Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/31842
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDuff, R Aen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, S Een_UK
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-21T00:04:43Z-
dc.date.available2020-10-21T00:04:43Z-
dc.date.issued2015en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/31842-
dc.description.abstractFirst 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.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherBergen Open Access Publishingen_UK
dc.relationDuff 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.v3i2.905en_UK
dc.rightsThis article is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which provides unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/en_UK
dc.title'Abstract Endangerment', Two Harm Principles, and Two Routes to Criminalisationen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.15845/bjclcj.v3i2.905en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleBergen Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justiceen_UK
dc.citation.issn1894-4183en_UK
dc.citation.volume3en_UK
dc.citation.issue2en_UK
dc.citation.spage131en_UK
dc.citation.epage161en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPhilosophyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPhilosophyen_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1673261en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2015-12-31en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2020-10-20en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot chargeden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorDuff, R A|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMarshall, S E|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectInternal Project|University of Stirling|https://isni.org/isni/0000000122484331en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2020-10-20en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/|2020-10-20|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenameDuff-Marshall-BJCLCJ-2015.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1894-4183en_UK
Appears in Collections:Law and Philosophy Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Duff-Marshall-BJCLCJ-2015.pdfFulltext - Published Version217.1 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.