Why does the US have so many victimless crime laws?

[piasabird]

Using salt or sugar can damage your body, so we must outlaw salt and sugar.

I can use the same logic for Hot Sauce giving people ulcers.

Coffee is addictive so lets outlaw all Coffee.

 

[tcG]

Not really. Just make it so that seatbelts must only be worn when driving on public roads. If you get into an accident on your property without a seatbelt, your problem. If you get into an accident on a public road without a seatbelt, it's a public issue. It's similar to how being drunk in public is legal in the privacy of your own home but not in public.

The libertarian response to this is that the fact that society is affected by the negligence of one person not wearing their seat belt and getting hurt as a result is a problem with the way the medical and insurance system is set up, not with the negligent action itself.

I also don't really see why seatbelt laws are being defended on the basis of their applying to public places. If anything, public places should be subject to less laws and liberty restrictions since it applies to everybody in an overarching and totalitarian manner, as compared with private places which respect liberty much more since their rules are determined by many individuals and because you can easily leave a small patch of private property. If making the public/private distinction is an attempt to elucidate the "society is harmed, so it's not a victimless crime" argument, then it fails because the "society is harmed" argument could be applied whether the action in question happens in public or in private. So, I don't see the reason for the distinction in this argument.

 

[Ketchup]

Although I have never tried it, my wife and I have been saying for years that they should make pot/crack/etc legal and tax the crap out of it.

When people are drunk and get behind the wheel, bad things can happen, just like it can with other substances. At some point, personal responsibility needs to step in, as apposed to passing laws that 'punish' everybody. just because a few people choose to make stupid choices.

 

[Jaskalas]

Not really. Just make it so that seatbelts must only be worn when driving on public roads. If you get into an accident on your property without a seatbelt, your problem. If you get into an accident on a public road without a seatbelt, it's a public issue. It's similar to how being drunk in public is legal in the privacy of your own home but not in public.

Funny how the government gets to do whatever it wants on 'public' land, then it goes around buying / paying for everything. Are you certain your own home isn't owned by Fannie or Freddie? Technically that's public land too.

Heck, forget the land. Healthcare. Your BODY is bought and paid for by society. What happens to it is public interest.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

We're talking about victimless crimes. Burglary, theft, rape, pirating, and murder are not victimless crimes.

So it only applies to victimless crimes?

Browsing child porn is a victimless crime, isn't it? I mean, you aren't producing it...just consuming it. So why is that illegal? It is hard to enforce.

I think we all have a very different idea of what a victimless crime is. Most people have such a myopic view of themselves that they cannot see the actions they take do take a toll on society. The rest of us are victims.

Someone rides a motorcycle without a helmet. That person gets into a wreck and is brain damaged. They are on medicare for the rest of their lives. We pay for their poor choice of not wearing a helmet with our taxes.

 

[tcG]

Although I have never tried it, my wife and I have been saying for years that they should make pot/crack/etc legal and tax the crap out of it.

When people are drunk and get behind the wheel, bad things can happen, just like it can with other substances. At some point, personal responsibility needs to step in, as apposed to passing laws that 'punish' everybody. just because a few people choose to make stupid choices.

I recommend trying pot. You sound like a reasonable chap, it would probably be fun.

 

[Ketchup]

I recommend trying pot. You sound like a reasonable chap, it would probably be fun.

Nah, just one more thing to get addicted to.

 

[zsdersw]

So it only applies to victimless crimes?

Browsing child porn is a victimless crime, isn't it? I mean, you aren't producing it...just consuming it. So why is that illegal? It is hard to enforce.

I think we all have a very different idea of what a victimless crime is. Most people have such a myopic view of themselves that they cannot see the actions they take do take a toll on society. The rest of us are victims.

Someone rides a motorcycle without a helmet. That person gets into a wreck and is brain damaged. They are on medicare for the rest of their lives. We pay for their poor choice of not wearing a helmet with our taxes.

That should be changed.

 

[Ketchup]

We pay for their poor choice of not wearing a helmet with our taxes.

Wouldn't that be insurance rather than taxes? Plus, here in SC it is legal to ride without a helmet. Not saying it's a good idea, but it's legal.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Wouldn't that be insurance rather than taxes? Plus, here in SC it is legal to ride without a helmet. Not saying it's a good idea, but it's legal.

Not if they are on government assistance. Who do you think pays for Medicare? Check your pay stub.

Maybe we need a subset of laws. Victimless laws with the caveat that no aid will be rendered. Not wearing a seatbelt? Well, you need to walk to the hospital or find another ride. Not wearing a helmet? We will gladly tow your motorcycle for you. Let stupidity be its own toll on those who are too dumb to do what is good for them.

