The Instigator
notpolicydebategod
Pro (for)
Winning
15 Points
The Contender
repete21
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

Libertarians are right on crime- No victimless crimes and support gun control

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,020 times Debate No: 3699
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (6)

 

notpolicydebategod

Pro

Gun control laws do not work because criminals will prey on citizens because criminals will be armed while citizens are defenseless. In Florida, the murder rate dropped 20% after gun control was abolished. Criminals fear armed suspects.

Our Constitution says, "The right to bear arms shall not be infringed." Gun control laws are unconstitutional.

Our police spend a lot of their time fighting victimless crimes like prostitution, gambling, and drugs. No body is hurt but the police are being overstretched for these crimes.

Our jails are filled with drug users, drug sellers, prostitutes and gamblers. Parole allows criminals to leave prison because the jail is overcrowded. If the jails were less crowded with victimless criminals, then violent criminals would not be back on the streets so quickly and people would not expect to get parolled and would be less likely to commit crimes.

Plus, we spend trillions on the War on Drugs each year. That money could go to other forms of crime fighting or anything else including lower taxes.
repete21

Con

Hello, and thank you for starting this debate.

First, I am going to discuss the consequences of "victimless crimes" in which you state, and I quote "No body is hurt". In case you are unaware last year over fifteen thousand people were killed in drunk driving accidents even though drinking and driving is a victimless crime, along with driving underage, and underage drinking. Tax evasion, which costs the country millions of dollars every year is a victimless crime. Driving without a licence, and driving without insurance, both victimless crimes which cost many lives, and thousands of dollars to people each year. Child pornography is a victimless crime, but you clearly state that perpetrators of these crimes should be let off the hook. Illegal prostitution, which spreads some of the most viscous diseases such as HIV/AIDs, and HPV which has been linked to cervical cancer is yet another example of the victimless crimes which you think should be ignored. The list could go on forever, and victimless crimes aren't always so "victimless", whereas violent crime covers only five things, murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault. These crimes are often less problematic than victimless crimes.

According to the Department of Justice, the rate of violent crimes went down by half between 1994 and 2001 and the rates have continued to decline. I am not advocating the fact that we should let up on violent criminals, but honestly, victimless crime is just as bad.

You also make note of the fact that are jails are filled with "drug users, drug sellers, prostitutes and gamblers" but you fail to mention how many lives are saved from the violent crimes correlated with drugs, prostitution, and gambling.

I would like to see statistics to back up these facts that you stated please.

"we spend trillions on the War on Drugs each year"

"Parole allows criminals to leave prison because the jail is overcrowded."
-Specifically mentioning that parole is allowed because of crowded jails

"If the jails were less crowded with victimless criminals, then violent criminals would not be back on the streets so quickly"
Debate Round No. 1
notpolicydebategod

Pro

Ok. I respond to ALL of his points below but I'd like you to seee my offense first. First of all, he didnt even begin to talk about gun control. In Florida, the gun ban was dropped and crime lowered 20%. In D.C., gun bans were enstated and crime rose dramatically. Criminals are afraid of armed suspects. You cant get rid of all the guns. If you try, all you do is make it so that citizens have noprotection and criminals can prey on them. Why hasnt he touched on this?

My opponent gives a lot of example of victimless crimes that are not even victimless crimes. An example is drug usage and gambling. Our prisons are very crowded with drug users and dealers. If we got rid of some of those people, then there would be, obviously, significantly less crowded prisons. This means violent criminals serve their full terms and criminals are discouraged because the parole system wont bail them out. We spend trillions on the War on Drugs (drugsense.org). We can cut this cost and put it toward education or veteran's health or something instead of fighting drugs, ineffectively. And obviously drugs can be taxed. This will be significant revenue. In Amsterdam, soft drugs are legal. Their homicide rate is way down. They spend way less on crime by some 150 Euros. And their drug usage is halved. (http://www.drugwarfacts.org...)

- Drinking and driving
+ Drinking and driving is not a victimless crime. Familes of lost loved ones and the innocent drivers that are not drinking are the victims. Drinking and driving is not a victimless crime. I'm not sure why you thought it is.

- Tax evasion
+ Tax evasion is not a victimless crime. the government looses money and taxes. I don't thinkyuo understand the concept of a "victimless crime." It is a crime where only the criminal is hurt.

