• Definitely they should

    I have never, nor will I ever, commit any crime that has a victim. Things such as stealing or physically harming another individual are rightfully illegal, and should remain as such. However, victimless crimes such as drugs, underage drinking, prostitution regulated in a way so that all participants are willing, and gambling shouldn't be illegal at all - let people do with their life as they please so long as they aren't hurting anyone.

  • So long as they are 100% victimless

    So long as the crimes are 100% victimless then i see no reason why they should be illegal.
    The problem with this hypothetical scenario would be the transitional period. Take cannabis as the example whilst buying an eighth and blazing up at home hurts no one, the process of that eighth arriving in your hands can have many detrimental effects on the people involved. Whilst A great deal of marijuana is grown domestically and an ever growing trend in users growing there own supply there is still a huge gang culture involved in the production and cultivation of the plant and should the demand for this product be taken away as you can now pick up your pot with your king skins at Sainsburys the people who previously made their living supplying you will need to turn to other avenues to make there money leading to higher crime rates in other areas such as burglary, muggings and the sale of other more dangerous drugs.
    Now it can be argued that if pot had always been legal then this culture surrounding it would never of existed however those who do think that victimless crime should be made legal really need to examine every aspect of the crime and the probable outcomes of legalizing such activities

  • My Personal Liberties

    A lot of the "No" side is stating that I shouldn't be able to choose to ruin my life. This is such backwards logic as it is MY life, I understand that people care about me (perhaps) and that death of humanity is not usually met with positive connotations but if I'm able to understand the repercussions of my actions I should be able to do as I please. This is provided I'm not harming anyone else physically or prohibiting them from exercising their rights.

  • Freedom is important

    Having no victim means you didn't harm any one. Convictions are for seeking justice from harm. If you commit a crime and you don't have a victim, You become the victim of your trial and sentence. The state becomes the perpetrator. Freedom is only present if you have bodily autonomy and are free to do as you please without imposing others freedoms. For example, If I choose to sell my body for sex, That is my customer and my own choice. The intent of this act is consentual and harmless. Recklessness can be dangerous for others, But whether I can put myself at risk is none of the states bussiness.

  • Victimless crime is no crime at all

    There are things put into our justice system as crimes that are in fact not crimes. Braiding your friends hair at your house for a bit of extra money is considered a crime if you don't have a license even though you are both consenting adults that agreed to that transaction. Smoking a joint is a crime even though it hurts noone and it helps calm you down after work. There are victimless crimes in this world. Theft as many people are using as an example is NOT a victimless crime. When a person's property has been stolen it makes them a victim of a crime.

  • Legalize them all.

    Somehow someway we are abusing these guys in prison. War on drug is a failure. Prostitution when illegal. Makes more. Gambling is also the same. Also selling organs. Somehow someway it Becomes a crime. Somehow prostitution is deemed "bad". Somehow it's said prostitutes get bad being one. Then punish them even more? Make them legal and voluntary. It's only a failure of legal system to punish real crime. Then we criminalize these things? Gambling? I know it's not good when people are addict. But people only become addict because it seems the most promising for them to be rich. Even terrorists did a crime because of something. Look at Norway for example. It's 21 years maximum for any crime. Even killing spree. Then why call this a crime? It don't even kill someone. Just a money flow.

  • Its called MY LIFE not MY LIFE RUN YOUR WAY. I don't approve of youre disapproval

    People that chose to do all sorts of legal activities that are MORE DANGEROUS THAN MOST DRUGS and end up being a burden or dying greatly affecting loved ones yet no-one would argue to make motorcycles or standing in a slippery bathtub illegal. Its called MY LIFE NOT MY LIFE period.

  • If there is no victim there is no crime

    Some will say "People shouldn't be allowed to shoot up on the sidewalk" or "i don't want hookers in front of my house".
    First thing allowing such behaviors does not mean they should be allowed in public. Going to the bathroom is pretty much a universally allowed behavior yet is for the most part done in private and in most instances doing so in public is not allowed.
    That system society has works pretty well and also means it is possible to allow behavior but that behavior is expected to be done privately, same for sex.
    So it all boils down to people who either have a loved one was negatively affected by "VICTIM-LESS-CRIME-X" which should not affect my right to partake in "VICTIM-LESS-CRIME-X" and people who just don't like the fact some people are enjoying "VICTIM-LESS-CRIME-X" in the privacy of an establishment or home.
    I simply can not for the life of me understand why American society has allowed its own government to incarcerate MILLIONS of people for years and in some instances a lifetime for a behavior that by nature has no unwilling victims. A side note, making "VICTIM-LESS-CRIME-X" illegal forces the behavior into the underground generating much more victim filled violent crime by organized criminal networks pimps and pushers, when society has a scapegoat it takes its eye's off the chessboard.

  • A fine for a victimless crime is more then enough if that!

    My son has been sitting in a correctional in upstate NY for almost 3 years he has not been sentence's and his lawyer is not forthcoming with information to this family. He has caused not trouble and has not record to speak of. I don't understand the good keeping someone who has not be in trouble before locked up for an undermine amount of time his lawyers says 5 years but the deal has not been signed off by a judge yet every court date he has been canceled. Yes wrong is what he did but no one was hurt and the county spent an ungodly amount of money on this one drug case. Its almost November and yet another court date has been postpone. I cant get any information out of the lawyer and alot of time I get letter from my son that he didn't understand what the lawyer was saying to him. He is now on I believe his 3rd PSR I need help getting my son home. Angelgirl21ny2AOL.COM ANYONE OUT THERE I AM NOT SURE WERE TO TURN AT A LOSS. Was arrested December 2012

  • Why should they not even be crimes?

