Abstract
Generally overlooked in the constant clamor for crackdowns on criminals and in the circus of committee investigations is the public's ambivalence toward crime—an ambivalence apparent in the passive response of ordinary citizens toward criminals com mitting misdeeds openly in their presence, in their reluctance to cooperate with the police in bringing the lawless to court, and in their hypocritical, face-saving tendency of professing piety in public while privately displaying an enthusiasm for violating just about every law available. When the machinery for sanctifying unlawful deeds fails to work, they then set up their own distinctions between the "elite" violator and the "common" lawbreaker. This ambivalence leads to subtle but complex distinctions between what is proper conduct, especially in the border areas of gambling, liquor, and sex.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.