Abstract
Conventionally, crime is regarded principally as harm or wrong and the dominant ordering practices arise post hoc. In the emerging pre-crime society, crime is conceived essentially as risk or potential loss, ordering practices are pre-emptive and security is a commodity sold for profit. Though this dichotomy oversimplifies a more complex set of changes, it captures an important temporal shift. As the intellectual offspring of the post-crime society, criminology must adapt to meet the challenges of pre-crime and security. This article examines the key features a theory of security needs to encompass. It explores the immanent capacities of criminology for change and suggests exterior intellectual resources upon which it might draw. It concludes that the pre-crime society need not be a post-criminological one.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 261-281 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Theoretical Criminology |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - May 2007 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Pre-crime and post-criminology?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver