Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should also be noted that locking people up puts them in contact with a bunch of convicted criminals. Making weed illegal put a bunch of otherwise harmless people in a situation where they wanted to do illegal business. The liberal position—don’t make relatively harmless stuff illegal—is one way to reduce the amount of crime. Sure, lock up people who do violent crimes (I mean, get them out of society while we try…
I think some of this political conflict is over what constitutes a harmless or victimless or nonviolent crime. In the past year I've seen different people claim that hemp consumption, property crime, and even intimidation with a firearm were nonviolent and that their perpetrators were merely marginalized individuals who need social assistance rather than prosecution. I think GP's point is that even property crime is…
> ... property crime is not victimless: It hurts everyone ...
"victimless" and "hurts everyone" are both at the two extreme, opposite ends of a spectrum.
It's fairly likely some of the property crimes occurring could be somewhere in the middle.