This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0887403408315111v1 19/2/153    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by McCleary, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Rural Hotspots

The Case of Adult Businesses

University of Califonria, Irvine, mccleary{at}uci.edu

A recent U.S. Tenth Circuit decision questions whether the routine activity theory of hotspots applies to adult businesses located in sparsely populated rural areas. Although few criminologists are interested in urban—rural differences, the Tenth Circuit decision makes this topic acutely relevant to policy makers and courts. To address the threshold question, the hotspot theory is analyzed to demonstrate its generality to urban, suburban, and rural locations. The results of a corroborating case study are then presented. When an adult entertainment business opens on an interstate highway off-ramp to a small rural village, total crime rises by 60%. Alternative explanations related to uncontrolled threats to internal validity are considered and ruled out. After reporting the results of the case study, the consequences of the theory and results for policy makers and courts are discussed.

Key Words: secondary effects • hotspots • ambient crime risk • adult businesses • rural crime

This version was published on June 1, 2008

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, 153-163 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0887403408315111


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?