Off limits. The effectiveness of age limits in reducing underage sales

The potentially negative effects of drinking alcohol, smoking tobacco, using illicit drugs, gambling, and exposure to violent or otherwise detrimental movies or games are widely acknowledged. Risks may involve harm to people’s mental or physical health and/or their social well-being. These risks may be especially valid for specific groups in society. Societies generally aim to protect children and adolescents from risky products. Availability can be seen as an important predictor of adolescent consumption of risky products. In order to reduce underage sales, in many countries so-called age limits have been introduced. Age limits serve to prevent young people’s access and exposure to risky products and to delay the age at which young people may start consumption. In addition to this so-called threshold effect, there has been speculation regarding the possible occurrence of an opposite effect. The forbidden fruit theory suggests that age limits may make restricted commodities more attractive. \ud The studies presented in this dissertation focus on the issue of compliance with age limits and the effects of various interventions that were designed to increase compliance with age limits. Furthermore, the possibility of a forbidden fruit effect was examined. \ud Based on the empirical chapters of this dissertation, raising awareness and providing feedback are distinguished as the essential instruments in increasing knowledge, ability and motivation and subsequently improving compliance. Age limits are an important first step towards protecting adolescents against risky products. Without actual attention to the issue of compliance, however, their contribution will remain limited

Young poker faces: Compliance with the legal age limit on multiple gambling products in the Netherlands

Gambling is an activity that can be performed on-premise (slot machines in casinos, bars and restaurants) or off-premise (scratch cards and lottery tickets). Although the addictive potential may depend on the specific gambling product, early onset increases the likelihood for future pathological gambling. To delay the onset of gambling behavior and to reduce gambling-related problems, many countries have introduced age limits that should decrease the availability of gambling products to underage individuals. In this study we evaluated compliance to the legal age limit, making use of a mystery shopping method. We distinguished between (1) off-premise scratch cards (n = 51); (2) off-premise lottery tickets (n = 49); (3) on-premise slot machines in casinos (n = 88); and (4) on-premise slot machines in the catering industry (n = 100), and we focus on the factors, such as characteristics of the establishment, buyer, and vendor, that may account for possible differences. The 288 visits demonstrate that gambling products are highly available and accessible to under-aged customers; young customers are still able to gamble despite the legal regulations. The compliance rates fluctuate and appear to be related to the specific gambling product in question. Furthermore, age verification activities and certain outlet- and buyer characteristics, as well as characteristics associated with the purchase attempt, may influence compliance

Mystery shopping and alcohol sales: do supermarkets and liquor stores sell alcohol to underage customers?

Purpose: \ud The Dutch national policy regarding alcohol and youth relies on retailers’ willingness to refuse to sell alcohol to underage customers. This study examined unobtrusively whether supermarkets and liquor stores do indeed comply with the legal age restrictions for alcohol sales. - \ud \ud Methods:\ud A research protocol was developed based on the methodology of mystery shopping. Using the protocol, 150 supermarkets and 75 liquor stores were visited by 15-year-old adolescents who tried to buy soft alcoholic beverages (legal age, 16 years), and 75 liquor stores were visited by 17-year-old adolescents who tried to buy strong alcoholic beverages (legal age, 18). - \ud \ud Results:\ud Of all 300 buying attempts, 86% were successful. In supermarkets, 88% of all attempts succeeded. In liquor stores, a difference was found between the purchase of strong alcohol by 17-year-olds (89%) and the purchase of soft alcoholic beverages by 15-year-olds (77%). In only 71 of all visits, mystery shoppers were asked for an ID. In 39% of these cases, they were still able to buy alcohol. Female adolescents were more successful in buying alcohol than male adolescents. - \ud \ud Conclusions:\ud The results show that supermarkets and liquor stores generally fail to see the need for extra care when young customers try to buy alcohol. Legal age restrictions without enforcement and facilitation clearly do not suffice to protect adolescents from early exposure to alcohol

Alcohol en jongeren in Kop van Noord-Holland. Nalevingsonderzoek

Until recently, Supreme Court precedent dictated that a person waives their Fourth Amendment rights in information they disclose to another party. The Court reshaped this doctrine in Carpenter v. United States, establishing that the Fourth Amendment protects cell phone location data even though it is revealed to others. The Court emphasized that consumers had little choice but to disclose their data, because cell phone use is virtually inescapable in modern society.In the wake of Carpenter, many scholars and lower courts have endorsed inescapability as an important factor for determining Fourth Amendment rights. Under this approach, surveillance that people cannot feasibly escape receives more Fourth Amendment scrutiny, while surveillance that can be avoided receives less, or none.This Article offers the first systematic analysis of inescapability in Fourth Amendment law. It challenges the prevailing wisdom that inescapability is a desirable or workable basis for Fourth Amendment protection. Inescapability does not provide a conceptually coherent standard for courts to apply. It incentivizes consumers to forego beneficial technologies, creating substantial social harms. It fails to adequately protect the most sensitive forms of personal information. It creates doctrinal confusion and ignores established precedents that contradict the inescapability model. Moreover, inescapability analysis elides individual differences — technologies that are avoidable for most people may be unavoidable for others, including the disabled, the poor, and other disadvantaged populations.Inescapability threatens to limit privacy rights to a narrow set of digital technologies while making a mess of Fourth Amendment doctrine. This Article analyzes these issues in depth and explores several alternatives for determining Fourth Amendment protections in the digital age