opinion, even in the face of 300 academic studies. ---
**Author:** ![mmmiiikkkeee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/edb3f5/32.png) [@mmmiiikkkeee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mmmiiikkkeee)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/32 "2014-12-27T18:07:59Z")
It depends where you are; it really is a cultural thing; look at other countries known for violence among young men… even certain subcultures in more modern 1st world countries. There are lots of online videos where people go into certain US neighborhoods and get slapped around and punched for saying the wrong thing or any number of social faux-pas. The people making these videos of course go looking to provoke such reactions, but they don’t have to try very hard; and they certainly don’t go into the worst areas (since they want to come out in one piece to upload their videos). I haven’t done any actual research, but following MMA and reading interviews of pro fighters coming from various parts of the globe fighting for honor/manliness/recreation is very much alive an well in the present. Hawaiin and Russian towns seem to have a lot of young guys going around fighting anyone they can, and Brazil is known (and even advertised sometimes) as being a pretty violent place. The Gracie family built their small empire and became millionaires through street fights. It’s interesting that the current Gracie generation, at least in the US, has adapted more to American culture in how they teach and promote their art, whereas the men from previous generations all have a small library of videos of their various street fights and almost define themselves by who the beat up. ---
**Author:** ![mo50](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@mo50](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mo50)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/33 "2014-12-27T18:32:26Z")
As mentioned earlier, I’d guess there are less fistfights in the us now that more people are carrying guns. I’d be interested to know what the trends are in places like the UK or Australia where gun laws are much more restrictive. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2014, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/34 "2014-12-27T19:00:58Z")
> [@mo50](#): > > As mentioned earlier, I’d guess there are less fistfights in the us now that more people are carrying guns. I’d be interested to know what the trends are in places like the UK or Australia where gun laws are much more restrictive. Might want to read the thread … > [@eburacum45](#): > > The concealed carry factor is probably irrelevant. Fisticuffs has declined in the UK as well and almost exactly no-one carries concealed firearms here. And to provide the [cite](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9411649/Graphic-how-the-murder-rate-has-fallen.html) - > [@](#): > > Annual crime figures show that the homicide rate has fallen steeply over the last decade, from a high in 2002 … [Violent crime in general](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7511807.stm) also down, just about half of what it was at the 1993 peak. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/35 "2015-01-05T03:32:03Z")
> [@mo50](#): > > As mentioned earlier, I’d guess there are less fistfights in the us now that more people are carrying guns. I’d be interested to know what the trends are in places like the UK or Australia where gun laws are much more restrictive. If this theory were true, we’d expect there to be fewer fistfights in areas with more guns, right? My understanding is that the opposite is true, however: high-poverty neighborhoods with significant street-drug activity have both high gun ownership and high levels of unarmed violence. And the stereotype of the wild west is that it’s a place both of many guns and many fistfights. Am I incorrect in these beliefs? ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/36 "2015-01-05T04:24:42Z")
I’m 50 something. When I was a kid, fights were allowed to go on the school ground but broken up eventually. If it was just aggression without it looking real serious, PE teachers might let it go for a minute before breaking things up. Now there is zero tolerance. When I was at university, there was a lot more fist fights. “Take it outside” was not uncommon. It’s one thing if a fight is kinda like really rough wrestling versus when you figure out some people are really serious about fucking you up. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/37 "2015-01-05T15:46:37Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Seems to me that the legal consequences of a fistfight are taken more seriously than they were in decades past. You get into a fight with someone, you could get sued, arrested, or both. As one data point, I’ve always been struck by PG Wodehouse frequently using as a stock plot device the tough guy who intimidates others and forces them to do his bidding with the complete absence of any suggestion that there might be protection by the law, or that the tough guy might face some consequences. It’s fiction, and not particularly realistic fiction at that, but I’ve wondered if it might have some cultural/legal basis in that era. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > If this theory were true, we’d expect there to be fewer fistfights in areas with more guns, right? My understanding is that the opposite is true, however: high-poverty neighborhoods with significant street-drug activity have both high gun ownership and high levels of unarmed violence. And the stereotype of the wild west is that it’s a place both of many guns and many fistfights. Am I incorrect in these beliefs? I don’t think this logically follows. It’s logically possible (not that I have any reason to believe it’s actually true) for guns to discourage fistfights but to also be correlated with higher levels of fistfights. IOW, a general cultural tendency to violence might significantly encourage both guns and fistfights, and the presence of guns might lower the level of fistfights but not to the full extent that is increased by the general tendency to violence. Which means that if the general cultural tendency to violence is unchanged and only thing changed is concealed weapons permits, then it would be possible for fistfights in general to decrease as a result even while the most violent places feature high levels of both guns and fistfights. Again, not that I’m endorsing that particular theory to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/38 "2015-01-05T16:40:16Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s logically possible (not that I have any reason to believe it’s actually true) for guns to discourage fistfights but to also be correlated with higher levels of fistfights. IOW, a general cultural tendency to violence might significantly encourage both guns and fistfights, and the presence of guns might lower the level of fistfights but not to the full extent that is increased by the general tendency to violence. > > Which means that if the general cultural tendency to violence is unchanged and only thing changed is concealed weapons permits, then it would be possible for fistfights in general to decrease as a result even while the most violent places feature high levels of both guns and fistfights. > > Again, not that I’m endorsing that particular theory to begin with. That’s a great point, and I agree with it. It seems likely to me that fistfights and gun ownership are likelier to occur in cultures where people have little trust that authorities will be effective in punishing violence. Folks inclined to fistfight will be encouraged by the belief they won’t be punished for starting fights, AND to carry guns for a similar reason; folks who aren’t inclined to fistfight might be inclined to carry guns out of fear of the first group. As authorities become more effective at punishing instigators of violence, **all other factors being equal** , gun ownership is likely to decrease. ---
**Author:** ![BOOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c4cdca/32.png) [@BOOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BOOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/39 "2015-01-05T17:11:55Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s logically possible (not that I have any reason to believe it’s actually true) for guns to discourage fistfights but to also be correlated with higher levels of fistfights. IOW, a general cultural tendency to violence might significantly encourage both guns and fistfights, and the presence of guns might lower the level of fistfights but not to the full extent that is increased by the general tendency to violence. Guns aren’t too relevant in an international context - crime has fallen off a cliff everywhere regadless of social or political policies, greater and less funding of police, etc. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2015, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222/40 "2015-01-05T18:20:24Z")
I believe it was the guys who wrote “Freakonomics” who pointed out that the decline crime rates was possibly related to the advent of legal abortion. The sort of parents / mothers who were not in a position to care for a baby, or in a lifestyle that would produce a delinquent, abused child or one with FAS, were the sort most likely to have an abortion. Since the majority of (violent) crime is committed by the 15-30 age group, then about 20 years after that 1970’s supreme court decision, the pool of violent offenders drops and has stayed lower. Again, though correlation is not causation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-people-less-likely-to-get-into-fisticuffs-today/708222.md?page=1)