Victimless Crime Is a Term

¶ … victimless crime is a term typically used to refer to illegal activities that do not threaten or violate the rights of another individual; consensual acts, gambling, and illicit drug use. The idea comes from a philosophical notion of individual rights and the idea of harm to others, typically consenting adults. The victim, however, in victimless crimes remains controversial. Some see society as the victim; others that laws are intended to protect a group from being adversely affected (Hazard & Dondi, 2004). Thus, there are four possible meanings / interpretations of the idea of victimless:

Consensual crimes -- these cause no real harm to anyone even though they are illegal within the letter of the law; sodomy, for instance.

Crimes in which the damage is focused on the individual perpetrator who, as a consensual adult, has agreed to suffer the consequences (suicide, drug use).

Crimes that have a cost that is shared in an abstract way by a whole society with no clear victim (driving without auto insurance).

Crimes against non-victims, or non-human entities. No real harm occurs or the receipt of the harm is not human (tax evasion) (Wertheimer, 1977).

An essential part of the idea of victimless crimes lies in the legal arguments of consent, individual freedom, and the ability to enforce crimes that are far less serious.

Consent implies that the individual or individuals are sane and have both the cognitive faculties and necessary information to make informed decisions about their actions. Children, or those mentally disabled, would not have such an ability to understand. The idea, though, is that there is a conscious decision made that allows for the "crime" to be committed.

Individual freedom is the belief that there is an inherent freedom for the individual to partake in any actions they chose, with the stimulation that these actions do not impede on the rights of others. This includes actions that could be considered detrimental to the individual (gambling, drugs, etc.) -- because the decision was made at the individual level (Hardaway, 2003).

Too, as the economic and political effects of globalization increase, the definition, prosecution, and attention to victimless crimes may sociologically change. Enforcing morality (e.g. prostitution and gambling), for instance, or black market goods and services may remain technically against the law, but may become so low a priority due to more serious matters. Indeed, international agencies are now taking the approach to crimes like illicit drugs of focusing on the suppliers who fail to pay taxes and thus hurt society, instead of the user. This also includes many of the underground financial crimes that have little societal or economic impact (Friedrichs, 2002). Drug use, specifically, is victimless because it is something the individual chooses to do, can do alone, and unless there is violence involved, does not harm another person. The user may be a victim of their own predilection or addiction, but they are cognizant of the harm and risk, just as someone who has too many drinks. The ancillary factors that surround drug use would go away, this view holds, if drug use was legalized. Further, the idea of morally telling someone else what they may or may not do to and with their bodies is outmoded (Stylianou, 2010).