我國少年事件處理法自1962 年1 月31 日經立法院制訂總統公布開始，將有觸法之虞之少年（亦即所謂的「虞犯」）列為處理對象已近五十年，但有關虞犯處遇爭議卻始終未停。本文認為處遇虞犯是政治問題，非理論問題。本文論證從分析我國處理虞犯少年的法律歷史與特色開始；其次，評議目前有關虞犯處遇適合以司法、社會福利或其他模式的論述，用以說明這些論述（或理由）均各有支持者，但也都忽略了爭議背後真正的影舞者：「道德恐慌」與「風險治理」。最後，本文提出虞犯處遇是一個假的「風險治理」，理由是我們缺乏對「虞犯性」資料庫之經驗值以及理性計算過程。本文建議少年犯的風險治理，應該根據評估已經觸犯法律之少年的再犯風險，換言之，當一個被保護的少年 犯，又有了諸如中輟、逃家、吸毒、與不良組織來往等高風險因素時，國家才具有強制介入處遇的正當性。

Since the establishment of Juvenile Criminal Law in Taiwan in 1962, juveniles in need of supervision (JINS) have been subject to protect and penalize. Debates on the treatments of JINS remain especially in the academic, judicial and welfare practitioners. The paper argues that politics is more relevant than theory for the government to choose the treatment models. Our papers begins with an analysis of the changing legal content of JINS in Taiwan history and follows by arguing how the debates in literature ignore the possible dynamics of moral panic and risk governance. The paper believes that the penalization of JINS in Taiwan comes mostly from a true moral panic on at-risk youth, however, the treatment indicates a “pseudo” risk governance which has no theoretical base on actuarial justice and/or risk management.