Victimless Deviance: Toward a Classification of Opposition Justifications

By Stylianou, Stelios | Western Criminology Review, July 2010 | Go to article overview

Victimless Deviance: Toward a Classification of Opposition Justifications


Stylianou, Stelios, Western Criminology Review


Abstract: Attitudes toward victimless deviance, predominantly drug use and various sexual behaviors, are explored using data from forty-nine semi-structured in-depth interviews with participants from various social and cultural backgrounds. The central question addressed is why people oppose these behaviors. The study explores perceptions of the nature and the consequences of these behaviors and the normative principles based on which people form opinions of opposition. The results support that opposition to victimless deviance is structured based on three normative principles: the libertarian principle (opposing harm to others), the paternalistic principle (opposing harm to self), and the moralistic principle (opposing harmless wrongdoing). Arguments justifying these oppositions are presented in a classification of opposition justifications. Particular emphasis is given to moralistic oppositions.

Keywords: crime seriousness, victimless deviance, drug use, sexual deviance, libertarianism, paternalism, moralism, harm to others, harm to self, harmless wrongdoing

INTRODUCTION

Since its conception, victimless crime, and more inclusively, victimless deviance, has been a controversial issue in normative philosophy and criminal law. Various theses and arguments have emerged in an attempt to resolve a fundamental question regarding the limits of the law and more broadly social norms: should society control, through prohibition or other means, behaviors that do not harm others?1 The difficulty of this question is reflected in the debates on prohibition of victimless behaviors. Serious disagreements remain regarding "conflict crimes" or mala prohibita, i.e., criminalized behaviors that according to a substantial proportion of the population should be decriminalized. Different views regarding this matter are supported by arguments based on a number of distinct ideological orientations and on a spectrum of perceptions of the nature and consequences of the behaviors in question. In this respect, criminological research has not investigated victimless crime to a satisfactory degree. For example, why are people expected to "just say no" to drugs (both as potential users and as opinion holders)? Is it because of the perceived harmful consequences of drug use, and if so, what are these consequences? Or is it because using drugs is "just wrong"? And then, what does this mean?

This study presents elements of the debate on the control of victimless behaviors at the level of individual opinion. It attempts to classify opposition justifications, i.e., arguments used to justify the disapproval of these behaviors. The research question addressed is why do people oppose victimless deviance such as drug use, sexual deviance, gambling, and other similar behaviors. The question focuses on the thinking involved in forming an opinion. The study does not address the etiology of opinion formation in the usual sense (i.e., identification of psychological and social correlates of attitudes).

PERCEPTIONS OF DEVIANCE AND NORMATIVE PRINCIPLESS

Criminological research on deviance perceptions has predominantly dealt with the measurement of perceived crime seriousness. It has shown that the perceived seriousness of a deviant act is predominantly a function of its perceived consequences. In surveys of perceived seriousness, acts causing physical harm are invariably rated as the most serious, followed by acts causing property loss or property damage, while victimless crimes are generally rated as the least serious (Sellin and Wolfgang 1964; Rossi et al. 1974; Rossi and Henry 1980; McCleary et al. 1981; Cullen, Link, and Polanzi 1982; Blum-West 1985; Wolfgang et al. 1985; Warr 1989).2 In addition, victimless behaviors tend to produce more disagreement than agreement with respect to seriousness perceptions (Newman 1976; Evans and Scott 1984; Miethe 1984; Carlson and Williams 1993). In the absence of victimizing consequences, the perceived seriousness of victimless crimes depends predominantly on perceived immorality (Newman 1976; Evans and Scott 1984).

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Victimless Deviance: Toward a Classification of Opposition Justifications
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.