Unpacking the Crisis — Part 1: Remember 'Mugging'? How a Word Changed a Nation

Have you ever noticed how a single word can reshape public perception overnight?

In 1970s Britain, mugging became such a word — no longer simply describing a type of street robbery, but symbolising social disorder, moral decline, and racial tension. This post provides a foundational example of what sociologists call a moral panic — a concept still vital for professionals working in policing, education, and local governance today.

What is a moral panic?

A moral panic occurs when a person, group, or event is portrayed as a threat to societal norms and values, then exaggerated through often sensationalist media coverage and political rhetoric. The panic typically identifies a ‘folk devil’ — a symbolic villain blamed for broader social problems — and justifies extraordinary responses, from new policing measures to legislative action.

In short: a moral panic is rarely just about the event itself. It reflects underlying anxieties, power dynamics, and social divisions.

The Victorian ‘Garrotting’ Panic

Britain’s first ‘mugging crisis’ came a century earlier.  In the 1850s and 60s, as London expanded into the world’s largest city, rapid social and economic change created widespread unease about crime and disorder.  Reports of violent robberies by so-called Garrotters filled newspapers, which warned of an epidemic of attacks and “no-go” areas where ‘almost nobody could pass un-garrotted.’

In 1862, The Times complained that “the whole of this great and most expensive judicial hierarchy seems to be established solely to catch thieves and let them go again” — a sentiment echoing today’s “revolving-door justice” arguments.

Parliament reacted swiftly with the Garrotters (Security from Violence) Act 1863, reinstating flogging (abolished just two years earlier) and increasing minimum sentences.  Once these harsher measures were in place, the panic faded.

This post reveals a familiar pattern: a surge of public fear, amplified by media outrage, prompting hasty punitive reform that outlasts the crisis itself.

The 1970s ‘Mugging’ Panic

A century later, Britain again faced economic and cultural upheaval — rising unemployment, industrial unrest, and shifting demographics.  Amid this climate, the American term mugging entered British media discourse, replacing phrases such as robbery with violence, bag snatching, or assault with intent to rob.

In the United States, mugging had become a racialised term, often linked to Black offenders. When imported to Britain, the word carried those connotations. Newspaper headlines warned of an “epidemic of muggings” and “gangs of youths” terrorising city streets.  Television reports and political speeches framed these incidents as evidence of moral collapse.

As Hall and his colleagues observed, the crime statistics did not support the alarm. The mugging crisis was less about rising crime rates and more about the symbolic meanings attached to them.  Ordinary robberies became a canvas onto which anxieties about race, class, and authority were projected.

This racialised framing legitimised expanded police powers — the early foundation of discretionary stop-and-search practices that continue to shape policing today.

From Headlines to Handcuffs: Media, Fear, and Policy

Both the Victorian and 1970s panics show how fear travels between the press, the public, and policymakers.  Sensational reporting constructs a sense of emergency, that then prompts swift and often punitive legislative action.

In each case, the focus shifted from the causes of crime — poverty, inequality, exclusion — to the control of offenders. The underlying message was clear: crisis demands action, not reflection.

In the 21st century, that same dynamic operates in real time, with digital platforms amplifying emotion and outrage faster than any newspaper ever could. Giving rise to what scholars now call digital moral panics.

Contemporary Parallels

Although the context has changed, modern panics follow the same pattern :

Recognising these patterns allows professionals to respond proportionately — analysing public anxieties critically, communicating responsibly, and building strategies grounded in evidence rather than emotion.

Why This Still Matters

For those working on the frontlines — in education, policy, councils, mental health or police services — understanding moral panic is not a purely academic exercise. It’s a practical skill.

By learning to recognise when fear is being amplified, practitioners can help their institutions avoid reactive decision-making, and encourage community trust.

Suggested Reading

About the Author / Series Purpose

Written by Daniel Davis, researcher and commentator on social justice and policing.

Unpacking the Crisis: Crime, Power, and the Politics of Fear is a multi-part series examining how perceptions of crime, disorder, moral decline and media narratives shape public policy, policing practices, community relations and public trust.

Drawing on the work of Stuart Hall, Stanley Cohen, and contemporary sociological research, the series explores how institutions — from government to media to local authorities — manage public anxiety and frame “crises” around crime and disorder.

Each chapter is accompanied by a short Practitioner Brief offering applied insight, discussion prompts, and reflective tools which invite professionals across policing, education, and local governance to critically assess contemporary crises, and respond effectively in their practice.

Next: Read Practitioner Brief #1 — Understanding Moral Panic
Then — Part #2: The New Folk Devils — Who Do We Blame Today?