Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society

by Peter McWilliams

Argues that criminalization of certain activities has a negative effect on society, denies constitutional rights, and misunderstands religious teachings

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Philosophy, Sociology, History, Law, Crime

692 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1993

Reviews

[Jeff Chase · Rating 5 out of 5]

If any one book ever changed my life, it was this one. The philosophy of this book is, boiled down, if I'm not hurting someone else, then what I do is my own business. Whether it's dressing up in a leather bustier, being an atheist, or ingesting the burning fumes of a certain plant. It's not hurting you, or anyone else, or their property, so I should be left alone.

I have given several copies of this book to people I felt needed to read it, and now it's finally available for free in pdf format. So if you want a copy, message me!

[Terry · Rating 3 out of 5]

Despite its imposing length, this is a quick read and lots of fun. McWilliams is a journeyman writer, so his book moves along with humor and energy; he tells a good anecdote and throws in puns and hyperbole with gleeful abandon. Although it dates from 1993, his central argument (nothing that consenting adults do that doesn't hurt someone else should be illegal) remains completely relevant. He doesn't cite his sources with the attention of an academic, so this is a good place to begin inquiry that leads in other directions.

[Luna Corbden · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do covers the facts on the politically-charged concept of victimless crimes.

Drugs, pornography, prostitution, and gambling. We make these things illegal in this country, because we assume it's the government's role to protect people from hurting themselves. But is this assumption correct?

I started this book as a conservative. The facts and history showed me I'd been lied to by mainstream advertisements, urban myths, and schools. I had many misconceptions that were quickly disillusioned by this book. Those facts are sound and have held up over the decade since I read it. Other sources back them up.

The conclusion: Adults should have the right to make choices about their own lives. Even if those choices seem harmful, stupid, or worthless, they have that right. Your freedom to swing your fist ends where my nose begins... but you should be able to hit your own nose all you want.

[Damon Suede · Rating 5 out of 5]

A superb, and superbly written meditation on what crime actually means, and what freedom must mean in order to identify our culture as a "free" society. Lifechanging!

[Erin Donovan · Rating 5 out of 5]

After 20 years, I still agree with many of McWilliams' viewpoints in this book.

Yes, McWilliams has an agenda: to persuade readers of the 'absurdity of consensual crimes in a free society.' If the US is a free society, then why and how did many consensual acts, such as prostitution and drug consumption become criminalized?

Read the book for yourself and make up your own mind.

http://www.drugsense.org/mcwilliams/w...

[Stan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Liberty and pursuit of happiness! Isn't it what this country all about? Or was? Shame on us for letting the Gov to "take care" of us because we're just not responsible enough to manage our own lives. Read this book. Make changes in your life. Scream about it on every corner. It isn't anyone's business what I do behind closed doors of the house I own!

[Glen Engel-Cox · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this is one--if not the--of the most important books that I have ever read. And I do not say that lightly. I'm weighing this single book against all the "great" books of the world, including that perennial bestseller, the Bible. Why is this book so important? Because of its terrifying immediacy. While I say this book is important, I mean here and now. It is my sincere hope that this book will become a historical document (like many of those great books); it is my fear that I am dreaming.

So what is so all-fired important? This book is a history and discussion about consensual crimes--that is, victimless crimes, or, as the author prefers, crimes in which the participants consented to the action. The distinction is necessary, and Peter McWilliams makes a point of clearly stating his position, codified in a single statement, which I will repeat for you here: "You should be able to do with your person or property whatever you please, as long as you don't physically harm the person or property of another." However, for such a simple statement, it is dangerously revolutionary with regard to our society today (but then, most revolutionary statements have been simple, like "Give me liberty or give me death" or "Thou shalt have no other gods before me").

What at first glance might seem the height of liberalism--McWilliams is, after all, recommending the abolishment of laws against drug use, gambling, and prostitution, among others--is actually the basis of libertarianism. Yet McWilliams has solved the problem that I have always had with the libertarian movement, and that is their stand on the environment. Clearly many of the environmental rules and regulations would continue to stand if McWilliams had his way; pollution does physically harm the environment (and the persons) of others.

