NCJ Number
28634
Date Published
1974
Length
15 pages
Annotation
THE AUTHOR REVIEWS AND CRITICIZES THE ARGUMENTS OF THOSE WHO URGE THE EXCLUSION FROM THE CRIMINAL CODE OF PRIVATE OFFENSES (VICTIMLESS CRIMES), CONCLUDING THAT VICTIMLESS CRIMES LAWS EXPRESS THE PREFERENCE OF THE MAJORITY.
Abstract
THE GENERAL THESIS OF THOSE WHO URGE DECRIMINALIZATION OF PRIVATE OFFENSES BECAUSE OF THEIR EFFECTS ON THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS THAT SUCH OFFENSES ARE, FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, THEMSELVES CRIMINOGENIC AND CAUSE AN INCREASE IN CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE FOUR ARGUMENTS MOST COMMONLY ADVANCED IN SUPPORT OF THIS GENERAL THESIS: 1) THAT THESE LAWS CAUSE DIMINISHED RESPECT FOR LAW; 2) THAT THEY ARE UNENFORCEABLE AND CAUSE CORRUPTION; 3) THAT THEY SERVE TO INCREASE CRIME ACTIVITIES WHICH SUPPORT THE ILLEGAL SERVICES; AND 4) THAT THEY RESULT IN A MISALLOCATION OF ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES. THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT THERE IS NO FUNDAMENTAL MORAL BASIS FOR LIMITING THE SCOPE OF THE CRIMINAL LAW, SINCE THE MAJORITY WOULD SEEM TO SUPPORT PRESERVATION OF THE SANCTIONS AGAINST THESE BEHAVIORS. HE ALSO MAINTAINS THAT THE 'CRIME CAUSATIVE' ARGUMENT AGAINST VICTIMLESS CRIME PENALTIES IS INVALID, BEACUSE THIS THEORY CANNOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THOSE OFFENSES MARKED FOR REPEAL AND THOSE WHICH SHOULD BE PRESERVED, SUCH AS BRIBERY OR WEAPONS OFFENSES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)