Should people be jailed/imprisoned for committing victimless crimes?

Should people be jailed/imprisoned for committing victimless crimes?
  • Yes, they're still criminals
    Vote A
  • No, but they deserve some other kind of punishment
    Vote B
  • I don't believe that there's such a thing as a "victimless" crime
    Vote C
Select age and gender to cast your vote:
I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
Updates:
5d
By victimless I mean pretty much anything that isn't murder, assault, rape, molestation, etc.

0|4
1032

Recommended Questions

Have an opinion?

What Girls & Guys Said

1032
  • There aren't a such thing as victimless crime, so therefor this logic can't be used. If there were no victims, it couldn't be any crimes either.

    Is not paying your taxes victimless crime? No, because if you don't pay your taxes it may affect the whole population's healthcare, education, police, military, infrastructure etc. So both the population and the democracy would be the victims here, assuming the majority supported the taxation. Democracy itself isn't a person, but it can be threaten or put in danger.

    Is helping someone else to kill themselves victimless? No, because although the killed person did consent to that you killed Them or gave Them assisted suicide, there would still be difficult to prove so and therefor people have to assume it was a regular murder. In addition we won't know if you pressured that person to be killed and you're by law (in my country) not allowed to kill another human being regardless. In addition you could help that person seeking professional help.

    Drug use is also a crime with victims. You can be the criminal and victim at the same time. Mental illnesses can cause you to be depressed and make you want to abuse drugs, but drugs are illegal and therefor you're also a criminal who's breaking the law. If you use drugs, it won't only give you bad side-effects, but also start a trend making other starting to use it too. Customers like you would make people able to make money on selling drugs and more people would be harmed. In addition if you gets sick, homeless or dies, both you and your family/friends would be negatively affected.

    Gambling also have victims in it. If you starts following the trend, more people would also join it and you would be a bad role model for younger people. Children aren't mature enough to take good economical decisions, so therefor it would affect their economy negatively. Then the parents have to be better at taking care of the children, the children have lost money, you're a bad role model and you makes other in addition to yourself addicted.

    3|5
    0|5
    • 5d

      Ok bootlicker. If anything bad happens you identify as a "victim" which is a psychological issue. Free speech is illegal in NK, China, Russia. Child sex slavery is perfectly legal in the middle east. Being out past midnight is a crime in cities around the world. Smoking marijuana is a crime and also not a crime in different parts of the world. Using legality as a guide for morality is asinine and for people who have no spine.

    • 4d

      "Drug use is also a crime with victims. You can be the criminal and victim at the same time."
      That's the most insanely idiotic thing I have ever read. Why would consuming drugs victimize yourself? If you ODd, maybe, but simply getting high is not a bad thing, you won't suffer from it The only argument I can imagine is that drug use would negatively influence the person's life, but by that logic you can criminalise eating too much, not exercising or sleeping enough, wearing ugly clothes, etc... because they ALSO negatively affect your life.

      "If you use drugs, it won't only give you bad side-effects, but also start a trend making other starting to use it too."
      So now you are criminalising an activity because some people are stupid sheep? You can't blame someone for other people's voluntary actions, this is the same line of argument as criminalising wearing provocative dresses, because if you dress provocatively, you create a trend, and the people who also wear it will possibly end up as victims of rape, therefore YOU made them rape victims, therefore YOU are a criminal.

      Using mental gymnastics any kind of cause-effect relationship can be turned into a scapegoat, but that's not how laws should work.

  • No. Non-violent offenders shouldn't be incarcerated because:
    1) It's wrong. Removing people from the population for non-violent offenses is way over the top.
    2) It's too expensive.
    3) It has a negative effect. Non-violent offenders become surrounded by only other criminals and this makes their chances of committing worse crimes higher.

    The only good thing that can be said is that it likely had at least some positive effect on reducing violent crimes in the US simply due to incapacitation.

    2|2
    0|0
  • If there is no victim it's not a crime.

    1|1
    0|3
    • 4d

      Depends where you live

    • 4d

      It's a crime for a reason. For example, if someone parked in a space for disabled without permission, it would effect the ability for disabled people to use that space, making them a victim.

  • "By victimless I mean pretty much anything that isn't murder, assault, rape, molestation, etc."
    So theft, tax fraud, destruction of private property, etc. are victimless crimes? Just because someone wasn't harmed in the process?

    Victimless crimes in my book are things like indecent exposure or public sexual intercourse, drug use, inc*st (I know G@G doesn't like this word...). These came to mind. Personally, I think these crimes, or at least the ones I mentioned above, should be straight up abolised. If you have sex publicly, or snort coke, people WILL look at you like you're a freak. Criminalising it is just useless - the poor will just be a burden on society, and the rich will just pay off someone and avoid prison entirely.

