Opinion Victimless Crime? Do you think there is no such thing?

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by MikeMcMann, Mar 29, 2019.

  1. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    This came up in another thread but is not a subject of the thread. i've always seen a very reactionary reply on this topic by some of 'there are no such thing as victimless crimes'. Do you believe that? Accept that?

    the typical example people give to argue for a victimless crime is a pot smoker. That then bleeds into the up stream and down stream problems that come with drug production and use and muddies the discussion.

    Most of these discussion end up circular as most point to the harm and victims caused by trying to enforce the law and say 'see victims' when those victims would not necessarily exist if the law was not in place. So I see them as victims of the 'law' and not the 'act'. What i would call 'tangential' victims.


    --------

    So how about this instead as an example where I am unable to identify even tangential victims.


    In many jurisdiction Big Agri has lobbied effectively to make the consumption of certain things illegal.

    One such example is Unpasteurized Cow's milk under the boogeyman that only their mass consumer product pasteurized milk is safe. Laws were passed in many jurisdiction making Unpasteurized Milk illegal.

    Selling it to the public could see a farmer charged with a crime. However the farmers who owned the cow could drink it themselves.

    to get around a loophole in the law and its intent, Farmers (or their lawyers) figured out the law stated 'cow ownership' was how the law defined who could buy it and drink it legally. So for consumers who wanted it Farmers started selling shares (ownership) in their cows.

    If someone was an owner of a fraction of the herd, even if for just $1/yr, they could then buy milk directly from the farmer.

    Who is the victim of this crime if that same farmer, sells a bottle to his neighbour, who may not have signed up to his cow share model which is only in place to skirt a silly law?
     
    Fawlty and Kafir-kun like this.
  2. luckyshot

    luckyshot The ONLY iPotWR Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2016
    Messages:
    8,724
    Likes Received:
    23,618
    Location:
    Location, Location
    I think the philosophical answer is that everyone is the victim when respect for the law is weakened. The idea that there is a "silly law" is, itself, the harm done.

    Not that I subscribe to this way of thinking, mind you, but I think that is a reasonable answer.
     
  3. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    I don't know if many would agree with that or think that is the proper application or intonation of the law.

    I am speaking specifically that when this is discussed they are considering the concept of 'if we all do not respect the law we weaken the institution and thus are all victims'.

    I could be wrong but I disagree that is what people are discussing.


    I think when people say there are no victimless crimes, they are in fact looking at the downstream and upstream effects of most actions and based on the activity being illegal it often upstream creates black or grey markets that involve real crime and victims and downstream may impact a persons health, etc in a way that may impact others.

    that exact discussion on personal marijuana use in another thread (and other discussions) is what prompted me to post this one. One person argued that because of gangs, etc upstream and sickness and abuse due to addiction downstream and some consequences that can come from that, that in fact marijuana is not a victimless crime. that debate will never be settled as it depends on how each person views those upstream and downstream consequences and agreement will not be had.

    I've tried to offer an example without upstream and downstream tangential consequences. Just a law prohibited an activity that is not harmful to anyone outside the normal health risk to the consumer that is not different than most food health risks.
     
    Fawlty likes this.
  4. grimballer

    grimballer Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    12,929
    Likes Received:
    9,122
    That’s like saying taking something from you wouldn’t be considered a crime if the law was not in place

    The fact that there’s a law in place n you choose to break it regardless means that you contribute (directly or indirectly) to someone else being a victim
     
  5. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    be specific then.

    Who is the victim if i buy a bottle milk illegally (i did not fill out the paperwork and pay the $1/yr for fractional ownership) from the Farmer selling his milk to others legally.
     
    Kafir-kun likes this.
  6. EradiatedHaggis

    EradiatedHaggis Yellow Card Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,568
    Likes Received:
    5,408
    This is false which is why there is a definition of it.

    https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Victimless+Crimes

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victimless_crime

    Almost all current victimless crimes are so because of some moral standard made into law and they are called victimless because no one is harmed by them other than the person doing the crime.
     
  7. grimballer

    grimballer Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    12,929
    Likes Received:
    9,122
    I was talking about the weed example...

    Here I’m not sure what are the laws in place?

    Do you get in trouble for buying that milk or farmer for selling it to you?

    If “studies” have found that non pasteurized could potentially be dangerous for general pop, then laws are in place to protect general public.

    Now what you talking about is a loophole farmers found to sell their non pasteurized milk.
     
  8. WhiteMousse

    WhiteMousse Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,397
    Likes Received:
    4,436
    I used to think so and while I won't be adamant about it, the older I get the less likely I think it is.

    People have told me that taking cash from the Chipotle register doesn't hurt individual people- it only hurts companies. I won't try to prove it because it seems to me there are a lot of moving parts to that kind of analysis, parts to which I'm not privy, but that seems to be an oversimplification. Companies are made of people.

    Some people ask what I think of taking the customer's cash for a sale, which they've willingly given to you, and then discounting the actual amount due by utilizing a Groupon or whatever, and then pocketing the difference. I don't know. Dishonesty is dishonesty, and it always hurts the one who is being dishonest.
     
