Victimless Crimes

USFREEDOM911 said:
I never said anything about a perfect societal justice; nor did I suggest of insinuate such.

You seem to be suggesting that the alcohol abuser or drug user's behavior, only affects themself.
Click to expand...
No, I am not saying that.

But what are you implying? That because an addicts behavior affects others, those others are "victims" of the people supplying the addict? Is that where you are getting your claim that drug sales are not a victimless crime?

I am asking this in all earnestness. Because we seem to have come to a disconnect. You have made the statement that the drug trade is not a victimless crime. I have, admittedly, made some assumption about what you mean by that statement, and it now seems at least some of those assumptions were incorrect.

So, please explain exactly what you mean by the statement "these are not victimless crimes". Who iss, according to your opinion, the victims of the drug trade? I believe I have already explained who I believe are the victims of a drug trade made illegal. Who would be the victims of a legal drug trade?
 
Last edited:
Good Luck said:
No, I am not saying that.

But what are you implying? That because an addicts behavior affects others, those others are "victims" of the people supplying the addict? Is that where you are getting your claim that drug sales are not a victimless crime?

I am asking this in all earnestness. Because we seem to have come to a disconnect. You have made the statement that the drug trade is not a victimless crime. I have, admittedly, made some assumption about what you mean by that statement, and it now seems at least some of those assumptions were incorrect.

So, please explain exactly what you mean by the statement "these are not victimless crimes". Who iss, according to your opinion, the victims of the drug trade? I believe I have already explained who I believe are the victims of a drug trade made illegal. Who would be the victims of a legal drug trade?
Click to expand...

You've misread and I'm not sure why, my comments.
I don't believe I've implied that the drug dealer makes a victim of his buyers.
You stated that this is a victimless crime and I disagreed.
Do you not find the children, family, and friends of a substance abuser, to be victims??
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You've misread and I'm not sure why, my comments.
I don't believe I've implied that the drug dealer makes a victim of his buyers.
You stated that this is a victimless crime and I disagreed.
Do you not find the children, family, and friends of a substance abuser, to be victims??
Click to expand...
Yes, but they victims of substance abuse, not the crime of selling/using those substances society has deemed to be illegal.

Children, spouses, other family members, friends and co-workers are also victims of alcoholism, which is legal. So once again, it is not the legality of the substance that creates the victims through abuse, but the abuse of the substance itself.

Therefore, the "crime" of dealing in forbidden drugs is still victimless.
 
Good Luck said:
Yes, but they victims of substance abuse, not the crime of selling/using those substances society has deemed to be illegal.

Children, spouses, other family members, friends and co-workers are also victims of alcoholism, which is legal. So once again, it is not the legality of the substance that creates the victims through abuse, but the abuse of the substance itself.

Therefore, the "crime" of dealing in forbidden drugs is still victimless.
Click to expand...

Are you then offering that you believe that there will be less victims (of those that abuse) if it's made legal, then there are now.
If you want to debate alcoholism, I would prefer for it to have it's own thread.

Your analogy of selling/using, is in error; because they do create victims; ie: what about the family of the seller??
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Are you then offering that you believe that there will be less victims (of those that abuse) if it's made legal, then there are now.
If you want to debate alcoholism, I would prefer for it to have it's own thread.

Your analogy of selling/using, is in error; because they do create victims; ie: what about the family of the seller??
Click to expand...
No, I am not arguing there would be fewer victims of those who abuse drugs if drugs were legalized. But you'd have a hard time arguing that there would be more.

As for the families of the SELLERS? That is EXACTLY what I am talking about. The seller of LEGAL drugs bears no stigmata, and neither does the family. But by making a drug illegal, the LAW creates victims. The term "victimless" refers specifically to the action which is made illegal. The selling and buying of certain drugs is illegal, but the transaction itself has no victim. It is not until those actions are made illegal that victims are created, from the families of those caught and prosecuted, to the violence inherent in defending an illegal trade, etc. etc. etc.

And what are the BENEFITS of these laws? Can you point to any evidence that illegalizing drugs has diminished their use in any given section of the population? Can you point out any evidence that people are better off with these drugs relegated to a violent black market?

But the COSTS of the laws are apparent throughout our society, from the unsafe streets taken over by drug gangs to the drive by shootings, to the over crowded prisons. It is a HEAVY cost for little to no demonstrable benefit.
 
Last edited:
Good Luck said:
No, I am not arguing there would be fewer victims of those who abuse drugs if drugs were legalized. But you'd have a hard time arguing that there would be more.

As for the families of the SELLERS? That is EXACTLY what I am talking about. The seller of LEGAL drugs bears no stigmata, and neither does the family. But by making a drug illegal, the LAW creates victims. The term "victimless" refers specifically to the action which is made illegal. The selling and buying of certain drugs is illegal, but the transaction itself has no victim. It is not until those actions are made illegal that victims are created, from the families of those caught and prosecuted, to the violence inherent in defending an illegal trade, etc. etc. etc.