    Because there's a new thing called - no one is harmed?
    Seriously if no one else other than the consenting individual is affected, it's not a crime. Oh, unless a major industry's profits are jeopardized. In that case, whatever it is instantly qualifies as a crime against humanity and the worst thing ever.
    Not even joking here.

  • There is no such thing!!!

    Victimless crimes does not exist! All crimes have a victim, some more than others. The alleged "victimless" crimes does in fact have a victim...The state (all the citizens)! Crimes with victims are usually one to a few individuals who were DIRECTLY affected by the crime. On the other hand, a "victimless" crime affects a system such as the economy (ex bootlegging, piracy, etc). These crimes affect the entire population indirectly (ex, increased insurance rates, increased taxes, etc.) There is no such thing as a victimless crime.

  • Nope, there's no such thing.

    There is no such thing as a victimless crime. All crimes can affect people, even drugs. Although, it may not bother you that someone engages themselves in drugs it can still affect someone somewhere. Prostitution for example, I do not agree with. That is in no way a victimless crime. And as for alcohol, I would not define that as being a crime. I mean, it can be if someone chooses to turn it into a situation such as that by drinking and driving for example, but in many instances it does not affect anyone in a bad way. Alcohol can have a bad affect on someone, thus making it a crime that does have a victim. But in other instances, a person is completely fine with the effects of alcohol. It honestly just depends on the person, because no two people are the same. But all crimes have a victim, in my book. At least that's the way I see it anyway. ;)

  • I'm saying No because

    If you think about it. Regardless of whether or not there is a victim. There will always be one. You. I know some people argue as to why is it a big deal if the only person hurting is yourself and no one else. Think about it. Marijuana may not effect anyone else but yourself but the reality is that it effects those around you. I have had friends that decided weed is more important than our friendship, and I've dated someone who decided that ignoring me and standing me up for drugs is better than our relationship. It hurts those around you IF you are not careful!! I'm not saying it should be looked at as a crime and you should be arrested for it but no crime no matter how small is victimless.

  • Of Course Not!!

    Point blank no matter what crime you commit there is a victim. If you steal-the person you stole from or if you do drugs it affects you AND those around you. No matter what someone is always effected in any action you take and in all cases if your committing a crime there is at least one victim.

  • No no no

    If victimless crimes became legal then these crimes would spiral out of control from the big cities to the small 'middle of nowhere' towns all over whatever country it is implemented in. If this was legal then the crimes such as breaking and entering would be legal! Would you want someone in your house at night with your knowledge and you can't do anything about it?!?!

  • No crime is completely victim-less

    God gave us freewill but at the same time morals and values uphold our society so just because you make a personal decision to do something that harms yourself that is not OK : by permitting victim-less crimes we are telling young kids in the modern world that it is OK to do whatever you want with no punishment if it does not hurt others. And you may argue that it runs other peoples lives but victim- less crimes lead to real crimes such as deaths associated to drugs , murders associated to prostitutes and sex

  • Even if it is my choice, NO.

    For all other those saying yes, it's like basically saying it's okay if i die because i chose to die. No, you do not get to choose when you die, and no you do not get to choose to ruin your life with drug, alcohol, and prostitution, and weed. NO.

  • Some but not all

    This debate is a mixed bag for me, first of all, defining a victimless crime is a difficult process, and in my eyes theres only two 'victimless' crimes' that should remain illegal, underage drinking being one, since people below the age of consent to drink are generally decided on the responsibility of the average population, its defined for a reason and it can be harmful to kids, it isnt victimless, thebkids are thebvictims of their parents neglect, the other is drugs, drugs harm everyone, the users harm their bodies and are often under constant threat for lack of payment, manybdrugs can easilly prove fatal and the damage it does to the familie and relationships of their users is inconceivable, the drugs trade is a cut throat and violent business world wide that funds and fuels other criminal activity such as murder, theft, vandalism, assault, fraud, rape, publoc indency, anti social behaviour, rioting and even terrorism, i understand that a legal drugs trade would reduce some crimes, but the damage it does to individuals? It wouldnt hold out for long, and it wouldnt totally illiminate the problem, even if it did itd only be temporary, and regulation would only result in more protest. I do however agree that gambling should be legalised, it would be easier to regulate people with gambling problems than drug problems, as for prostitution, a consenting sex worker shouldnt have any legal trouble, it should be down to the individual to establish a sex business in a safe and secure environment with checks on their clients, sex between consenting adults for any reason should not be illegal (although incestual sex if at all probably shouldnt result in offspring) finally pornography should always be legal as long as it doesnt break any other laws (child abuse, animal abuse etc) and all participating members are of their country's legal age to be in porn and are consenting to it, but thats just my opinion, drugs are evil, paid/public sex/ nudity and gambling are a ok with me

  • No they should not be made legal.

    Although the crime may be victimless it does not mean someone was not affected by it. Some crimes such as stealing can be considered victimless, but it still has an affect on the person who's property was stolen. By leaving them as illegal we are granting protection and consequences for peoples actions.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.