I want to start off by saying, frick off with the 'forum this' 'forum that', I have two perfectly working eyeballs, and a perfectly functioning brain. I can spot the word at top just like anyone else can. The purpose of this post is to have a discussion relating to current events in SK and relate them to U.S. That's why it is labeled "DISCUSSION". Don't like, don't read. You are free to leave.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 If there aren't any victims, why charge someone with a crime?

Victimless crimes are crimes that only directly involves the perpetrator or between two consenting adults. Some examples are prostitution, drug use, public intoxication and in some places gambling. In each of the examples, the only harm being done is to the perpetrator. There is no other direct victim.

Marijuana was outlawed and yet cigarettes are still commercially sold. The affects of cigarettes are worse than marijuana. 

Doctors prescribe drugs to people but it is not outlawed. Addiction to drugs usually start at the hospital where doctors would prescribe one medicine, get you addicted, then prescribe another drug to curb your addiction to the previous drug and now you're addicted to the new drug and so on.

Addiction to Alcohol is an illness, but alcohol is still being sold everywhere. Alcohol is even celebrated. You're not adult enough if you don't drink is a common thought. The affects of alcohol is worse than marijuana. You can literally destroy your organs.

If you were to braid your friend’s hair for cash, it would be a crime technically. It is between two consenting adults, but if you don’t have a license it would be a crime.

For organ selling, I get why you would want to ensure the donor is willing, but why can’t they sell it if they explicitly give consent themselves. Hospitals charge for services, why must donors give up their organs for free?

I never understood why punish someone for something that directly affects them. Whether it be drugs, prostitution, suicide, organ selling, or anything else. 

Another thing I was curious about is suicide. For example, the death penalty is still in effect in the U.S. Does that mean only the government has control over whether we live or die, under law? There are countless homeless people on the streets who are fighting to live. So why spend money on someone who does not wish to live? I know that ideally and morally we wouldn’t want someone to kill themselves, but why does suicide mean that the person must be crazy? Not everyone has the same value of life. In some countries, like Switzerland, there is the option of physician assisted suicide. Someone may have a disease like cancer and do not want to prolong their pain. Or they just want to commit suicide in a non painful way. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_die

By criminalizing these victimless acts, it is just more of taxpayers money to punish these individuals.

Another note, have you ever taken ibuprofen/Motrin, Tylenol, benadryl, claritin, birth control, blood pressure pills, iron, adderall, needed morphine for anything, etc etc. Matter fact, have you ever went to the doctor's office and got a shot??? Apparently, we are all druggies then. Because there is no difference between these and other drugs. Drugs are drugs. Get off your high horse.

Physical pain and mental pain/strain. Why is physical pain prioritized over mental pain or just being done with it?

1. 1. Capon, Felicity. "Dramatic Increase in Assisted Suicides in Switzerland." Newsweek. N.p., 20 Mar. 2016. Web. 17 Apr. 2017.
2. 2.Agency. "Right-to-die: European Court Rejects Paul Lamb and Tony Nickinson's Widow Case." The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 16 July 2015. Web. 17 Apr. 2017.
3. 3. European Court of Human Rights. "Euthanasia." SpringerReference (n.d.): n. pag. Http://www.echr.coe.int. European Court of Human Rights. Web.
4. 4. "The United Nations." A Good Life. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2017.
5. 5. Hurst, Samia A., and Alex Mauron. "Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in Switzerland: Allowing a Role for Non-physicians." BMJ : British Medical Journal. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 01 Feb. 2003. Web. 17 Apr. 2017.

• https://www.rwi.uzh.ch/dam/jcr:00000000-5624-ccd2-ffff-ffffa664e063/assisted-suicide-Switzerland.pdf
• “Physician-assisted" class="redactor-autoparser-object">https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/cl... suicide.” Merriam-Webster.com, Merriam-Webster, 2017. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/physician-assisted%20suicide. Accessed 22 April 2017.
• Braddock, Clarence & Tonelli, Mark. “Physician Aid-in-Dying.” Ethics in Medicine, 1998, n. pag. ProCon.org. "Historical Timeline." ProCon.org. 23 July 2013, 1:09 p.m., euthanasia.procon.org/view.timeline.php?timelineID=000022.
• Lee, Melinda, et al. “Legalizing Assisted Suicide-Views of Physicians in Oregon.” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 334, no. 310-315, 1996, n. pag.
• “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in Australia.” The World Federation of Right to Die Societies, (n.d.), http://www.worldrtd.net/euthanasia-and-assisted-Suicide-australia. Accessed 22 April 2017.
• Bosshard G, Broeckaert B, Clark D, et al. “A role for doctors in assisted dying? An analysis of legal regulations and medical professional positions in six European countries.” Journal of Medical Ethics, 2008, vol. 34, p. 28-32.