In society many
people are debating whether or not victimless crimes are harmful.
Some people believe there are true victims and particular
consequences should follow. Others believe these crimes are wrong
in terms of their morality. The history of victimless crimes, the
type of crimes, and societys view on these crimes can offer
evidence as to why these types of crimes are morally wrong and
should be decriminalized. This paper demonstrates that victimless
crimes are morally wrong rather than harmful.
A victimless
crimecan be
described as an act that is illegal, but consensual and lacks a
complaining participant (Veneziano & Veneziano, 1993). Those
that participate in these types of crimes do so willingly and
without force. Victimless crimes have also been referred to as
public order crimes, but there is debate over whether there are
actual victims and whether or not these types of crimes are harmful
(Veneziano, 2014). The common traditional victimless crimes are
gambling, prostitution, and drug use.
show more content
During the
Medieval times, people were punished if crimes were committed
against family and morals. At this time in history all power was
accorded to the Church. The Church would punish those who committed
acts against family and morals, such as adultery and acts of
nonviolent sexual behavior (in-text book). As time went on, the
Monarch courts began to take power over the Church. The crimes
against family and morals became crimes against public morals.
The debate of whether law should play a role in the implementation
of public morals was started by two English scholars, John Stuart
Mill and Sir James F.








Other samples, services and questions:
When you use PaperHelp, you save one valuable — TIME
You can spend it for more important things than paper writing.