3 ms·
It sounds like you’re equivocating on the term “victimless crime.” The term is very commonly used to refer to crimes where no people who are directly involved i
by baddox 9y ago
It sounds like you’re equivocating on the term “victimless crime.” The term is very commonly used to refer to crimes where no people who are directly involved in the crime are harmed. It doesn’t mean that the act has literally zero social costs.
Externalities are a completely separate argument. Externalities can apply to actions regardless of their legality, and are completely orthogonal to whether an action is a victimless crime.
- zxcmx 9y agoIt's because I read that the poster's argument was: drugs are a "victimless crime" and therefore regulating drug sales is a market distortion and pointless. My counter-argument was that there are negative externalities to many kinds of drug sales and use. I agree that these concerns are orthogonal but I did not feel that the conclusion was supported by the argument and therefore shifted the field somewhat. I don't think the precise definitions of the terms are central to the discussion. I do wonder if we're getting a bit caught up on regulating versus criminalization.