I consider myself a proponent of the prison abolition movement, but this really isn't a radical sentiment. Imprisoning those who commit victimless crimes is patently regressive.

Why the fuck does it still go on?

Like drug dealing?

I was thinking more along the lines of possession and consumption, but sure, drug dealing could fit.

What would you suggest society do instead?

What would you suggest society do instead?

Well, decriminalising a bunch of harmless behaviour would probably be a good start.

As for socially undesirable behaviour (like dealing heroin or krokodil), a hefty fine would probably work.

Quote from: Gatsby on September 21, 2014, 04:44:20 PM

What would you suggest society do instead?

Well, decriminalising a bunch of harmless behaviour would probably be a good start.

As for socially undesirable behaviour (like dealing heroin or krokodil), a hefty fine would probably work.

Yeah I agree, sending someone to prison for selling drugs is pretty pointless. Putting thousands in a prison does more harm(economically for the nation) than it does good.

I'm not saying drugs aren't bad but you should have the right to do whatever you want with your body.

There's several reasons for the illegality of victimless crimes. Why imprisonment is the chosen punishment for some has to do with the determined severity of the crime.

My question is "what victimless crime could possibly warrant a prison sentence?". Prisons are horrible places; essentially de facto insane asylums.

The main reason of banning victimless crime is to deter what's known as secondary crime. Using drugs seems fine on its own, but it needs to be obtained which in turn creates a market for it and encourages people to grow, smuggle and deal it. Same argument could be made for watching child pornography, buying stolen goods and others.

The legalisation of drugs allows for legitimate avenues of supply to open up, and the medicalisation of harder drugs allows for better monitoring and treatment of such issues. Addiction is a medical, not criminal issue, and drugs get their profitability from their illegality.

Finally, there's the interest of society and the issues with determining what exactly is victimless, such as attempted crimes.

The distinction between drug possession or assisted suicide and attempted murder is startling, even if both are victimless. The latter has a quite clear, intended, determined victim who, in essence, got lucky.

Then you'll upset the gun-grabbers by removing any laws against owning "hur assult wepuns"