    Additionally, I personally believe that there is a healthy and beneficial alternative to committing financial crimes like theft or robbery - and that is requiring the person to find some work (or find some work for him/her), and ask them to pay a given percentage of their income to the victim as compensation.
    This:
    1) Ensures the integration of the criminal into society, and gives them a way our of being a career criminal.
    2) Cuts costs on prison upkeep.
    3) Produces net wealth.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Anything that involves stealing has a robbery victim. Steal from big stores and they raise their prices to cover the loss. Anything involving welfare or disability payment cheating has victims who must pay for the fraud through their taxes. Drug abuse or other self-harm in private prevents the person from contributing their fair share to society, and/or causes them to burden society with their need for support. Etc. etc.

    1|0
    0|1
  • I believe drug use shouldn't be illegal and I'm tired of paying for people to be in jail over smoking crack. Leave that crack head smoke crack behind the dumpster. It's been proven ending prohibition lowers violent crime.

    1|3
    0|0
  • Yeah, that wouldn't be a bad idea. Our prisons are already overcrowded. And remember, if a person steals something, it means they needed that item more than you. You can't blame them for simply trying to survive.
    So I agree, that it would be better if those things were handled with fines or shame punishment. I don't think certain things warrant a prison sentence.
    America in general has a very strict prison system

    1|0
    0|0
  • What about vandalism & destruction of property? Do they count as "victimless crimes" for you? If yes, jail time might be too extreme unless the property violated is extremely valuable.

    1|1
    0|0
  • There is no such thing as a victimless crime. It’s just a simple fact that your crime hasn’t impacted a “victim” at any moment a crime has ramifications. Take speeding for instance. You may think it victimless crime, but if you hit someone at a high rate of speed it becomes a crime with victims... consequences will follow. Someone will have to pay someday for your decision to commit that crime

    1|0
    0|1
  • Prison is a horrible and inhumane concept. Locking another human being in a cage for 23 hours a day away from their family is very cruel.

    Criminals who victimize people especially in a violent way must be killed and all other certain crimes can be punished by flogging or hard labor at a camp or fines or something.

    But the hell with prison.

    1|0
    0|1
  • It depends on the crime...

    Some people call watching child-pornography a victimless crime "because they do no harm". They forget the children are really raped.
    Some people would call drugdealing to adults victimless "because they're old and wise enough. But how about the families of those people?
    Some cops steal drugmoney because otherwise it'll be just left in a box. But how about the whole idea of being a cop?

    Every crime has a victim. That's why it's a crime.

    1|1
    0|1
  • Every crime has a victim of some sort... well unless it's a very specific crime like holding a garage sale that lasts more than 3 days in Jefferson County Missouri

    2|0
    0|1
  • Well duh, a victimless crime should be legal.
    Also what kinda idiot thinks there isn't a thing called victimless crime.

    1|2
    0|0
  • Like smoking weed or smth? I know a lot of black people serve a lot of jail time for that.. i’d like to see that change.

    But crimes like fraud should be punished with jail time.

    1|1
    0|0
  • If they aren’t hurting others then they are hurting themselves. Therefore, they are the victim in their own crime.

    1|1
    0|2
    • 4d

      Don't break your back with those mental gymnastics

    • Show All
    • 4d

      But you can still hurt yourself doing it

    • 3d

      You can also hurt yourself eating, breathing, walking, having a pet, a pool, literally anywhere. If you want complete security, go to a prison. The only thing missing is freedom.

  • Well for one I think the war on drugs is a load of Bullshit because most of the people it criminalizes don't have victims.

    1|2
    0|0
  • If someone has a problem with some guy lighting up a joint in his own house by himself.. then they're way too authoritarian.

    1|2
    0|0
  • No victim = no crime.

    And in fact, though it is mostly forgotten and or lied about today, the highest valid Law in America is that each individual is endowed with the unalienable right to do whatever they want as long as they are not harming someone else by doing it.

    This is how I live my life, I do what I want and I don't I don't hurt others unless they try to hurt me first. If I get arrested or if nosy people mess with me for not living the way they want me to, I am not above severe personal retaliation toward anyone at all who hurts me or mine. Why? Because I am the kind of person who forged this country to begin with. Most people here have become bootlicking jellyfish, but for me; I am a REAL American, give me liberty or give me (my enemy's subjugation by all necessary means even if they force those means to be their) death.

    1|0
    0|0
  • No, and with things like drug addiction, that should be treated as a medical issue

    1|1
    0|0
  • No, they should be sent to correction facilities...

    1|0
    0|1
  • No victim, no crime. It's that simple. PS: Victims must be INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE, not "society".

    1|0
    0|0
  • No, but they deserve some other kind of punishment

    1|0
    0|0
  • Nope.. could make loads robbing investment companies and banks 🤞🤣

    1|0
    0|0
  • there is always a victim right? non-violent victims are also victims

    0|0
    0|0
  • Such as? Most crimes have some victim

    1|2
    0|2
    • 5d

      Even things that aren't like assult have victims. Theft, graffiti, everything has some sort of victim

    • Show All
    • 5d

      Gangs and malicious activity are already illegal lmao, banning other shit does not affect anything. in addition to that, you're also completely wrong as Colorado State has done numerous studies that after they legalized recreational marijuana, crime significantly dropped, funding for social programs skyrocketed. The only negative side effect has been 8% more cases of DUI. Let's stay consistent with your logic. You're not looking at the broader picture. A lot of people talk at the dinner table and end up choking and dying. Then all these stupid idiots driving their cars end up it motor accidents massacring innocent children! And these stupid adults having sex and don't use birth control end up as single mothers and families being torn apart! Point being, being a scared little pussy your whole life doesn't get you far. You die, and you die faster if you're irresponsible, get over it.

