There are basically two types of crimes. One is the type where you take something from someone else. The other type is a thought crime, usually starting with the thought: I’m a free man why would it be prohibited?
Continuing the thought: “Crime” is both a technical and arbitrary term. Technical because it has a specific definition: a violation of law as established by whatever authority is in power. Arbitrary because a “crime” is whatever they say it is.
Avoiding crime is generally a logical course of action for most; such avoidance keeps one out of prison and less in danger of being killed by the “authority.”
But does crime automatically delineate that which is right or wrong? No, not by a long shot. When the national 55 mph speed limit law was passed, people who were driving well within previously established speed limits of 60 or 70 suddenly became criminals. When the national 55 mph speed limit was repealed, all those people suddenly ceased being criminals.
None of those people committed an act of force against any other person by driving 60 when the speed limit was 55. Yet still they could be legally punished.
Knowing what is a “crime” is important in order to avoid monetary punishment, imprisonment, and even death. But the difference between wrong and right can almost always be determined by application of the Zero Aggression Principle. Have you initiated force against any person for any reason? If so, then you are in the wrong, regardless of whether you have committed a “crime” or not. (Note the key word initiated). The state wrongly commits acts of aggression against the people as a matter of course; in regard to the speed limit it is only another way to collect revenue to support itself. But in doing so, the state does not commit a crime, because the state decides what crime is.