- Driving without a licence, and driving without insurance
+ How do either of these cost lives? Really? The people who are paying the thousands of dollars are paying because they chose to. They have the right to. But anyway driving without a license is not a victimless crime. It hurts drivers on the road if the rdiver is for whatever reason imcompetent. But I defend that driving without insurance is an unreasonable victimless crime.

- Child porno
+ This is horrible. The victims are children who cant make the decision and are not allowed to make decisions until they are 18. And their parents cant make these decisions for them. People under the age of 18 dont count.

- Illegal prostitution spreads disease
+ People who patronize prostitutes under the disease risk and it is conesntual sex. Under any consentual sex you are at a risk for disease. If you sleep with a promiscous person, you are more likely to get a disease. Should it be illegal to be promiscuous? No.

- honestly, victimless crime is just as bad.
+ Are you telling me that smoking a joint is just as bad as killing or raping someone? Any voter can tell you are mistaken.

- you fail to mention how many lives are saved from the violent crimes correlated with drugs, prostitution, and gambling.
+ very few. there ive done it.

Thank you. Ive responded to all of his votes incredibly well, without question. And my points have barely been contested. Some not even touched.

Vote pro.
repete21

Con

For starters lets go over what I asked for which you conveniently ignored, and AGAIN, I would like to press for evidence of these facts

1-"Parole allows criminals to leave prison because the jail is overcrowded."

2-"If the jails were less crowded with victimless criminals, then violent criminals would not be back on the streets so quickly"

Also, on the note of gun control, I agree, gun rights should not be infringed upon, but that is only part of your resolution, so I will concede that point to you, however I stand firm on the fact that it would be foolish to ignore victimless crime.

I would like to point out that EVERY example of victimless crime I listed is considered a victimless crime legally, that being "an illegal act that is consensual and lacks a complaining participant, including such activities as drug use, galnblina, pornography, and prostitution". Therefore, unless you can show me a definition that fits what you say better, and is more reliable than law, we are going to have to go with my definition.

To answer most of your bulleted subjects, read the above paragraph about what a "victimless crime" actually is.

On the point about prostitution, "legal prostitutes", such as in Nevada, must be regularly checked for STDs so they don't actually spread the disease like you state.

In reply to this
"- you fail to mention how many lives are saved from the violent crimes correlated with drugs, prostitution, and gambling.
+ very few. there ive done it."

I think you should look at the statistics about the hundreds of people raped, killed and beaten by drug users, pimps, and illegal gamblers. Then think of how many of those would be prevented if those drug users, pimps, and illegal gamblers were off of the streets, and all the lives saved from the ones who were taken off the streets.
Debate Round No. 2
notpolicydebategod

Pro

It is common sense. If a prison is full nobody new can get in. They have to free people by ending sentences or paroling. Here is a source: www.prisoncommission.org/statements/haney_craig.pdf

I really wanted to debate gun control but ok.

Most of those crimes are not victimless crimes. I support the abolishing of victimless crimes not victimed crimes.

On the point about prostitution, "legal prostitutes", such as in Nevada, must be regularly checked for STDs so they don't actually spread the disease like you state.
+ You can get STDs from consentual sex. Just as much with a promiscuous person. If they outlaw prostitution, a taxable service and livelihood, they should outlaw consentual sex. Prostitution should be legal.

I think you should look at the statistics about the hundreds of people raped, killed and beaten by drug users, pimps, and illegal gamblers. Then think of how many of those would be prevented if those drug users, pimps, and illegal gamblers were off of the streets, and all the lives saved from the ones who were taken off the streets
+ People are constantly exposed to violence in illegal activities but no prostitute is going to say to the cops "My pimp beat me!" /if they could go to the police and there wasnt lawlessness in the profession, then they could complain to the cops and violence would be dramatically reduced. You dont see workers at Walgreens getting raped and beaten because they can complain to the police.

In Amsterdam, soft drugs, like marijuana are legal. Their drug usage rate is halved, they spend 156 million less euros a year on crime, their incarceration rate is 5 times lower and their homicide rate has dropped significantly.
http://www.drugwarfacts.org...