    • 5d

      @Repa, in regards to everything, and specifically prostitution, it's called accepting the risks. If BOTH parties CONSENT to ANYTHING, they BOTH accept any consequence of their action. Saying "oh you can't do that cuz something bad COULD happen" is asinine. You accept the risk when you turn on your car that you could get into a motor accident, but assuming you're responsible, there's hardly anything to fear.

  • In theory, no

    1|1
    0|0
  • No they shouldn't

    1|1
    0|0
  • There isn't such a thing as a victim-less crime.

    1|1
    0|2
  • No type of prison.

    1|1
    0|0
  • isn't that what community service is for?

    1|0
    0|1
  • all crimes have victims

    1|0
    0|1
    • 4d

      What about being executed for saying you're hungry in North Korea?

    • 4d

      Watch this I'm about to blow your mind. Different countries have different things that they consider to be crimes. 🤯

  • A fine or community service

    2|0
    0|0
  • Give me an example of a victimless crime

    0|1
    0|0
    • 5d

      Growing your own field of marijuana and smoking your own supply is illegal or getting a gun is also illegal at least here in the U. S.

    • Show All
    • 3d

      What would you do with the others?

    • 3d

      Anything else should be monetary or mandatory volunteer work or if they're at maximum if they're a potential danger to house arrest. Let the punishment fit the crime.

  • jailed/imprisoned? i would say tried.

    1|0
    0|0
  • The only crime is sin.

    0|1
    0|1
  • A crime is still a crime.

    0|0
    0|0
    • 4d

      Free speech is a crime in North Korea. But crime is still a crime 🤷‍♂️ however if I go to the middle east, child sex slaves are legal and completely moral.

  • Name a victimless crime.

    0|0
    0|0
    • 4d

      Building on your own land when fema wants to steal it. Speaking truth to power. Speaking truth at all about certain subjects. There are thousands of "crimes" that are not only victimless, but are also treason for even trying to legislate in the first place, in fact there are more "laws" for prosecuting victimless "crimes" than there are for legitimate ones.

    • Show All
    • 3d

      "I'd say that's psychologically damaging to both people"
      If everything that's psychologically damaging would be criminalised, we'd all be in prison. Ever said a bad word? Were you ever rude with someone? That's psychological damage.

      "there is still that risk as well."
      Abortion.

      "sounds like you want to fuck your sister lol"
      I see you have no actual arguments.

    • 3d

      @Benedek38 to be frank, I think it's inherently a silly choice of crimes to choose. So yes, I will tease you. Pull the stick from your ass brotha man.

  • Commited crime is never victimless in my book.

    Unless you have example to prove me wrong.

    I'm not talking about civil matters like speeding or bad parking, on its own, that is not a crime in my book.

    0|0
    0|2
    • 4d

      Tell that to people who are executed for being gay. How about being executed for saying your hungry in North Korea?

    • Show All
    • 3d

      "What western country put people to jail for that, not have old law and not use it"

      www.nzherald.co.nz/.../article.cfm
      Now, these people WERE slared jail, and were given a 3 year probation supposing they keep their distance... But that's the same. The state intervened in their relationship.
      And I looked it up. These are not archaic laws, EVERY Western country as far as I know punished relationships between close family members with at least 3 years of prison, often 8-10 years.

    • 3d

      US? Never knew that this is possible there...

      I'm not in to my relatives anyway or doing this to my mother, not even crossed my mind... That could be the reason I'm not aware of it.

  • Yes, because of the other impacts that they have on society. Drug addicts tend to victimize other people when they're looking for money to get their next fix, or commit other crimes because their mental faculties are not together, and prostitution spreads disease.

    1|0
    0|1
  • I believe the authorities should be there when they are called or see something taking place that involves a potential victim, when they are needed not setting anyone That's exactly why the jail houses are over crowded. And if someone doesn't consider themselves victimized then it shouldn't be considered a crime.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Depends on what the victimless crime is. When it comes to drug use/abuse, people don't need punished, they need help to overcome their addiction. Studies have shown that just throwing drug users in jail does more harm than good. Can't tackle the issue of drugs addicts requiring rehab instead of jail till you tackle the issue of for profit, privet prisons which create incentives to lock up any and all drug users to the max even if it just for smoking a little pot.

    1|1
    0|0
    • 5d

      Drugs crimes have victims. The seller have drugs addicted as victims. Often the drug customers have mental illnesses and hears a lot of propaganda from the sellers. You can also be forced to sell drugs for others.

  • Yep u should still send em to jail

    1|0
    0|2

Recommended myTakes

Loading...