Among the United Kingdom's efforts to deal with ASB are the enactment of injunction powers for registered landlords to remove antisocial tenants (1996 Housing Act); the provisions of powers for the police to disperse groups an officer believes are likely to behave antisocially (2003 anti-Social Behavior Act); and, most notably, the introduction of the Antisocial Behavior Order (ASBO), which restricts the movement and behavior of people deemed to be antisocial (1998 Crime and Disorder Act). This article argues that common understandings of ASB are vague at best, leading to difficulty in deciding what is or is not antisocial. Because ASB does not directly cause harms that rise to the level of criminal behavior, it raises the question about why certain noncriminal behaviors are deemed so offensive that they must be prevented and/or stopped. Typically, the focus of ASB concerns and the issuing of ASBOs by police is in urban spaces and at times when large segments of the public congregate for entertainment and retail sales. The author argues that perceptions of ASB in these contexts are dependent on the public's behavioral expectations for people present in a particular space at a given time. Such norms are subject to change over time and depend on the particular behavioral norms of the people and/or police officers who observe and assess the behavior's acceptability at a given place and time. The danger of ASBOs in a diverse, pluralistic society is that they will be overused with minorities whose cultural and subcultural behavioral norms in various contexts may not comply with those of the majority culture. 2 figures and 79 references