Do Victimless Crimes only hurt the person who is participating in the activity or does society as a whole suffer as a result of that persons actions?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
“This blog is a place for you to expand on class discussions, discuss current events, and to give your opinion on given topics. You may comment on the opinions of others and build on their thoughts as a group. Each new post will stay current to the theme we are discussing in class and your responses should reflect your growth as a student of Sociology.”
Welcome Back Students
Hello - and welcome to the Sociology class blog for Mr. B. Please register at the bottom of the page so you can begin blogging! Please write down your user name and password in a safe place! Please choose a user name that I can identify!!!!!!! Feel free to explore the old responses to blog questions on the site.
18 comments:
i think that "victimless crimes" can definitely hurt other people. i think society as a whole does suffer from these people's actions. for example, when someone is on drugs, it impairs their judgement and this can definitely affect other people. they might do things that they wouldnt normally do and this could end up hurting other people.
for example, a person i know was high and was driving and kept swirving over the lines. he could have easily gotten into a car accident. this, obviously, would have affected someone besides him. he could have even killed someone, just because he decided to go out and get high.
gambling can also greatly affect people other than the person that does the gambling. some people get so addicted to gambling that they loose their money, cars, and even their houses. this effects both them and their loved ones, as any kind of addiction does.
most of the victimless crimes that we have learned about are likely to lead to addiction. addictions to things such as drugs or gambling effect the person doing them, their families and loved ones, and can, on occasion, effect complete strangers. this in turn effects society as a whole in a negative way.
I agree. I believe that Victimless Crimes hurt both the victim and society as a whole. For example, if someone were an alcoholic wondering around the town of Newington, many people would see and recognize that they were drunk. What if you happen to be taking a walk with your young child that day? What would they think? What would you tell them? It is not only bad for your child to see, but it represents the town very poorly. People often don't think about their actions before they do them, and it definitely effects others.
That is just one example of how a Victimless Crime effects society as a whole, there are many more Victimless Crimes committed daily such as drug use, vagrancy, gambling, vandalizing, prostitution, etc.
Addictive behavior, such as drug use or gambling may cause someone to be less effective in a work environment, or even loose relationships with friends and families.
With that being said, Victimless Crimes do not only hurt the person who is participating in the activity, society as a whole suffers greatly as a result of that persons actions.
I definitely think that 'victimless crimes' hurt both the person participating in the activity and society as a whole. Certain addictions to things like gambling tear apart not only the person responsible but all of the people surrounding that one person. Whether it be the people they work with or their own family; in one way or another it affects both.
Another addictive behavior can be drugs. Drugs are illegal for a reason and that is because it hurts a person, but it also hurts the people around that person.
I talk about addictive behaviors because many victimless crimes lead to addictive behavior. Overall, this is why Victimless crime affects both the person participating and the people around them.
I think that initially it has a greater impact on the individual committing "victimless crimes". For example, someone choosing to partake in gambling might be initially causing oneself to spiral into an obsession; however their actions may affect the family or personal that they're involved in at the time.
I do believe in some cases, such as white collar crimes that they can have a much greater impact on a society. Simply forging checks like we have seen in Catch Me If you Can had a more serious impact on the society because he was stealing money and taking away from economy.
I really think it depends on the severity of the crime one has committed to completely understand the effect on society. The gambling example might be affecting loved ones, but not the society. The casinos make money, due to taxes so it’s not hurting the economy in that respect. However, it’s hurting the family who’s suffering from this simple addiction.
i believe victimless crimes hurt both the person who is participating in the activity, and society as a whole. For example, a person who is prostituing themselves could possibly be initiating another crime such as murder, i belive one of the main reasons prostituin is illegal is to protect the actual prostitute from posibly being physically harmed, in many cases prostitutes are harmed or murdered. Another sufferage prostituion may cause is the spread of sexually transmitted infections which is DEFFINETLY harmful to society. Therefor, i believe that society as a whole suffers as a result of that persons actions' who is participating in a "victimless crime".
I think that society as a whole can hurt other people, because they are hurting themselves but their choices affect their loved ones. Their actions even affect people who dont know them, because for example gambling is said to be a victimless, however if this addicted gambler is a parent they could gamble away life savings and possibly even their children's college funds which affects the world because that child could have been famous and made the world a better place.
Victtimless crimes deffenatly affect more than the peopl ethat do them. the name victimless crime really doesnt make sence because if there isnt a victim how can it be a crime?
Victimless crime affect more than just that person. wether it was from what they actually did such as illegal gambleing to the aftermath of what happened.
As an example of this would be if i were to be involed with illegal gamblinging and i lost all of my money then me and my family would have no money to spend on anything so they would be affected by that.
also if i were to get caught gambling illegany then it would affect my familly because i would have to go to jail or do some other type of community service.
I believe that victimless crimes do affect and ultimately harm other people. Things such as drugs and gambling are great examples of this. Of course, when you use drugs you are putting the people around you at risk. You don't have as much control of your body like when you aren't using. In addition, drug addicts can affect their family. A drug addict would do anything to get what they want, drugs, even if that means selling your car or your house because your so addicted.
