But is the delineation between “violent” and “nonviolent” crime a useful way to approach the issue?

There have been several reports showing that this oversimplified classification not only perpetuates criminality but also results in people being punished for behaviors that should not be considered crimes in the first place.

A City Journal article detailed the story of Yowhannes “John” Tewelde in San Francisco, who died after trying to stop a thief from stealing beer from his store. If the store owner had not intervened and allowed the criminal to pilfer his beer, it would have been classified as a “nonviolent” crime, which means he would not have faced any serious consequences. The author also notes how many “nonviolent” criminals commit crimes that can easily escalate to assault or murder.

By downplaying the severity of crimes like theft and others, progressive policymakers are essentially giving some of these individuals a free pass to conduct mass shoplifting operations. This trend has had a seriously detrimental impact on businesses in these cities, many of which had to close up operations or take other measures to safeguard their property.

Perhaps the problem is with the “violent vs. nonviolent” dichotomy in general. Instead of focusing on differentiating between these types of crime, it would be better to focus law enforcement efforts on crimes that actually have victims.

Rather than using police resources to hunt down, arrest, convict, and imprison people over substances they choose to consume, it would be more effective to target those who are actually violating people’s rights. Those who assault, steal, murder, and defraud are threatening people’s natural rights to life, liberty, and property. People who choose to consume a plant are not.

Decriminalizing or, at the very least, deprioritizing victimless offenses would free up resources for law enforcement agencies – especially those that are already stretched thin. This would empower officers to go after people who are engaging in harmful behavior against others. Those who commit crimes with victims should be given the appropriate punishment instead of going easy on them out of some misguided sense of social justice.

America’s approach to justice needs a lot of work. A more nuanced approach to these issues is needed. Law enforcement must take into account the full range of a crime’s impact on victims and communities. The current handling of these issues has not worked – especially the War on Drugs.

The bottom line is that punishing people for engaging in behavior that does not threaten other people’s rights should not be the purview of the government. Moreover, it has not actually made for better and safer communities. There are far more drug overdose deaths today than there were in the 1980s, the decade after the War on Drugs began – and it’s not only because of fentanyl.

This isn’t to say that drug addiction and other victimless behaviors are not an issue. They certainly are. But it has been shown over and over again that using the government to address these problems not only doesn’t work, it makes them worse while also creating a slew of additional problems.

If anyone is going to solve these problems, it is we the people, not the state. I trust private organizations, churches, and individuals to help people get off drugs far more than I would ever trust the government’s solution, which pretty much involves locking people up and hoping for the best.

Reforming our criminal justice system is a complex issue. But we have already seen that going easy on those who harm others isn’t the way to keep people safe. Perhaps if law enforcement adopts a laser-like focus on these individuals, it will prevent more situations like what happened to Tewelde.