Knowledge on Tap: Police Science and Common Knowledge in the Legal Regulation of Drunkenness

Abstract

Although scholars have devoted considerable attention to the formation, modification, and dissemination of knowledges in and around the legal complex, few systematic inquiries have been made into the sociology of legal knowledges. In this paper, we focus on two areas of law-liquor licensing and drunk driving-and contextwlize their development from the perspective of police science. We document the ways in which contemporary police science authorizes a "common knowledge," which is not to be confused with lay knowledge, or even trade knowledge. Rather, the "common knowledge" that is authorized is what legal authorities believe everyone should know, despite any lay or trade knowledge individuals may have. This analysis demonstrates the need for further work on the ways in which knowkdges are formed and authorized within law, with particular emphasis on documenting how a "responsibility to know" comes to be deployed beyond the state.Sociolegal scholars have documented the formation of legal knowledge for quite some time, with the literature in this area falling into three rough categories. One set of studies examines the ways in which knowledge produced by professional bodies-such as psychiatry and genetics-circulates within law and helps to shape legal outcomes and legal discourses (e.g.,

The place of drink: Geographical contributions to alcohol studies

“…For example, consideration of the trade offs and conflicts between legal and 'common-sense' definitions of drunkenness and policing policy (including sensitivity towards differences in local cultural practices, behaviour, speech and so on), have shown how discourses of pleasure are accounted for in policy making in different locations (Levi & Valverde, 2001;O'Malley & Valverde, 2004;Valverde, 2003). Similarly, consideration of the characterization of the 'larger lout' by the Thatcherite government and studies of young male drinkers in the North East of England and street drinking in Vietnam (see Gofton, 1990;Hunt, 1991;Hunt & Slatterlee, 1981, 1986Nayak, 2003;Thomas, 2002) have identified how local, regional and national identities are constructed in terms of broader processes.…”

Authorizing the Production of Urban Moral Order: Appellate Courts and Their Knowledge Games

“…What Souter is doing is thus not taking the side of the social, but rather deploying one dimension of old police science/police powers (administrative knowledge [Levi and Valverde 2001]) as against another dimension (the power/knowledge of city councillors). Souter wants the city staff to produce its own reports, in the style of German police-science (Knemeyer 1980), instead of letting city councillors use their first-hand/expert knowledge of urban vices.…”

Alkoholio pardavimų kontrolės priemonių vertinimas Lietuvoje : socialinės žalos valdymo perspektyva

“…Licencijavimas, kaip valdymo technologija, įtraukia atsakomybės perdavimą privačiam sektoriui, kai tikima, kad jis turi žinių valdyti savo veiklą, analizuojamu atveju susijusią su alkoholio vartotojais. Licencijų turėtojai yra atsakingi už savo ir aptarnaujančio personalo veiksmus tiek, kiek juos įpareigoja įstatymas (Levi, Valverde, 2001 Remiantis alkoholio vartojimo ir žalos valdymo per alkoholio pardavimų kontrolę teoriniu modeliu, toliau analizuojama šių priemonių taikomumo problematika Lietuvoje (neapžvelgiama eksporto ir importo bei reklamos, pardavimų pakuotės ir gėrimų stiprumo reglamentavimas).…”

“…Tuo tarpu teigiama, kad moralinė logika motyvuojanti licencijuoti alkoholį negali būti atskirta nuo tvarkos ir saugumo. Alkoholio kontrolę liečiančios reformos vykdomos, kad užtikrintų socialinę tvarką, dvasios pakilimą ir visuomenės gerovę (Levi, Valverde, 2001). Siekiant užtikrinti visuomenės interesą tokia alkoholio kontrolės reforma reikalinga ir Lietuvoje.…”