{"id":1236,"date":"1996-01-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1996-01-23T23:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/?p=1236"},"modified":"2019-01-18T00:19:51","modified_gmt":"2019-01-17T23:19:51","slug":"attitudes-towards-victimless-crimes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/attitudes-towards-victimless-crimes\/","title":{"rendered":"Attitudes towards Victimless Crimes"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"fortune\"><i><br \/>\nProseminar work<\/i><\/div>\n<div class=\"container\">\n<div class=\"center\">\n<p>Peter Keel<br \/>\nStudent of sociology<\/p>\n<p><b>24. January 1996<\/b><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<h3>Table of Contents<\/h3>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#chap1\"> Introduction<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#chap2\"> Thesis<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#chap3\"> Survey<\/a>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#chap31\"> College Freshmen Report on homosexuality, abortion and marijuana<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#chap4\"> Conclusion<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"#biblio\"> Bibliography<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><a id=\"chap1\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>1. Introduction<\/h3>\n<p>Victimless Crimes as defined by <i>Edwin Schur<\/i> [<a href=\"#fn1\">1<\/a>] are<br \/>\ncrimes which do not have any evident victim. They consist of actions which<br \/>\nare outlawed because they violate moral standards. Reason number two, the<br \/>\nprotection of the subject from itself can be traced back to the violation<br \/>\nof moral standards, since obviously the same actions are not outlawed in<br \/>\nother cultures. Most of these victimless crimes differ wildly among cultures,<br \/>\nexamples might be the consumption of hashish and alcohol in the western<br \/>\nsociety compared to the Islamic society, or prostitution now and by the times<br \/>\nof the ancient in greek. These victimless crimes must therefore be a product of culture, and<br \/>\nnot a measure to insure health or protection of the subject from itself. What<br \/>\ngives even more proof to this, is the fact, that criminal prosecution costs<br \/>\nmore than the (if required) medical treatment of the offenders. Nobody will<br \/>\nspend much money just for someone to be protected from self. But money<br \/>\nwill be spent to ensure the own moral standards. Of course, this will not<br \/>\nbe admitted in most cases.<br \/>\nSpeaking of damage, we should define damage as the subjective feeling<br \/>\nof being hurt. (See also <i>Jeffrey H. Reiman<\/i>, [<a href=\"#fn6\">6<\/a>]). We<br \/>\ncannot speak of damage, if it is wanted, e.g. by masochists,<br \/>\nor if it is inevitable for getting the desired effect (e.g. dentists, drugs,<br \/>\nor extreme-sports). For victimless crimes, there is no damage done to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>physical and psychical integrity of the people<\/li>\n<li>property of the involved people and society<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This type of crime is defined by the willingness of all involved parties<br \/>\nto commit such an action, and no harm is done to other people, except of<br \/>\nthe violation of law and moral standards. This for instance is true for<br \/>\nthe use of illegal drugs, for suicide or for prostitution, but not for<br \/>\nbribery or black-market trade, since there is damage done to society or<br \/>\nthe state or to property of them. So we come to some actions which might<br \/>\nbe considered victimless crimes,  which either are outlawed or not. Of<br \/>\ncourse, nearly everything can be outlawed (such as not wearing a veil<br \/>\nas a woman). This is only a small list of actual or historical outlawed<br \/>\nactions in western society that <i>can<\/i> [<a href=\"#note1\">*<\/a>] be<br \/>\nconsidered victimless crimes.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Use of drugs (alcohol, tobacco, coffee, marijuana, opiates, etc)<\/li>\n<li>Prostitution<\/li>\n<li>Homosexuality<\/li>\n<li>Suicide<\/li>\n<li>Abortion<\/li>\n<li>Gambling<\/li>\n<li>Exhibitionism<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>It is necessary to know that outlawing of such acts might lead to further<br \/>\ncrimes, accomplished in the attempt to commit aforementioned actions.<br \/>\nParticular examples include crimes for getting money to buy drugs, smuggling<br \/>\n(especially popular in Switzerland was smuggling of coffee at the beginning<br \/>\nof this century) or the exploitation of prostitutes. For most outlawed<br \/>\nvictimless crimes which involve goods or services, a black market will evolve.<br \/>\nWhen deciding what is victimless crime or not, it must be clear that such<br \/>\n&#8220;secondary&#8221; crimes are a result of the <i>outlawing<\/i> of such actions and<br \/>\nare not to be confused with the actual consequences. But I will not go into<br \/>\ndiscussion of these particular actions, and whether they should be considered<br \/>\ncriminal acts and outlawed or not. [<a href=\"#note2\">**<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"chap2\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>2. Thesis<\/h3>\n<p>One might expect that the attitude towards victimless crimes is subject to<br \/>\nchanges over time. While this is true, no evident direction of this attitude<br \/>\nchange will be remarkable. It is not to expect that a general trend regarding<br \/>\nvictimless crimes will be visible, instead, different actions will be judged<br \/>\ncompletely different. There is to expect however, a typical difference between<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Urbanized and rural territories<\/li>\n<li>Higher and lower educations<\/li>\n<li>Younger and older people<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The first ones generally taking a more liberal position. Eventually, there will<br \/>\nbe some differences between male and female persons on certain subjects, but<br \/>\nno apparent coherent point of view towards different actions. It is not to<br \/>\nexpect that a generally more liberal or restrictive point of view is depending<br \/>\non gender.