'Abstract Endangerment', Two Harm Principles, and Two Routes to Criminalisation

Citation

Duff RA & Marshall SE (2015) 'Abstract Endangerment', Two Harm Principles, and Two Routes to Criminalisation. Bergen Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 3 (2), pp. 131-161. https://doi.org/10.15845/bjclcj.v3i2.905

Abstract
First paragraph: For a long time, theorists discussing the relationship between harm and criminalisation, or other kinds of state coercion, talked about ‘the harm principle’—as if there was just one, univocal principle that they were discussing, advocating, applying, or criticising. In fact, however, the discussions tended to slide between (at least) two distinct principles — principles which differ in their meanings, their implications, and the ways in which they can lead to decisions about criminalisation. We will argue that a better understanding of the differences between the two principles will help us to avoid some confusions in crim-inalisation debates, and to get clearer about the different ways in which criminalisation can be justified.

Journal
Bergen Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice: Volume 3, Issue 2

People

Professor Antony Duff

Emeritus Professor, Philosophy

Professor Sandra Marshall

Emeritus Professor, Philosophy