And what are the BENEFITS of these laws? Can you point to any evidence that illegalizing drugs has diminished their use in any given section of the population? Can you point out any evidence that people are better off with these drugs relegated to a violent black market?

But the COSTS of the laws are apparent throughout our society, from the unsafe streets taken over by drug gangs to the drive by shootings, to the over crowded prisons. It is a HEAVY cost for little to no demonstrable benefit.
Click to expand...


1. So since there might be same, we should legalize it and see what occurs??

2. So make murder legal, that way thier family's won't have to bear the shame, and what about embezzlers, and why not just about anything else that thinks it's OK to do??

3. Since crime seems to be on the rise, in any number of areas, I guess we should legalize carjacking and that way people can just buy parts at a better market value, then the parts store.

4. Is running a stop sign, when there's no traffice, really a crime?? I mean, who does it hurt??

I work with youth who have been using drugs, since they were young; so you tell me how making them legal is going to stop this from happening and just maybe I'll buy into your ideas; because most of these youth are getting them from their parents or older relation. Oh, this also includes alcohol.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1. So since there might be same, we should legalize it and see what occurs??

2. So make murder legal, that way thier family's won't have to bear the shame, and what about embezzlers, and why not just about anything else that thinks it's OK to do??

3. Since crime seems to be on the rise, in any number of areas, I guess we should legalize carjacking and that way people can just buy parts at a better market value, then the parts store.

4. Is running a stop sign, when there's no traffice, really a crime?? I mean, who does it hurt??

I work with youth who have been using drugs, since they were young; so you tell me how making them legal is going to stop this from happening and just maybe I'll buy into your ideas; because most of these youth are getting them from their parents or older relation. Oh, this also includes alcohol.
Click to expand...
Why do you keep putting up ridiculous assertions as summaries of my arguments?

1) No, that is NOT the reason I support legalization of most (but not all) recreational drugs. There is no indication what would happen with addiction rates one way or the other. But we have historical FACTS showing us the cost vs benefit relationship with these kinds of laws. You think the deaths, the violence, and all that goes with the drug black market is worth an UNKNOWN factor of MAYBE it has a negative effect on addiction?

2) Stupidity is unbecoming.

3) Same as 2. I have CLEARLY stated my reasons for legalization. They have NOTHING to do with the "they'll do it anyway" argument you keep strawmanning.

4) You have experience with drug addiction. I have experience in alcoholism - which is actually the same thing, just specified to the substance used. Know what alcoholism rates were among Native Americans in the 60s? Do you think they were any better during prohibition? Again, history indicates there would be little difference.

But again, the anticipation of little difference is NOT a reason, by itself, for legalization. However, the historically proven fact that violence and associated crimes of the black market would significantly diminish WITHOUT any proven indicators there would be a rise in addiction among youth; the COMBINATION of factors is what makes for the reason.

We KNOW, due to our experience with prohibition, we can achieve a lot of positive results in our society by legalizing and regulating alcohol. Crime rates all over would diminish, prison populations would drop by 60% or more, etc. For every addicted youth you and those like you have treated, there are probably two or more deaths, and innumerable jail sentences brought about by making drugs illegal. Weight that against and UNKNOWN factor of addiction rates in youth (though history would indicate little change) and we would have a significant net positive effect. Frankly, I'd rather see people like you treating addiction than see doctors treating bullet wounds.
 
Last edited:
Good Luck said:
Why do you keep putting up ridiculous assertions as summaries of my arguments?

1) No, that is NOT the reason I support legalization of most (but not all) recreational drugs. There is no indication what would happen with addiction rates one way or the other. But we have historical FACTS showing us the cost vs benefit relationship with these kinds of laws. You think the deaths, the violence, and all that goes with the drug black market is worht an UNKNOWN factor of MAYBE it has a positive effect on addiction?

2) Stupidity is unbecoming.

3) Same as 2. I have CLEARLY stated my reasons for legalization. They have NOTHING to do with the "they'll do it anyway" argument you keep strawmanning.

4) You have experience with drug addiction. I have experience in alcoholism - which is actually the same thing, just specified to the substance used. Know what alcoholism rates were among Native Americans in the 60s? Do you think they were any better during prohibition? Again, history indicates there would be little difference.

But again, the anticipation of little difference is NOT a reason, by itself, for legalization. However, the historically proven fact that violence and associated crimes of the black market would significantly diminish WITHOUT any proven indicators there would be a rise in addiction among youth; the COMBINATION of factors is what makes for the reason.

We KNOW, due to our experience with prohibition, we can achieve a lot of positive results in our society by legalizing and regulating alcohol. Crime rates all over would diminish, prison populations would drop by 60% or more, etc. For every addicted youth you and those like you have treated, there are probably two or more deaths, and innumerable jail sentences brought about by making drugs illegal. Weight that against and UNKNOWN factor of addition rates in youth (though hisatory would indicate little change) and we would have a significant net positive effect.
Click to expand...


Your entire foundation, is one using the alcohol example as one for legalizing specific drugs.
You have no more ability to show that it would be true, then I do that it would be false.

