One source of the controversy about the causal nature of alcohol in violent crime has been the definition of "cause." Some researchers require that, in order to be considered causal, the presence of alcohol must be necessary and sufficient in order for a violent crime to occur. This article suggests it is more reasonable to consider the epidemiology of violence in the same way one would consider the epidemiology of disease. For example, while smoking is a causal factor in the occurrence of lung cancer, not all smokers get lung cancer and not all lung cancer victims are smokers. In the same way, not all violent crimes involve alcohol and not all people under the influence of alcohol commit violent crimes. However, ample evidence exists that more drinking tends to result in more violence and less drinking in less violence. The article concludes, however, that too much attention to exact estimates of the relationship between alcohol and violence may only divert attention from the more important issue of how to prevent alcohol-related violence. A detailed understanding of causal pathways and potential points of intervention that can be used in preventing violence is needed to make a difference in the rate of alcohol-related violence. Table, bibliography