In response to:

Another Drug War Nightmare

Paulus Textor Wrote: Nov 06, 2012 10:34 AM
....of "victimhood" to include third parties who had no part in the transaction, then we enter the world when thousands of activities we do not ordinarily call crimes, become crimes by virtue of the fact they create "victims." Thus, if one argues that the poor children of a drug addict who spends his money on cocaine instead of bread are "victims" of the crime, then should we not also criminalize alcohol, which creates the identical problem? Consider the poor children of a father who is lazy, and doesn't work enough to buy bread. Should his laziness be deemed a "crime" because his children are the "victims" of his sloth? Indeed, by these terms, just about any negative human trait should be construed as a "crime", since you can.....
MoreFreedom Wrote: Nov 06, 2012 12:16 PM
I agree completely Paulus. I'd go further, and stat that creating laws prohibiting voluntary acts among consenting adults, is criminal in itself.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Nov 06, 2012 10:38 AM
....(SCOTUS-like) perceive penumbras of "victimhood" in human traits like laziness, poor money management, or over-consumption of saturated fats and sugary soft drinks.

As to these last examples, need we point out that leftists in our society are ALREADY taking action against these victimless "crimes"?
The government has the power to seize your assets for a crime you did not commit. That's essentially the argument being made in a Boston federal court this week as the U.S. Department of Justice and Tewksbury (Mass.) Police Department work to take Motel Caswell away from its owner, Russ Caswell.

The libertarian-leaning legal team Institute for Justice took on Caswell's case pro bono, attorney Scott Bullock told me, because this case "is really taking civil forfeiture where it has not gone in the past."

The government wants to take Caswell's motel, not because Caswell is guilty of dealing drugs or other crimes...

Related Tags: Drug War War