At 3:54 PM -0600 10/29/96, Steve Edwards wrote:

This isn't about crypto but since cypherpunks is the most interesting libertarian forum I know, I thought I'd throw it out. ... It has been said many times in this forum that prostitution and drugs are victimless crimes. Is this really so? Although I am generally in concert with libertarian views, I would say that the young lady I talked to was definitely a victim. Also, if we are a society, rather than fortress-like individuals, we should be concerned with the inevitable spread of disease and insanity that is the result of "victimless" crimes.

"Victimless" in the sense that the effect is on that of the perpetrator of whatever act is involved. (Stealing money to pay for a drug is of course a different issue; libertarians believe the illegal status of drugs accounts for much of the crime connected with drugs, of course, but this is, strictly speaking, a fully separable issue from the act of consuming drugs per se.) While it is true that some drugs may have some bad effects, this is true of a vast number of behaviors: drinking too much alcohol, smoking too much, watching too much t.v., hangliding, playing Russian roulette, rock climbing, gambling, and even horseback riding. (As Christopher Reeve, the millionaire superman, now lobbying for cripple's rights and demanding that the government "do something" about spinal cord injuries...the dumbass jumps horses as a hobby, has an accident, and is demanding that "the spinally-challenged" and "persons of alternate locomotion" be treated as _victims_ of some nebulous conspiracy! I say do to this dipshit what was done to his horse.) Back to "victims." If "victim" is defined to be "a person hurt by some behavior," then of course there are many tens of millions of "victims." But most of us don't use this as a definition. As with rock climbing, stunt plane flying, boozing, and having unprotected sex, many bahaviors have a high probability of creating problems down the road. One view is just "think of it as evolution in action." Or, "we all die...big deal." Or, "people have to take responsibility for their own actions." The dramatically different view is, in contrast, "we need to outlaw potentially dangerous activities." Thus, ban smoking, outlaw hangliding, ban horseback riding. (Or force the taxpayers to pay for all care for these "victims.") In short, the young woman (I assume she's young...) who is offering certain services for $2 apparently made her choices. It just as well could've been alcohol (plenty of toothless rummies out there doing what they can to cadge a drink). We tried Prohibition. Now we've been trying Prohibition II for the past several decades, with a major intensification (the Tet Offensive?) the last decade or so. It ain't working, either. No surprise. I urge people to think carefully about issues of morality, ethics, free will, and the type of society we wish to have. People make choices every day. To use or not to use drugs is just another choice. --Tim May "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."