Citation

Levi R. Br. J. Criminol. 2009; 49(2): 131-149.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, Publisher Oxford University Press)

DOI

10.1093/bjc/azn080

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Faced with the most violent summer in its history, the City of Chicago enacted a gang loitering ordinance, making it an offence to have no apparent purpose' on city streets. This paper analyses the testimonies of Chicago residents and aldermen to draw out the lay narratives of insecurity that underwrote the ordinance. These testimonies provide evidence for Ericson's (2007) model of counter-law: the ordinance was a response to broad insecurity among residents, a perceived failure of existing risk management systems, and a view that liberal legal principles were themselves aggravating residents' insecurity. Yet, while counter-law is generally theorized as undermining conventional legality, this paper draws on legal consciousness research and finds that the polysemic appeal of legality endures the counter-law turn.