  9. Renard

    Renard Black Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    5,121
    Likes Received:
    9,520
    Raw milk is available in many European countries. In France they even sell it in vending machines, that's how banal it is. You don't see them dropping dead, do you? They also have raw milk cheese and bunch of goodies that are banned in the US for no reason.

    The laws against raw milk in North America are 100% due to big food corporations afraid to lose money from selling inferior products.
     
    Kafir-kun and MikeMcMann like this.
  10. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    Weed (drugs) are the example i want to avoid as people just have to agree to disagree over upstream and downstreams effects and how they apply.


    The Milk example is something that came about as law due to Big Agri lobbying. They wanted to cut competition and force everything through a centralized model.

    they used fear of 'unpasteurized milk has risk' which it does if not properly handled. But that applies to ANY and ALL food items. Pasteurized milk also has risk when not processed or handled properly. All sorts of people now utilize the legal loophole to buy shares in cows so they can get 'raw' milk that is not pasteurized.

    other such examples I could put forth are sex laws that are lobbied for by religious folk. Sodomy laws being the easiest example. In one state it might still be on the books as illegal. In the next State over that law may be off the books.

    If a husband butsexes his consenting wife in a state where its legal, is their no victim but in the State over where the husband is doing the exact same thing with his consenting wife, there is a victim??
     
  11. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    Well you have taken this on some wacky tangents.

    You have people trying to rationalize blatant examples of theft where someone on the other genuinely has a loss, but they just say the one losing is not important and are saying that changes your view on a topic that your example really does not apply to.

    See my example above re a husband and wife and see if that brings you to another position.
     
  12. grimballer

    grimballer Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    12,929
    Likes Received:
    9,122
    Don’t know how many of those “moral standards made into law” are left in today’s western society...

    Still some laws are put in place to protect the public (n I’m not getting into if it’s right or wrong) from “dangerous behaviour” That others might try to emulate

    Like not allowing ppl to walk on a highway, climbing buildings downtown or public intoxication
     
  13. WhiteMousse

    WhiteMousse Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,397
    Likes Received:
    4,436
    Your verbiage is confusing, but I'm perceiving a standoffish attitude at best, arguing in bad faith at worst.

    I said at the beginning that I was uncertain about my position.
     
  14. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    Yup.

    Raw milk is more susceptible to bacteria contamination and growth within the milk when not handled properly. If the cow is milked by hand then dirty hands or teets that have any bacteria on them can transfer that bacteria into the milk, it will grow in the milk, and can cause illness.

    By pasteurizing milk, the process of heating up briefly to a very high temp, will typically kill most bacteria, if it managed to get in. Thus making the mild more safe compared to its peer. It also kills of a lot of the nutritional benefits of the milk too though and thins it which impacts taste for many.

    So the question of fractionally 'lower risk' in pasteurized milk versus greater health benefits and taste in 'raw' milk is one people want to decide for themselves and why so many get around the law in N.America.
     
  15. grimballer

    grimballer Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    12,929
    Likes Received:
    9,122

    Sure n some ppl eat raw meat n eggs...

    https://www.fda.gov/food/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm079516.htm
     
  16. phoenixikki

    phoenixikki Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2012
    Messages:
    4,041
    Likes Received:
    6,239
    Pot smokers more often than not co-finance drug trafficking which is responsible for ton of other related crimes like robbery, extortion, kidnapping, forced prostitution and all the suffering and death caused by it.
     
  17. MikeMcMann

    MikeMcMann Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    18,876
    Likes Received:
    22,762
    laws exist in non western societies so the debate about victims is equally valid there.

    And its logically fallacy to keep pointing to laws where victims exists to try and substantiate a position that there is no such thing as a victimless crime.

    even if we examined 1000 laws and agreed 999 of them had victims but 1 did not that would substantiate the position there is such a thing as a victimless crime. Pointing at the 999 with victims does not counter that.

    lets all concede most crimes do have victims to get passed that.
     
  18. EradiatedHaggis

    EradiatedHaggis Yellow Card Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,568
    Likes Received:
    5,408
    Umm...prostitution was outlawed due to religious morals, drug laws stem from the documentary Reefer Madness (originally called TELL YOUR CHILDREN!) made in 1936...gambling also due to "morals"...this is why the wiki article talks about how morals were/are behind most victimless crimes. It was the reason behind outlawing homosexuality, sodomy, sex toys, pornography, adultery...the list is long.
     
  19. grimballer

    grimballer Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Messages:
    12,929
    Likes Received:
    9,122
    K, now you’re talking about unenforced laws

    I think in Canada until recently women were not allowed to wear pants, I think they changed that law few years back.

    I can guarantee you no woman went to jail for wearing pants
     
  20. EradiatedHaggis

    EradiatedHaggis Yellow Card Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,568
    Likes Received:
    5,408
    Which can only happen if its against the law...legalize it, its a victimless crime as a person choosing to smoke weed is no different than a person choosing to shove a big mac in his gob.
     
    Vitor CroCop and phoenixikki like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.