One other thought - many of you are stating things like "since alcohol is legal, then so should drugs because alcohol does more damage blah blah blah." First, maybe alcohol does more damage because it is legal and easy to get. Second, maybe alcohol shouldn't be legal. Think of it from the other direction - we should outlaw alcohol because other drugs are also illegal.

 

[Paul98]

What about all the gangs that are illegally selling drugs and shoot peope on the street killing your child in the cross-fire. Drugs are not a victimless crime. What is happening now is the drug dealer will sell your child heroine claiming there is no weed available. That is a death sentence to most people.

By what you have said weed shouldn't be illegal to make or use.

 

[Paul98]

We are well on our way to living in a society like the future in demolition man.

 

[Ketchup]

We are well on our way to living in a society like the future in demolition man.

Then just go ahead and freeze me now, as I would like to wake up on the other side of it. I think I laughed must more at that movie than the writers intended.

 

[dank69]

... First, maybe alcohol does more damage because it is legal and easy to get. Second, maybe alcohol shouldn't be legal. Think of it from the other direction - we should outlaw alcohol because other drugs are also illegal.

 

[nehalem256]

Wouldn't that be insurance rather than taxes? Plus, here in SC it is legal to ride without a helmet. Not saying it's a good idea, but it's legal.

And when the insurance company prices their policies they take into account that x% of people will ride without a helmet, which causes higher rates. Resulting in responsible people subsidizing idiots who dont wear a helmet.

 

[BoberFett]

So it only applies to victimless crimes?

Well that is the topic of this whole thread...

Browsing child porn is a victimless crime, isn't it? I mean, you aren't producing it...just consuming it. So why is that illegal? It is hard to enforce.

There are reasonable arguments out there that while producing child porn should be a criminal act, viewing it should not. Look them up.

I think we all have a very different idea of what a victimless crime is. Most people have such a myopic view of themselves that they cannot see the actions they take do take a toll on society. The rest of us are victims.

I'm a victim of your posts, we should probably ban you from the internet.

Sorry, but the "toll on society" excuse is a thin one. From the moment your cells begin dividing in your mother's womb you had an affect on society. If your mother chose not to drink or smoke while pregnant, just consider that affect on commerce! Does that mean that there is no limit to what government can order you to do? Are we all slaves to society?

Someone rides a motorcycle without a helmet. That person gets into a wreck and is brain damaged. They are on medicare for the rest of their lives. We pay for their poor choice of not wearing a helmet with our taxes.

No, society is paying for the poor choice of creating the Medicare system, not the accident.

 

[Ketchup]

And when the insurance company prices their policies they take into account that x% of people will ride without a helmet, which causes higher rates. Resulting in responsible people subsidizing idiots who dont wear a helmet.

I think that statement applies to all insurance - paying for other people's mistakes. I know, sometimes we are paying for natural occurrences (storms, etc) and theft, but most of the time, it is the stupidity.

 

[SMOGZINN]

One other thought - many of you are stating things like "since alcohol is legal, then so should drugs because alcohol does more damage blah blah blah." First, maybe alcohol does more damage because it is legal and easy to get. Second, maybe alcohol shouldn't be legal. Think of it from the other direction - we should outlaw alcohol because other drugs are also illegal.

We already tried that, Prohibition did not work out too well for us. Partially because alcohol is impossible to effectively ban. If I set a jug of sugar water in a cool dark place for a few days I get alcohol. Put it in a freezer for a few hours and pour off what doesn't freeze, and I have high proof alcohol.

I think we all have a very different idea of what a victimless crime is. Most people have such a myopic view of themselves that they cannot see the actions they take do take a toll on society. The rest of us are victims.

Every action takes a toll on society. You are giving a slippery slope argument. No matter what you name I can link it to some cost to society that would allow me to ban it under your theory. It is simply a justification for enforcing your morals on others.

Someone rides a motorcycle without a helmet. That person gets into a wreck and is brain damaged. They are on medicare for the rest of their lives. We pay for their poor choice of not wearing a helmet with our taxes.

Turn right on red, get into a wreck, be on medicare for the rest of your lives. BAN turning right on red!
Drive 60 MPH, get into a wreck, be on medicare for the rest of your lives. BAN driving faster then 40 MPH (the effectiveness of seat belts reduce drastically at greater speeds)
Actually, we should probably just ban cars altogether. 1 in 5 drivers will be in an accident this year, the cost of that to our society is massive.

 

[Incorruptible]

This is what happens with dumb liberals in charge and big government