This book, for the simple nature of its argument, is no half-measure though. Although it is extremely readable, with an interesting layout (included a boxed quote for almost every page), it is still 800 pages. I didn't feel like any of the material was extraneous, however, and sometimes wanted more detail. Some of the interesting details that were included:

* McWilliams documenting Jerry Falwell committing a "false witness" (lying) on national television;
* The history of hemp use (and the evolution of the propaganda on its abuse);
* The play-by-play description of a "Dragnet" episode in which a character dies of an LSD overdose, although there's never been a documented case of such (some have died due to actions performed under the influence [similar to drunk driving?], but not of an overdose);
* "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose." The Bible, right? Wrong. Shakespeare, "The Merchant of Venice," Act 1, Scene 3, Line 99.

While it isn't necessary to agree completely with McWilliams (although you'll be tempted; he is a very persuasive writer), the point is that if you agree with a single argument, it is enough to call for the abolishment of laws against consensual crimes. A strong statement, but clearly evidenced by the facts--that is, if you agree with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Is it needless to say that I highly recommend this book? No, I think I need to state it openly. Even if you don't come to the same conclusions as McWilliams, I think it is vitally necessary that you make the effort to educate yourself regarding the history of these activities and the history of the laws against these activities. Given the amount of dis- and non-information that is available on drugs, prostitution, homosexuality, et al., even if the statistics that McWilliams quotes are only 10% accurate, the figures are still impressive.

This isn't a "dry" book at all, even given the numerous quotes from founding fathers (both American and Biblical); McWilliams understands the necessity of humor (who said, "If I couldn't laugh, I'd be crying"?). Thanks to Laurie Mann for recommending this book.

[Anton Klink · Rating 5 out of 5]

I still remember reading this book online back in 1997. Since the author knew, that he wouldn't be around for much longer, yet he wanted to disseminate his important message to the world, he decided to publish all this book online for anyone to read. He was dying and one of the few things easing his pain was smoking cannabis - which at the time was almost impossible to acquire legally in the US. It was maddening, how he had to struggle as a dying man, trying to ease his pains and how to state was simply prohibiting him from doing it. I was struck by his decision to tell his story, publish his book online and it certainly made me pay attention - and boy am I glad I did.

This is one of those eye-opening books that can actually change one's life and maybe even give it a new course. I now realize, that I am still largely under the influence of the ideas of this book, as I've grown to be a staunch supporter of personal liberties. Indeed, "ain't nobody's business if you do" - smoke weed, watch porn, use contraceptives etc. It is YOUR life, you only have one and we are all entitled to live it as we please. As long as we don't harm others around us, we are even free to harm ourselves if we want to. We don't need the state or the church or anyone else really in their misguided attempts to "protect" us from ourselves. Yes, some of the choices we make in life can be harmful to us, nevertheless those are OUR choices about our OWN lives and really - "ain't nobody's business if we do".

One of the best books I've ever read and one that still influences me almost two decades after having read it.

[James Maxey · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book fifteen years ago and it still influences my thinking about political rights. A comprehensive and exhaustive argument for removing government from medling in morality, the book is an extremely well-researched primer on the constitution, the Bible, and American history. Despite the seriousness of the subject and the arguments, the book is an enjoyable read because McWilliams has a sharp and biting sense of humor that often manifests in sarcastic and snarky footnotes, plus page after page of great and relevant quotes on the subject at hand by celebrities and politicians. If every person in America read this book, we might actually have a shot of living in a sane and compassionate country.

[Jem43 · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is one of the most important exegesis on the current state of the American penal system and breakdown of our Constitution. Each page holds a pearl of wisdom from Billie Holiday to Thomas Jefferson. Peter McWilliams style is completely accessible, compassionate and astute. It is a priceless tome and one that I keep near by. You can begin the book at any number of chapters and in fact are given permission to do so by the author. This book tragically was released post-humously, followinga debacle of jurisprudence the likes of which this book seeks to inform on. Please get, read, pass on, re-read a copy of this book.

[George · Rating 5 out of 5]

6/15/10

Thanks to her recent and excellent review of Peter McWillams' 'Ain't Nobody's Business if I Do,' my goodreads friend, Krista, has reminded that I too had read and very much appreciated this book, but had not included it on my goodreads shelf. In fact, it was the one book that I happily gave to my son, soon after he became a defense attorney in a county public defender's office. Not trying to influence the judicial system (too much).