<\/p>\n<p>What I also expect is that the attitude towards victimless crimes changes<br \/>\nover time in waveforms, altering states of more liberal and more restrictive<br \/>\nviews, but not a general trend towards liberal or prohibitive views. I expect<br \/>\nthe views on different subjects to evolve differently.<br \/>\nIn a geographic context, the attitude towards victimless crimes is also<br \/>\nexpected to be different. While most restrictive societies as islamic ones<br \/>\nwill likely outlaw various actions of their people, such as not wearing a<br \/>\nveil as woman (clearly a victimless crime, since only the moral standards of<br \/>\nthe respective society are hurt), western society will also show different<br \/>\nstandards. The USA for instance, clearly has more strict moral standards.<br \/>\nIt was, for instance, possible for the US-state Colorado to outlaw<br \/>\nhomosexuality [<a href=\"#fn5\">5<\/a>] in 1993 for a short period of time.<\/p>\n<p>Despite these differences, I expect that <i>there will be no evident trend in<br \/>\nthe attitude towards victimless crimes in general<\/i>. People will judge<br \/>\ndifferent victimless crimes different, depending on culture. There is no<br \/>\nconsciousness that these crimes have their victimlessness in common.<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"chap3\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>3. Survey<\/h3>\n<p>Based on the available data, which, in my case, consist essentially of the<\/p>\n<p><i>Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1995<\/i> [<a href=\"#fn4\">4<\/a>],<\/p>\n<p>which is an annual statistical report of the USA by the Utilization of Criminal<br \/>\nJustice Statistics Project at the Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center,<br \/>\nUniversity at Albany, Albany, New York, USA, for the U.S. Department of Justice,<br \/>\nBureau of Justice Statistics.<\/p>\n<p>I took a look at the college freshmen report. This<br \/>\nis a report from a survey on a sample which consists of 200&#8217;000 people entering<br \/>\nthe freshmen classes each fall. The Survey is conducted by the Higher Education<br \/>\nResearch Institute (HERI).<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"chap31\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h4>3.1 college freshmen report on homosexuality, abortion and marijuana.<\/h4>\n<p>Tables 2.110, 2.111 and 2.114 in the above mentionned sourcebook give us the<br \/>\nfollowing data. This compiled table (Table 1) shows no information on the<br \/>\ngender of the subjects.<\/p>\n<div class=\"center\">\n<table border=\"1\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"><tt><b>Supports prohibition of<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Year<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Homosexuality<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Abortion<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Marijuana<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1977<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>48.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>44.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>47.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1978<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>46.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>43.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>50.50 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1979<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>47.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>46.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>54.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1980<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>48.90 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>46.40 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>60.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1981<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>48.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>46.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>64.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1982<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>47.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>45.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>70.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1983<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>49.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>45.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>74.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1984<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>47.80 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>46.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>77.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1985<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>47.90 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>45.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>78.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1986<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>52.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>41.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>78.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1987<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>53.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>41.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>80.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1988<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>49.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>43.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>80.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1989<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>54.40 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>35.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>83.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1990<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>44.40 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>35.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>81.40 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1991<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>42.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>37.