This is the issue in the West that causes the most tension and misunderstanding when popular perception is placed against academic scholarship and what can be understood to be reality. On this later issue of "reality," we must remember that the West is the largest region in North America and the history of the West spans centuries. Historians are fond of describing the situation as one of "many Wests" - so your question must be first placed within the larger question of "which West."

Setting aside that last point, we can assume that we are talking about the West that is depicted in media - everything from dime novels to films and television shows. This is typically the Intermountain West (east of the Sierra/Cascades and west of the Great Plaines before they rise up to meet the Rockies). And we are talking about a time that is largely after the Civil War (1861-1865) and before the 1890s when the Frontier was traditionally regarded as closed. Clearly there are "Westerns" that step outside these boundaries, but this place and time defines most of what is depicted.

The issue we face with your question is not unlike what modern journalism faces: "if it bleeds it leads" is the axiom of the media. The same forces affect the writing of history. No one will read a newspaper, watch a movie, or read a history where the story is dominated by the narrative that, "Well, it's been another quiet day in Tombstone." Narratives, whether in newspapers, film, or history depend on something happening, and nothing beats bleeding.

Because of this, there is a prejudicial focus on violence - and the other sins to embrace your question in its entirety. On top of this, many Western communities took a certain amount of twisted pride in claiming that their town was harder drinking, more likely to have killings, and fuller of gunslinging criminals than any other place. This predilection was part of nineteenth-century Western culture and it is perpetuated by modern tourism boards.

Historians for the past several decades have recognized the problem embedded in your question, and they have worked to adjust the popular perception about this idea that the West was dominated by violence, gambling and alcohol. That adjustment, however, is an uphill battle.

Studies, including my The Roar and the Silence: A History of Virginia City and the Comstock Lode (1998), have arrived at several conclusions. First of all, first settlements were dominated by young men, but families eventually arrived in ever-growing numbers, and nature being what it is, young men became older men. As a result of this, there is an easily documented trend that began with alcohol-related crimes and the mischief that young men commit. Crimes in younger towns often involve killings of passion and alcohol and petty robberies, and there is a lot of destruction of property along the lines of what young men do with or without alcohol. Within a few years, communities tended to tamp down the inclinations of the initial young, male population. Statistically, we see crimes shift to fewer robberies - but those committed tend to be on a larger scale. And we see murders involving what one often sees in a modern setting: people being killed by family members or crimes involving domestic disputes in many ways.

Historians have studied the relative consumption of alcohol, and it seems that consumption per adult male was generally the same nationally. Young men drink more than older men; nineteenth-century men on average drank more than women - and these national trends were reflected in the West. As a community shifted from younger to older and toward more of a gender balance, drinking as a whole declined statistically, but if we look at the components of society, men were doing about the same thing nationally.

Despite the lark of claiming one's town was the hardest drinking most violent place in the West, most communities quickly attempted to become and to depict themselves as settled, law-abiding, church-going, school-building places. Investments and "good folk" are attracted to prosperity and calm, not violence. Most places were quick to crack down on ruffians.

In summary: In the effort to correct the misperceptions about the West, some historians overcorrect. There were times and places when violence and excessive drinking occurred. There were, after all, many Wests. But periods of these extremes were generally short lived, and the national standard of conduct quickly took hold. Mostly, the West tried to grow up to be peaceful and respectable.

edited for minor things.