Recommendation: We really do need to pay more attention to the individual, freedom-loving good guys, once and always, among us. Peter McWilliams was one of those good guys.

[Cannonhistory Potter · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book needs to be read by anyone who is confused if they are a liberal, a conservative, or a Libertarian. Very well written, it takes you step-by-step through the absurdities of laws that have been passed in America that protect one from oneself. McWilliams goes of the deep end on some issues, but there is a logical consistency in what he is saying.

Do yourself a favor when reading this book: suspend all of the "rules" that have been imprinted on your mind, be they from home, church or state.

[Kim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Yeah, it took me a LONG time to read this book.

The irony is it is an easy, short-chaptered read. So one would think one would be able to rush through it. However, the content and depth of the book makes one inclined to take one’s time to absorb and subsequently (and hopefully) appreciate the premise and point of the book.

The premise of the book is that consensual crimes – or those considered to be consensual crimes- put a pointless and needless drain on society, because one cannot legislate morality. McWilliams points this out throughout the book; this is not to say that there are crimes that are not harmful, to individuals and broadly, to society. Hence, the genesis of religious factions and politicians to annihilate the “crime-in-question.” Yet, even in the example of cigarette smoking, prostitution and illegal drugs, one must also starkly see that there is also a hypocrisy to these socially-considered consensual crimes. Yes, we all know (especially now) that smoking is bad for you. Yet, and at every attempt to completely annihilate it, it does not make it go away. Why? Because of personal choice, underground access, and someone, even with government ‘blessing’ profits off the consensual crime.

Yet, the bigger danger here as McWilliams points out, IS the encroachment to our individual and broadly, our collective freedom every time someone want to annihilate what it considers to be a consensual crime. First, who determines what the crime is, the degree of same, finally, who enforces it, and ultimately, does criminalization, prosecution, enforcement eliminate (annihilate) the crime in question? McWilliams’s chapter on this with the religious and political (left/right) bents on these is irreparably stark. Further, in the prosecution these alleged crimes – again, under the presumption of innocence- one loses one’s home, income, livelihood, and ability to keep oneself going as one can/tries to prove one’s innocence. Add a conviction, and one then and henceforth, cannot start over again, even after serving one’s time! So, you’ve lost everything before the conviction and now cannot start over post-conviction – having served one’s time, as once one is a convicted felon, you can’t get a (good) job, an apartment, nor vote! What then, is one to do to live? You turn to crime to survive and feed the beast once more.

The encroachment deepens when religious and political (left/right) try to impose, which is what they’re actually doing with religious factions wagging the political wheels its ideal/standard of morality on the rest of society. The chapter on the origin of the nuclear family is also telling to this end when one considers the historical basis for it, with the idealized American standard. These factions (conveniently) forget that the United States separated church and state for a reason. They have forgotten or disregard the history behind this tenet, for lack of a better word. The tenet is that no one religion, and subsequently ideology is to take possession of the country when the pivot point is (still) for citizens to be able to do what they please, of course with the limitation that what they please does not infringe upon the right of others to in general, pursue the ‘same’ thing (“life, liberty and the pursuit so happiness”). Yet, factions wish to limit liberty to suit its interests, standards, and subsequently determine what (and how) happiness is to ‘supposed to be.’ However, no one is to question, let alone, curtail that imposition, because then, the presumption on the part of the adherent is the questioning and curtailment is against God. No, it’s not against God: factions want to determine, enforce and ultimately control what others can do to suit their interest; induce a global and narrow comfort zone … in a country that has fought on many levels and times thus far, to preserve freedom, which includes the freedom to choose. These fame factions also forget that they are not in a position to rule which is their quiet objective, but intentionally, via the Bill of Rights and the United Stated Constitution, to serve! There is a difference between the two, and here is the warning, lesson, hope and resolution in McWilliams’ book.

