Jurors were surveyed rather than judges, psychiatrists, police officers, or parole board members because jurors represent the sentiments and tolerance levels of the general citizenry. Jurors also may determine what is dangerous as a finding of fact, at several stages of the legal process. From a random sample of 200 jurors from San Francisco and Orange Counties, Calif., 97 subjects responded to a questionnaire containing 25 items of dangerousness. The items were based on a review of relevant legal, criminological, mental health, and popular literature. The mean dangerousness ratings and different subjects' were calculated. Results showed that subjects' age, sex, and educational level affected their views of such acts as marijuana smoking, industrial pollution, gambling, child abuse, drunk driving, prostitution, car theft, homosexuality, and trafficking in drugs and pornography. Significant differences in ratings of dangerousness of acts and offenders also emerged as a function the respondents' self-reporter political position. Respondents generally rated as most dangerous the violent crimes of murder, rape, and robbery, but rated aggravated assault behind drunk driving, heroin trafficking, and child abuse. Tables and 26 references are provided.