Paulus Textor Wrote:
Nov 06, 2012 10:28 AM
Quick note: When we refer to drug possession as a "victimless crime," some people misconstrue the meaning, saying, "Wait! There ARE victims of drug possession! Look at all the poor children of parents who spend money on drugs instead of groceries!" This claim avoids the essential issue: when we say "victimless" we mean that the alleged, direct "victim" of the "crime" (the buyer of drugs) does not ordinarily report the transaction to the police. There can be no "victim" in a voluntary transaction (leaving off side issues such as duress, which by definition make the transaction INvoluntary). Now, those who argue that drugs create "victims" in the form of third parties, essentially argue like liberals. If we are to widen the concept....