Ive responded to all my opponent's [weak] points and now I'd like to make my own.
Victimless crime prohibition would:
- create tax revenue from things like drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc.
- cost the govt. much less money. we spend trillions a year on the war on drugs alone.
- our police would be less stretched out and could focus on real crime.
- our court system would no longer be clogged and there would be "speedy trials"
- our murder and general crime rate would lower significantly
- AND VICTIMLESS CRIMES WOULD LOWER!!! as Amsterdam proves.
Why not legalise these costly and illogical victimless crimes?

Thank yoou. Vote PRO!
repete21

Con

First off, I read the whole article from your prisoncommision source, and although it does say overcrowded jails are uncomfortable it still doesn't answer my questions, since you were never able to prove these points, it is up to the judges to decide whether they are reliable facts or not, but in my opinion if you can't prove it don't bring it to the table.

You stated that "Most of those crimes are not victimless crimes", but I was the only one to bring a definition of victimless crime, and since you used no counter definition, we have to go with my definition, which those crimes DO fit under.

On the note of prostitution spreading disease, prostitutes in Nevada are required to test for STDs and if they have them, to stop doing buisness until they can get rid of the STD, so they actually don't spread them. I am not debating whether or not prostitution should be legal, simply that when done illegally it leads to the spread of STDs.

"People are constantly exposed to violence in illegal activities" that is exactly the point I was trying to make, and your story about Walgreens further proved my point that victimless crimes lead to violent crimes by showing that people who stay out of the victimless crime buisness aren't affected as much by violent crime, so by allowing more people to get away with victimless crime, you make more people succeptable to violent crime.

You mentioned the fact that crime rates are lower in Amsterdam, but you failed to make note of the fact that although violent crimes have lowered a little, they are still only .0001 percent lower than the UK where drugs are still illegal, and that the amount of victimless crime has skyrocketed, so your statement that "AND VICTIMLESS CRIMES WOULD LOWER!!! as Amsterdam proves.
Why not legalise these costly and illogical victimless crimes?" was dishonest, and wrong.

You say that there would be a "tax revenue from things like drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc." but at what price? Are you honestly willing to risk so many lives so that the government can make more money?

I believe that through your lack of requested evidence and the points I have made about the risks of victimless crime we have proved everything else in your last paragraph wrong.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 6 years ago
Geekis_Khan
No, it doesn't e say you have the right to bear any type of arms you want. Just as long as you can have a gun, it's fine. Otherwise, it'd be fine for you to own nuclear weapons.

And as for your stats, there's a lot less guns in Western European nations and nations like Japan. Much heavier gun control. And guess what? Much lower violent crime rates!
Posted by notpolicydebategod 6 years ago
notpolicydebategod
gun control NEVER works, it is simply naieve. criminals will always have guns. they will prey on the defenselss. dont let yourself be the defenseless. when florida dropped their gun laws the crime rate droppped 20%. when dc enstated a gun ban, their crime rate increased dramatically.
Posted by notpolicydebategod 6 years ago
notpolicydebategod
It says that exactly!!! The founding fathers shouldnt have to make a seperate document and underline the text. Its in the Constitution to matter, even if Ben Farnklin didnt manage to highlight it.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 6 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Okay, you can bear arms. That doesn't mean that there can't be some control over it. It never says you have to be able to bear all types of weapons. As long as you can own one type of gun, it's Constitutional.

Furthermore, that's not what it says. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I'm tired of people leaving out the other half of it.

And, quite frankly, there needs to be gun control (I know where getting to a debate in your comments now; ha). There needs to be a check to make sure that people who own a weapon are responsible enough to.
Posted by notpolicydebategod 6 years ago
notpolicydebategod
"The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed." Can't be much clearer. Did the founding fathers have to add "...I'm serious" for you to believe it.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 6 years ago
Geekis_Khan
I'm not going to take you up on this one because I don't feel like arguing police stuff, but I never buy that gun control is unconstitutional...
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Leftymorgan 5 years ago
Leftymorgan
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by libertarian 6 years ago
libertarian
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Jamcke 6 years ago
Jamcke
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by attrition 6 years ago
attrition
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by behindblueeyes 6 years ago
behindblueeyes
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by repete21 6 years ago
repete21
notpolicydebategodrepete21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03