In addition, gambling can affect other people as well. Most of the time when you gamble, you lose money instead of winning. Even though this may be true, people find themselves stuck to gambling and can't get rid of the addiction. They could lose thousands of dollars, be in debt, and be in trouble with the wrong people. This was shown at the senior seminar based on gambling. It showed us the consequences of gambling underaged and for being addicted to gambling.
So, ultimately I do believe that victimless crimes aren't very victimless. Crimes such as gambling and drugs definitely do have their victims.
I think that victimless crimes hurt the person participating in the activity and also the society as a whole. For example, if someone is drinking and driving, this could easily affect them because, they could crash and die, but it also affects others because, if the person crashes into someone else and kills them, or if they have friends in the car, then it effects everyone else not just the person driving. This could affect people that you might not even know.
This could also affect other people around you because what if you were a drug addict or addicted to gambling and sell all your kids and family's things just so you could have more money for drugs or to gamble with.
I believe that "victimless crimes" not only cause harm to those participating in the act, but can have a harmful affect on society as a whole. Things such as addiction can not only harm the user but it can also destroy others around them such as their families and friends because of the acts that the potentially commit while being under the influence of their addiction.
For example gambling, can cause a huge problem for those who abuse the privilage. It can send everything that you have in your life spiraling downward and you could loose everything as you can with other types of addictions such as drugs and alcohol. On a whole, I believe that victimless crimes have not only a huge effect on an individual but also on those in society.
In my opinion, there isn’t a way in which victimless crime can affect only the person taking part in the activity. If someone is driving drunk and gets into a car accident, they would cause damage to themselves (not necessarily physically- probably financially), the other person, vehicle, etc. Same goes with drug use. Even if no one gets physically hurt during the act (besides the person doing the drug), people are affected by it. I think of this as sort of a chain. Someone who sells drugs affects the person using, while the person using is probably hurting their family members or friends. Because of these crimes, laws and punishment must be enforced, therefore affecting society as a whole.
I think the victimless are not victimless they not only hurt the people who are committing the crime but they can hurt the loved ones that are involved in the person’s life. In my opinion the two “victimless crimes” that effects people the most are gambling and drug use. Gambling may seem like it only hurts the person that is spending the money but over time it can affect a whole family by bringing them into debt or even losing a home. Like gambling drug use also hurts the loved ones by spending money but a person who is on drugs can also become irresponsible and totally change this can affect a whole family.
Addiction is the main problem with these two and other victimless crimes and a person not being able to stop committing these crimes are hurting their family and loved ones. Everyday there are people who suffer from addiction but they are not the only ones suffering from the addiction loved ones are too. I believe the victimless crimes are never victimless they always effect the person committing the crime and most of the time affect the people around them.
Supposedly victimless crime harms no one but the user, but then the book goes on to say that "though others may not suffer directly, consequences can be significant to society." I agree with the fact that there is an impact on society because people aren't oblivious to what's going on. They see these "victimless crimes" take place, and in return they think that it is okay. They don't see what a person's life is like who uses drugs or is illegally gambling. Now not only do you have the user self-justifying his/her actions, now you have some people in society who think they are unsafe, but you have those that think they can copy the actions as well. Where i disagree the most with the statement in the book is how it said it didn't effect others directly. The crimes that the user is committing interrupts the family. It teaches wrong morals and money is wasted on an addiction. Victimless crime doesn't only hurt a user, but everyone around them as well.
I feel like victimless crime is very affective to society as a whole. people can domino out of control, its just the way that we are inside. naturally we are brought down by the people around us. small things, as long as they are present, makes alot of what the thing is. this defiantly goes with society today in my opinion. alot of people I know count on small things and don't even know that they do. its interesting how we are as a group.
I think that peoples actions as a whole make up what society is like. The over all impact of what one person does in fact effect everyone. Even though its called a victimless crime doesnt mean there just hurting themselves it hurts everyone. For some reason I really do believe this and srtongly, because one persons action really can change people as a group or a whole. Most people dont believe that one person can make a differnce weather its in a good way or a bad way its all relavent in this case. I think thats what it means to be an individual but thats just me i wish that most people one day will believe that their actions count for something.
Of course i believe that victimless crimes can hurt other people besides those who commit them. However the point can be argued that it's through learned behaviors that these deviant individuals are able to gather the necessary information to lead to those crimes. Society also benefits from the crimes such as in Catch Me If You Can when Frank's arrest leads to him becoming a very helpful tool to the FBI. Either way, its mostly just an endless cycle of society having to deal with our reckless behavior and us suffering the consequences of society's influence.
I definately believe that "victimless crimes" not only harms the person committing the crime but society as well. I believe that the worst of the after effect of the crime is pinned on the criminal however society gets the left over effect so to speak.
If a group of people were walking down the street after a night on the town and see a group of prostitutes how would those people react? Not only are the prostitutes harming themselves but they are harming the group of people walking down the road. It is not a good thing for people to witness or be in the area that it is going on. I definately believe that it can hurt other people even though they are "victimless crimes".
Post a Comment