NCJ Number
15304
Date Published
1974
Length
158 pages
Annotation
A LOOK AT SO-CALLED VICTIMLESS CRIMES FROM THE VIEWPOINTS OF A SOCIOLOGIST AND A PHILOSOPHER, WITH AGREEMENTS ON DECRIMINALIZATION OF SUCH ACTS AS PROSTITUTION AND GAMBLING, BUT ARGUED FROM DIFFERENT BASES.
Abstract
THE SOCIOLOGIST SCHUR DEFINES VICTIMLESS CRIMES AS THOSE WHICH INVOLVE THE EXCHANGE OF GOODS OR SERVICES BY WILLING PARTICIPANTS WHERE THE ACT CAUSES NO OVERT INJURY TO THE PROPERTY OR PERSON OF ANY NOT CONSENTING TO THE ACT. SCHUR ARGUES THAT PROHIBITORY LEGISLATION EXPANDS RATHER THAN DECREASES THE HARMFUL CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH ACTS BOTH FOR PARTICIPANTS AND THE LARGER SOCIETY IN TERMS OF COST, WASTE OF TIME AND MANPOWER, AND THE DEVALUATION OF PERSONAL WORTH AND GOALS OF PARTICIPANTS. THE PHILOSOPHER BEDAU ARGUES AGAINST SCHUR'S CONCEPTS OF ACTS TO BE INCLUDED UNDER THE RUBRIC OF VICTIMLESS CRIMES AS WELL AS THE TERM VICTIMLESS CRIMES ITSELF. HE MAINTAINS THAT THE DETERMINATION OF THE FACT OR EXTENT OF VICTIMIZATION IS AN IMPOSSIBLE CRITERION FOR ASSESSING AN ACT AS IS THE UTILITARIAN MEASURE OF THE DEGREE OF SOCIAL HARM OR GOOD. BEDAU ARGUES EACH ACT MUST BE VIEWED INDEPENDENT OF BROAD CLASSIFICATIONS WHERE LEGISLATIVE GENERALIZATIONS ARE APPLIED. IF A PARTICULAR ACT HARMS ONLY THOSE ADULTS WHO KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY CHOOSE TO DO IT, BEDAU HOLDS IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO PROHIBITION.