|
Another problem is that some studies made
conclusions about crime rates without actually
examining
crime rates. Instead of analyzing offenses, they
used arrests, but did not discuss the problems
inherent
in using arrest rates to infer anything
definitive about crime rates. Using arrest data,
Albanese (1999)
concluded that casinos did not increase
embezzlement, fraud and forgery crime rates.
Hsing (1996)
used a cross-section of 48 states and identified
higher illegal drug arrests in states that
permit gambling.
A fourth criticism is that most studies are
subject to substantial omitted variable bias
because
they rarely controlled for variables that affect
crime. Margolis (1997), Florida Department of
Law
9
Enforcement (1994), and Florida Sheriffs
Association (1994) included no control
variables. Nearly all of
the other studies control for very few factors.
Fifth, the literature has generally neglected
discussing the theoretical links between casinos
and
crime, as Miller and Schwartz (1998) document in
detail.
Last, many studies were agenda-driven, conducted
or funded by either pro-gambling or law
enforcement
organizations. Nelson, Erickson and Langan
(1996), Margolis (1997) and Albanese (1999) were
funded by explicitly pro-gambling groups. Not
unexpectedly, they concluded that gambling had
no impact
on crime.9 The Florida Department of Law
Enforcement (1994) and Florida Sheriffs
Association
(1994), which both opposed casinos, concluded
that crime and drunk driving increased in
Atlantic City
and Gulfport, MS, as a result of casinos.
In summarizing the existing body of literature,
the General Accounting Office (GAO) and National
Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC)
concluded that definitive conclusions cannot yet
be made
about the casino-crime link because of the
absence of quality research.
Back to casino
news
|
