All victim-less crimes should be decriminalized.

It is my position that promotes self-interest. The united states government should not have the authority to govern how one chooses to live their life. The only time the government should interfere with ones autonomy is when that individuals self-interests infringes on another's. With this reasoning we can promote freedom to its fullest. -Philosophy- John stuart Mill theorized that, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others"[1]. This is what has become commonly known as the "harm principle". This is a solid platform for enacting laws while still promoting freedom. The majority cannot rule that slavery be brought back, nor can they discriminate against those with different self-interests that do not harm them. This helps ensure that even the minority, no matter how small, is treated with the same freedom as everybody else. -Legalized "Harm"- Consent is an affirmation of ones self-interest. After all, one does not consent to that which they do not want. Only that which goes against one's self-interest should truly be defined as a harm. As such, there can only be a victim if ones autonomy is infringed on. In boxing matches, both participants consent to the fight and understand that both may possibly be injured during the brawl. In this situation it wouldn't make sense to say that the one who gets injured is a victim, because he was well aware of the possible consequences. This can also be said for many physical sports such as football, rugby, or wrestling. Players who get hurt during these sports also cannot press criminal charges because they have acknowledged the harm prior to playing. "In New York, you can"t bring a lawsuit for a sports-related injury if, by participating, you assumed the risk of getting hurt. " [2]. Smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol are other forms of legalized "harms" between buyer and seller. The cigarette boxes themselves must be labeled with warnings so as to inform the individual of the possible "harms" they will suffer, the same can be said for alcohol bottles. The government has already acknowledged that people are going to serve their self-interests regardless of what the government thinks (see prohibition), and have instead chosen to legalize and regulate these harms. Further evidence of this can be found from the sudden surge of legalizing not only medical but even recreational marijuana. My state in particular has recently taken the initiative of starting to legalizing marijuana for recreational use [3]. -Promoting freedom- Everything I have stated above has been legalized due to the fact that the individuals who promote them have accepted these possible harms. If consensual harms can be legalized because of the assumed risk and the fact that their is an interest in them, it naturally follows that other crimes with these qualifications, should at-least be decriminalized. Among such crimes include, prostitution, gambling, illicit drug use, assisted-suicide, (formally) sodomy[4]. All of these crimes involve two parties, both of whom have consented to the desired action. Both of each others self-interests are being met. The government shouldn't focus on making or enforcing crimes that go against two consenting parties self-interests, instead they should try to promote some form of regulation for them, or at least make the knowledge of the harms associated with those interests more easily available to the public. The autonomy of the individual is the most important part country of a "free" country, considering this is what fuels the nation as a whole. By allowing everybody to maintain their autonomy we ultimately benefit the nation and help ensure equal rights for all. With that being said, I look forward to Cons response. [1]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [2]. http://segarlaw.com... [3]. http://www.azcentral.com... [4]. http://en.wikipedia.org...