No victimless crime? ... Really?

[Accountable]

no such thing as a victimless crime because crimes aren't committed against people, they are committed against society

This is an interesting enough comment that I felt it deserved its own thread. It seems to suggest that legislature can claim on behalf of society that virtually anything can rightfully be considered a crime.

Comments?

 

[Jersey]

If you run a red light, you still have committed a crime regardless of whether or not you caused any injury to another person. Any law that is broken is still a crime...

 

[Accountable]

If you run a red light, you still have committed a crime regardless of whether or not you caused any injury to another person. Any law that is broken is still a crime...

That's a law of safety. The potential is there for one person's negligent action to cause another nonconsensual person to be hurt or killed. What about, say, seatbelt laws, prostitution, or smoking marijuana? How about "blue laws" like prohibiting the sale of alcohol on Sunday?

 

[Accountable]

If you run a red light, you still have committed a crime regardless of whether or not you caused any injury to another person. Any law that is broken is still a crime...

Sorry, I got off my own point. So you agree there are victimless crimes?

 

[Thornless]

There are indeed.

When in doubt, look it up

The term victimless crime refers to infractions of criminal law without any identifiable evidence of an individual that has suffered damage in the infraction. Typically included are traffic citations and violations of laws concerning public decency, and include public drunkenness, illicit drug use, vagrancy and public nudity.[1] These laws (concerning public decency) are based on the Offence principle, as opposed to laws based on the Harm principle.

The term is not used in jurisprudence. It is rather a political term, used by lobbyists with the implication that the law in question should be abolished. In a constitutional state, the legislature, a body in turn elected by the sovereign, defines criminal law. A crime (as opposed to a civil wrong or tort) is an infraction of a law, and will not always have an identifiable individual or group of individuals as its victims, but may also, for example, consist of the preparations that did not result in any damage (mens rea in the absence of actus reus), such as attempted murder, offenses against legal persons as opposed to individuals or natural persons, or directed against communal goods such as social order or a social contract or the state itself, as in tax avoidance and tax evasion, treason, or, in non-secular systems, the supernatural (infractions of religious law).

Victimless crimes are a proposition of liberalism and anarchism, as in the harm principle of John Stuart Mill, "victimless" from a position that considers the individual as the sole sovereign, to the exclusion of more abstract bodies such as a community or a state against which criminal offenses may be directed.[2]

In a democratic society, wide agreement on a given law as punishing a "victimless crime" will eventually lead to that law's abolishment, as has been the case with most laws regarding homosexuality or sodomy law, abolished in most democratic countries in the later 20th century, and to a lesser extent prostitution (see regulated prostitution). More limited are legalization's of euthanasia (legal in Japan, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Albania, Oregon and Washington) and cannabis use (see legality of cannabis by country).

 

[Jersey]

Sorry, I got off my own point. So you agree there are victimless crimes?

I do agree. As ridiculous as some laws are, there were put down on paper for some reason. Whether we agree or disagree with them, they are there and were written to protect something, someone, or some ideal.

 

[Peter Parka]

I want to know who the victim was today when I broke the law by having a smoke, outside, in the hospital grounds? Anyone?

 

[Thornless]

The pigeon who got cancer because of it

 

[Peter Parka]

The pigeon who got cancer because of it

It would have caught cancer 1000 times over from the fumes from the ambulances. Besides, pigeons are pests so killing them is good, rats with wings.

 

[Thornless]

Um, every time you smoke... fuck, I got nothing

 

[Peter Parka]

The tax on it pays the complete cost of the hospital too.:nod:

 

[kelvin070]

Just refer to the Penal Code and Crimnal Procedure code or Statutes to be specific.

 

[Margene]

Sorry, I got off my own point. So you agree there are victimless crimes?

Yes, there are victimless crimes. No one is harmed or robbed of their property say for instance while engaging prostitution. It is still a crime, but there is no victim for society to avenge, only society's disapproval to be assuaged.

 

[Peter Parka]

Yes, there are victimless crimes. No one is harmed or robbed of their property say for instance while engaging prostitution. It is still a crime, but there is no victim for society to avenge, only society's disapproval to be assuaged.

I would agree to a certain extent, if the woman is doing it of her own free will, victimless crime. Unfortunately, there is a big problem of women (especially immigrants) being sold into this and used as sex slaves. This is what the government should be cracking down on and not prostitution, in its self.

 

[Margene]

I would agree to a certain extent, if the woman is doing it of her own free will, victimless crime. Unfortunately, there is a big problem of women (especially immigrants) being sold into this and used as sex slaves. This is what the government should be cracking down on and not prostitution, in its self.

Ok, I agree, that additional circumstance provides a victim. I agree, without coersion, the government needs to ignore prostitution.

 

[Peter Parka]

Its legallising it which cuts down on sex traffic and improves the safety of working girls. :nod: As a counter to what this thread's about, it should be said that even laws in 1st world countries produce innocent victims.

 

[alibaba]

Not having a feckin TV Licence!!
Seriously we have to pay €165+ for a TV licence to get crap and its not like the BBC where they have no ad's.

Not paying your TV licence is a victimless crime, they make a fortune from advertising revenue and dont make any shows of real quality, they just buy american shows, that you can watch on any network.

 

[Margene]

Its legallising it which cuts down on sex traffic and improves the safety of working girls. :nod: As a counter to what this thread's about, it should be said that even laws in 1st world countries produce innocent victims.

Legalizing it, eliminates pimping. Their involvement, for me, is coercion and certainly the girls are victimized by men taking a large portion of their earnings while providing "protection". If it were legal, no need for pimps.

 

[Peter Parka]

Exactly! In countries like Holland and Australia, where it is legal, they have to pay taxes, which contributes to the economy and have to pass health and safety laws, not to mention planning permition, which makes it safer for everyone.

 

[Margene]

Exactly! In countries like Holland and Australia, where it is legal, they have to pay taxes, which contributes to the economy and have to pass health and safety laws, not to mention planning permition, which makes it safer for everyone.

Here in the states, there was an advocacy group called COYOTE (Call off your old tired ethics). They seem to have vanished the last couple decades. They tried to initiate a reform movement to legalize it and thereby help the women involved in prostitution, as a womens' issue. I don't think it went anywhere because the U.S. is a nation of puritanical phonies and therefore nature of the business didn't lend itself to endorsement by politicians who are trying to get hockey moms to vote for them.

Much like pot, it should be legalize and taxed and aside from the money going to the government, the crime associated with it is eliminated. Like after prohibition was repealed.