Could boxing reduce antisocial behaviour?

One of the classic sporting stories out there is the ruffian made good by virtue of learning to box. A classic example is stories such as this and this. But I feel that you have to ask some searching questions about this narrative. In the long run does a violent sport such as boxing prevent or encourage violent behaviour? My suspicion is that in most cases it helps prevent violent behaviour by giving people confidence, discipline and something to do. But it also brings with it exposure to other violent people, and training in how to fight. In addition there is a risk of brain damage.
So how can we answer this question? I’m not aware of any specific research into the issue, but I think there are some clear ways we can answer it. The first would be to find out what percentage of violent criminals are boxers and compare it to the population as a whole. So for example if five percent of violent criminals are boxers and five percent of the general population are, then that would suggest it has no impact. If there is lower percentage of boxers among violent criminals then that would suggest that boxing prevents violent crime and if there is higher percent then it encourages it. However this by itself would risk falling for the fallacy of suggesting correlation implies causation. I suspect people who are drawn to boxing tend to be more violent than those who aren’t. Another way to investigate would be to follow the lives of some of the students of the previously mentioned projects. I would love to know more. Particularly as this article highlights the anecdotal evidence is good.

Of course just opening lots of free boxing gyms won't solve violent crime and antisocial behaviour by itself. But it strikes that this option really should be researched.