Opinions surrounding the effectiveness of targeting prostitution differ, with critics contending that arresting prostitutes and johns has not affected the problem. Others contend that prostitution is a victimless crime and should be treated as a moral issue rather than a legal one. Do you agree or disagree with the idea that prostitution is a victimless crime? How would you change the prostitution policy in order to make a greater impact on prostitution?
Please use references/cite sources.
There is no crime that is "victimless," and if there were such a thing, it wouldn't be a crime. All crimes have victims because they have effects on society. In this case, prostitution has a large impact on society and definitely has victims. Let's look at what happens as the result of someone that engages a prostitute in prostitution:
The person (we'll assume he's a man) arranges to meet with the prostitute at a certain hotel, area, etc. The value of that area just declined because the man (we'll call him Joe) increased the crime rate by engaging in a criminal act (she's guilty too). We already have decreased land values, so those attempting to sell a home or business in the area are affected.
Because Joe met with the prostitute, we now have a continued cycle of men arranging to pay these types of women. Many contend that this act continues feeding into the cycle of keeping women in these positions where they believe there is no logical way out. The prostitute only continues to do so because people pay her. We could ...
This solution discusses if prostitution is a victimless crime, and how the prostitution laws could be changed to make a greater impact on deterring this crime. Includes 2 references.