I'll stop my ""ridiculous assertions", right after you stop your "ridiculous summeries". :pke:

I guess we've reached an impasse, seeing as how you have had to resort to making references as to what you don't agree with as "stupid".
Oh, well, it was worth the try.
 
Good Luck said:
Oh, come on! Are you bored? Because I really don't think your are this stupid.

If theft were legal, it would still be theft. If someone were to steal something from you, it would be theft. Whatever the thief takes from you are stolen goods. If it were legal all that would mean is you'd have no criminal justice system available to you to find the thief, prosecute them, and possibly get your property back.

If the thief sells what he stole from you, he is still selling stolen goods even if doing so were legal. Being legal, you'd have no legal recourse against those who deal in stolen goods, but they'd still be dealing in stolen goods BECAUSE THEY WERE STOLEN! Legality has nothing to do with them being stolen.
Click to expand...

Trust me he is that stupid.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Your entire foundation, is one using the alcohol example as one for legalizing specific drugs.
You have no more ability to show that it would be true, then I do that it would be false.

I'll stop my ""ridiculous assertions", right after you stop your "ridiculous summeries". :pke:

I guess we've reached an impasse, seeing as how you have had to resort to making references as to what you don't agree with as "stupid".
Oh, well, it was worth the try.
Click to expand...
I made a genuine attempt to understand what you were saying when it became apparent I was misunderstanding you.

Have you done the same?

As for my assertions, can you explain exactly why legalization of recreational drugs would NOT result in a collapse of the drug black market and all the ancillary crimes of violence. Can you explain how legalizing recreational drugs would NOT result in a vast reduction of pressure on our prisons? My assertions are based on the obvious: the drug black market is causing enormous levels of violence and other black market associated crimes. Remove the need for a black market, and the market collapses, and the associated crime rates with it.

While the above is plain logic, the anticipated results are also borne out by the experience of prohibition. We created a black market with our laws, which resulted in massive ancillary crime, and which collapsed with the repeal of prohibition.

Your assertion that use of drugs by youth, and corresponding increase in additions, is NOT borne out, either by logic or by experience. I do sympathize with your experiences dealing with addiction - and I laud your choice to make that dedication to our youth. But I also firmly believe your fears of rampant addiction resulting from legalization and regulation of recreations drugs is unfounded.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Should we then do away with the laws that prevent children from being exploited??

I mean, why do they need laws to protect them?
Click to expand...
I love it, when liberals resort to invoking the children, conservatives mock it. But when it serves a purpose conservatives will do the same thing and then condemn people who call it for what it is. Children also smoke cigarettes, even with the more stringent state laws, perhaps would should just make cigarettes illegal too, I mean that is your point here right? It is nanny statism, telling us that we need protection from ourselves that created the modern day mafia. Before prohibition they were a small times numbers and protection racket. Marijuana, illegal marijuana is still the number cash crop for the Mexican Cartels. The insistence that we keep it illegal is benefiting them, not harming them.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
While you're correct; do you really think that drug dealers are going to quit, just because it's now legal.
Hell, there are still moonshiners.
Click to expand...
There are still some, but no where near the number there once was. One of the guys I work with is from North Carolina. I went back home with him to visit and see the sights. We decided we wanted to get some moonshine but every person he knew that used to make it has stopped. Moonshine really isn't very good and the market for it has gone away because it is easier for people to get it even in dry counties by just going to the next county and getting it. The Moonshine comparison is weak.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
1. So since there might be same, we should legalize it and see what occurs??

2. So make murder legal, that way thier family's won't have to bear the shame, and what about embezzlers, and why not just about anything else that thinks it's OK to do??

3. Since crime seems to be on the rise, in any number of areas, I guess we should legalize carjacking and that way people can just buy parts at a better market value, then the parts store.

4. Is running a stop sign, when there's no traffice, really a crime?? I mean, who does it hurt??

I work with youth who have been using drugs, since they were young; so you tell me how making them legal is going to stop this from happening and just maybe I'll buy into your ideas; because most of these youth are getting them from their parents or older relation. Oh, this also includes alcohol.
Click to expand...
You are being purposely obtuse. It does not make you look clever or smart, it makes you look like someone that has lost a debate but continues to argue strawmen ad absurdium.
 
So as you can see from my picture above, I smoke cigars. Increases my risk for mouth and throat cancer and perhaps just a bit for lung cancer. If I were to die of these diseases it would be my own damn stupid fault. But using your logic, my children, wife parents are also all victims of my early passing. So why not make cigars illegal. Cigarettes too. Shit they REALLY aren't good for you. Lets pass a prohibition on them as well. Prohibition has always worked so well.
 
Good Luck said:
I made a genuine attempt to understand what you were saying when it became apparent I was misunderstanding you.

Have you done the same?

As for my assertions, can you explain exactly why legalization of recreational drugs would NOT result in a collapse of the drug black market and all the ancillary crimes of violence.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. No one goes to a speakeasy anymore, because there aren't any. Granted, if I ever opened an establishment, I would sooo name it a speakeasy instead of a bar or pub, because it would be kickass to do so, but it still wouldn't be the same thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top