Victimless crimes, according to Samaha (472), are crimes in which none of the involved parties perceives themselves as criminals. In addition, the type of crime involves adults who consent to engagement in the activities, a factor that makes detection, and hence legal action, difficult.
Further, prosecuting victimless crimes may not necessarily achieve objectives of criminal justice of ensuring public interest in the society because such crimes may not have any apparent impact on another member of the society, except those who engage in the activities who may be deriving benefits from the crimes. However, the cost of enforcing victimless crime laws is overwhelming. Almost 50 percent of reported drug cases, for example, relate to marijuana while human resources and finances that are used in dealing with these cases could be channeled to the other drugs that are illegal and have adverse effects on lives (Ruschmann 55). Extending this observation to the strain that other victimless crimes have on the criminal justice system then supports opinion for legalization of the victimless offences to facilitate efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system in dealing with other forms of offences. Perspective of economic conservatives, since dealing with the crimes involves the government and its resources, supports withdrawal of government regulations (Brux 49). The victimless offences, based on these rationales, should therefore not be criminalized.
Response to post
You argue, in the post that victimless crimes such as prostitution and gambling should be criminalized but you defend legalization of marijuana. I do not however agree with your position because it appears to be based on personal opinion, than existing literature, and this induces reliability concerns. In addition, assumptions of financial factors to prostitution and from gambling may not be true in all cases and the identified harm of marijuana on brain cell is a reason for supporting its criminalization, unless one can identify a great benefit to counter the harm. You should therefore use literature to support a every position and be consistent in your rationale.