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>79.10 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1992<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>37.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>35.90 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>77.00 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1993<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>36.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>37.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>71.80 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1994<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>33.90 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>40.30 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>67.90 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>1995<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>30.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>41.60 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>66.20 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Average<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>45.54 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>41.94 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>70.70 %<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Deviation<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>6.38<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>3.92<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>10.70<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt><b>Variance<\/b><\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>40.66<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>15.38<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>114.51<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>Table 1<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>I also calculated the average, deviation and variance for the sum of all<br \/>\nvalues. The average is 52.72, deviation 14.85 and variance 220.57. This<br \/>\nmeans that the values are enough dispersed to not have any interconnection.<br \/>\nTo see the things better, we can put this as graphic, and can recognize<br \/>\ngeneral trends and the dispersion of attitude towards different subjects.<\/p>\n<div class=\"center\">\n<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"\/Blog\/content\/report.png\" alt=\"report 1\"\/><br \/>\n<img decoding=\"async\" src=\"\/Blog\/content\/report2.png\" alt=\"report 2\"\/><br \/>\nFigure 1<\/div>\n<p>Since the data used in this survey is very big, one can assume that the<br \/>\ndata given represents a better educated part of US-citizens very well,<br \/>\nit might well be the most representative survey ever conducted. Representative<br \/>\nin this case, of course, for college freshmen in the USA. On the fact that<br \/>\nthis survey is conducted every fall since 1976, one can try to make assumptions<br \/>\non the future, respectively the present. The college freshmen of 1976 will<br \/>\nnow be roughly in their mid-thirties. According to the data, 12.9 percent<br \/>\nof college graduates think marijuana should be free, 12.9 percent think it<br \/>\nshould be a minor violation, 50 percent think it should be used for medical<br \/>\npurposes and 22.1 percent oppose anything but a complete prohibition. The<br \/>\ncurrent values for college freshmen seem also not to differ very much from<br \/>\nthe current general attitude towards victimless crimes (excerpt from Tables<br \/>\n2.68 and 2.111 of source [<a href=\"#fn4\">4<\/a>]).<\/p>\n<div class=\"center\">\n<table border=\"1\">\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td><\/td>\n<td colspan=\"3\" align=\"left\"><tt>Supports prohibition of<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>1994<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>Homosexuality<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>Abortion     <\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>Marijuana<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>all citizen<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>No Data<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>38.40<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>72.00<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td align=\"left\"><tt>college freshmen<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>33.90<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>40.30<\/tt><\/td>\n<td align=\"right\"><tt>67.90<\/tt><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>Table 2<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>It is not to expect that the data for Europe will come very close to these<br \/>\nnumbers, but one can assume that the attitudes will spread similar on different<br \/>\nsubjects [<a href=\"#note4\">****<\/a>]. Also interesting might be the high-point<br \/>\nin 1989, in which the <i>most<\/i> prohibitive opinions regarding homosexuality and<br \/>\nmarijuana are recorded, along with the <i>smallest<\/i> number of prohibitive<br \/>\nviews towards abortion. This can not be explained with a general restrictive<br \/>\n&#8211; and perhaps religious influenced &#8211; opinion, but it seems that this goes<br \/>\nalong with the victory of the republicans, taking over more than fifty percent<br \/>\nof the seats in the white house. Also, the rise of the anti-marijuana attitude<br \/>\ncannot be quite explained. Perhaps the government had more money to spend after<br \/>\nthe oil-crisis and during the eighties for making anti-hemp propaganda. This<br \/>\nwould correlate with the following recession in the nineties, in which this<br \/>\nattitude is somewhat less common.<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"chap4\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>4. Conclusion<\/h3>\n<p>There is no evident trend towards legalization of victimless crimes. The<br \/>\nattitudes towards victimless crimes differ on each subject, so there seems<br \/>\nto be no coherent view of that matter among the citizens. So we have<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>People view different victimless crimes not as victimless crimes,<br \/>\nbut as entirely different crimes and handle them as such, based<br \/>\non their cultural and historic background.<\/li>\n<li>The attitude towards specific victimless crimes varies extremely with<br \/>\ntime.