Document Type

Conference Proceeding

Publisher

University of Tasmania

Faculty

Faculty of Health, Engineering and Science

School

School of Computer and Security Science/ECU Security Research Institute

RAS ID

16222

Comments

This article was originally published as: Corkill, J. D., & Coole, M. P. (2013). Security, control and deviance: Mapping the security domain and why it matters. In Proceedings of 6th Annual Australian and New Zealand Critical Criminology Conference (pp. 142-149). Hobart, Australia: University of Tasmania. Original article available here

Abstract

Security is one of the foundations on which a stable and cohesive society is built. It is this security that allows citizens to go about their daily lives with freedom and certainty,affording them the ability to make their own choices as to what they do. Yet it may be argued that security is a concept that is misunderstood and perceived in a myriad of ways by the various stratum of society. Since the tragic events of 9 September 2001, security has become a much used and abused term. Law and legislation have been changed and enacted to protectand control the community. Personal rights and freedoms have been given up, wars have been waged and it may be argued by some, police states have emerged out of democracy in the name and pursuit of security. In this period,the global community has witnessed massive growth of global security organisation and the rise and legitimization of its cousin the global private military company. Yet there is remarkably little consensus as to what security is, what constitutes the security domain and just how much freedom should be traded in a free and democratic culture in pursuit of this nebulous concept that issecurity. The purpose of this paper is to establish a roadmap for domain exploration which focuses attention on the complex and often contradictory nature of security. Notwithstanding scholarly difference and interpretation of the context of security, and the lack of a singularly acceptable definition of security and ignoring the argument that security is so broad as to lack meaning, the authors will assert that security is a legitimate and necessary construct, with specific concerns.This position is framed within the argument that the alternative of non-security(Manunta, 1998) is not acceptable in the context of a civilised world.This paper is presented in four parts, beginning with a discussion of the domain in general. In the second part the concept of security deviance will be discussed before finally proposing a way forward for domain research and discourse.Then, the structural relations, indicating the depth and embedded nature of security in a modern society, will be presented to articulate the opportunities for security deviance in a modern society.

Share

 
COinS