<\/li>\n<li>The time seems to be a much more important factor on attitude than<br \/>\nthe age is.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This states effectively, that my assumption on the trend I&#8217;ve made at the<br \/>\nbeginning is true. There is no evident trend in the attitude towards victimless<br \/>\ncrimes in general. Time being obviously an important factor, can now be<br \/>\nleading to another questions. Why is there such an immense variation in time?<br \/>\nIs this somehow interconnected to a yet unknown variable like economy? And<br \/>\nwhy do the attitudes towards victimless crimes not have a similar progression?<br \/>\nAnd on the socio-psychological base, has society probably more influence on a<br \/>\nperson than its youth has?<\/p>\n<p>I close this file now, leaving more new questions open than I answered.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tPeter Keel<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h4>Footnotes<\/h4>\n<p><a id=\"note1\">[*]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><i>We should see that this gives material to lots of discussions<br \/>\nwhether someone else gets hurt by some special action or not. There is, for<br \/>\ninstance, an ongoing discussion on the topic of what makes a human a human,<br \/>\nand at which point abortion therefore should be disallowed.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"note2\">[**]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><i>There is also the contrary of victimless crimes, that is,<br \/>\nlegal actions which have victims. An example of this might be the destruction<br \/>\nand pollution of our environment, which is mostly legal but which inflicts us<br \/>\nall.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"note3\">[***]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><i> Some US-American specialities:<br \/>\nLooking at the data [<a href=\"#fn4\">4<\/a>] I have present, I realize that this<br \/>\npresumably would not fit European countries. The American society seems to be<br \/>\nmore strict and more un-enlightened than European countries. For instance if we<br \/>\nlook on Table 2.60: 50.8% think that the most important purpose<br \/>\non sentencing is to give criminals what they deserve, only 19.8% think this<br \/>\nshould serve to educate and counsel offenders. Or on Table 2.72 we see that<br \/>\n74% of the American support death penalty, only 20% oppose it, despite the<br \/>\nfact that death penalty cannot be proved to be a measure to minimize violent<br \/>\ncrimes. This gives some general assessment on American society.<\/i><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"note4\">[****]<\/a><\/p>\n<p><i> There is very little information available on the<br \/>\ninternet concerning Europe. While I was able to find immense resources<br \/>\nof statistical data for the USA, the rest of the world remains in the dark.<br \/>\nAlso, much more data than I actually could get is available in databases<br \/>\nI had no access to. It either would cost money to access it, or to make<br \/>\nthem send the information on discs. This applies for instance to the<br \/>\nswiss Bundesamt f\u00fcr Statistik. In this case, the information on paper<br \/>\nis actually free of charge, but the machine-readable version is not.<\/i><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><a id=\"biblio\"><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>Bibliography<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>\n<a id=\"fn1\">[1]<\/a>Schur, Edwin M.<i>Crimes Without Victims<\/i>. \u00a9 1995, Prentice Hall, Inc.<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"fn2\">[2]<\/a>Wilkins, Leslie T. <i>Social Deviance<\/i>. \u00a9 1963, Tavistock Publications;<br \/>\nElectronic version \u00a9 1995, Harrow and Heston, Publishers; Internet<br \/>\nWWW-Page at URL: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scj.albany.edu\/wilkins\/SD000000.HTM\"><br \/>\nhttps:\/\/www.scj.albany.edu\/wilkins\/SD000000.HTM<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"fn3\">[3]<\/a> Mill, John Stuart <i>On Liberty<\/i>, London, 1859<br \/>\nInternet Gopher at URL: <a href=\"gopher:\/\/wiretap.spies.com\/11\/Library\/Classic\/liberty.jsm\"><br \/>\ngopher:\/\/wiretap.spies.com\/11\/Library\/Classic\/liberty.jsm<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"fn4\">[4]<\/a> Utilization of Criminal Justice Statistics Project,<br \/>\n<i>Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics 1995<\/i>, Hindelang<br \/>\nCriminal Justice Research Center, University of Albany, 1995<br \/>\nInternet WWW-Page at URL: <a href=\"https:\/\/freegovinfo.info\/node\/3731\"><br \/>\nhttps:\/\/www.albany.edu\/sourcebook\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a id=\"fn5\">[5]<\/a> <i>Soapbox Magazine<\/i>, Issue 2, February 1993<br \/>\nInternet posting to alt.censorship by<br \/>\n(cskelton.0inw@realm.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca) on 30 March 1993<\/p>\n<p><a id=\"fn6\">[6]<\/a> Reiman, Jeffrey H. <i>Prostitution, Addiction and the Ideology of<br \/>\nLiberalism<\/i>, in <i>Contemporary Crisis<\/i>, Issue 3 (January 1979),<br \/>\npp. 53-67. \u00a9 by Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<div class=\"center\">\n<hr \/>\n<p>Done in<\/p>\n<div id=\"date\">1996-01-24<\/div>\n<p>by Peter Keel (<a href=\"mailto:seegras@discordia.ch\">seegras@discordia.ch<\/a>)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Proseminar work Peter Keel Student of sociology 24. January 1996 Table of Contents Introduction Thesis Survey College Freshmen Report on homosexuality, abortion and marijuana Conclusion Bibliography 1. Introduction Victimless Crimes as defined by Edwin Schur [1] are crimes which do not have any evident victim. They consist of actions which are outlawed because they violate [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1236","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1236"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1294,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236\/revisions\/1294"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1236"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1236"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/seegras.discordia.ch\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1236"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}