The people have forgotten their history, what their country was founded upon, with the fact that factions cannot and do not have power nor keep same without following. McWilliams makes the valid point that sadly, politicians come to, and stay in power by what they feel/gauge their constituency wants. It is a double-edged sword as it is career-dangerous to be out-of-touch with what one’s constituency wants. However, it is another matter in that what the constituency wants is diametrically opposed to the Bill of Rights and United States Constitution, the latter of which each representative, irrespective of the level of government swears to uphold! People need to keep this in mind and also be mindful of what they want does have consequences. I love McWilliams’ chapter on Education which goes into this. It’s a brief chapter, yet it reminds the reader what he/she learned in history class, and why there is a reason for conscious choice as opposed to just and only top-down given ‘choice;” propaganda. What people fail to realize is that when you demonize and subsequently try to eliminate who(ever) you feel you do not like, there will come a time when that same authority that you depend upon to uphold what you feel is freedom, will, and can also come to get you:

In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then, they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then, they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then, they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then, they came for me, and by that time, no one was left to speak up. – Martin Niemoeller. Page 756

… and if that isn’t enough for consideration and reflection:

Freedom is not a luxury that we can indulge in when at last we have security and prosperity and enlightenment; it is rather, antecedent to all these, for without it, we can have neither security nor prosperity nor enlightenment. – Henry Steels Commager. Page 767

Liberty trains for liberty. Responsibility is the first step in responsibility. W.E.B. DeBois. Page 768
A man is either free or not. There cannot be any apprenticeship for freedom. Imamu Amiri Baraka. Page 768

If there is anything a public servant hates to do it’s something for the public. Elbert Hubbard. Page 768

The war for freedom is never truly won because the price of freedom is constant vigilance over ourselves and over our government. Eleanor Roosevelt. Page 769

This government is ours whether it be local, county, State or Federal. It doesn’t belong to anyone but the people of America. Don’t treat it as an impersonal thing; don’t treat it as something to sneer at; treat is as something that belongs to you. – Harry L. Hopkins. Page 771

When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default, it can never be recovered. – Dorothy Thompson. Page 771


Overall and still, a cautionary tale, that is, if we, the people are aware of what our responsibilities are with the consequences of our choices. It’s a big book, but worth the considerate read on so many levels.

[Krista]

I completely agree with the concept of this book; that we waste a lot of resources and our own future liberties criminalizing activities that were agreed to between adults and do not harm another's person or property. The book has some shocking facts and interesting history.

However, I think it is limited in its ability to persuade and convince, because the tone ridicules anyone who doesn't already believe the concepts.

[Kevin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone should read this book! It looks imposing, but reads quick. You also do not need to read front to back. You can read different sections randomly without losing anything. This book clearly outlines how ridiculous so many of our laws are, how un-enforcable they are, and in some cases, how archaic they are. It has a healthy dose of humor, but takes the subject very seriously. If you read only one book in your life, this should be it!

[Dirdirdir · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is not an objective look into the criminalization of consensual activity, but rather a politically driven tome that states the obvious and assumes the reader is an idiot. I can't imagine anyone who is a fan of a justice system derived from societal morality would be persuaded by this book given the language. If you support the decriminalization of "consensual crimes", then this book is still a waste of your time, as it is not going to present an idea you have not thought before.

[Allison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent arguments for why consensual crimes (aka victimless crimes, like drug use, homosexuality, etc) should be decriminalized. MacDonald anticipates moral and religious arguments and presents convincing counter-arguments; his writing is logical and packed with data, but is also highly readable, as he takes a conversational tone with the reader.

[Michael Jinks · Rating 5 out of 5]

Surprised me in the way it broadened my notion of personal liberty and government intervention in citizens' lives. Changed the way I look at American politics; put me outside the scope of pretty much any public discussion then or now, but on topics which have been gradually easing that way in the years since; drug policy being the most obvious, but on others as well.

[Jen G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every time I pick up this book I feel like I am settling in for a heart to heart with my slightly crack pot and very paranoid Father. I love it! To hell with the law degree all you need in life is this book.

[Kathie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Anyone who thinks Marijuana should be legalized should read this. Be prepared to be appalled at how much money we spend in our country to jail people who are only harming themselves. On the other hand are they? This was the dilemma I had with the book. Thought provoking

[Kevin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely wonderful book. Best compendium on quotations on liberty you are likely to ever find. The book would be worth the price just for the quotations. Sad that such a book is so radical in a once promising social experiment.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best books I have ever read. Long, detailed, but explains how and why a so called "democratic society" like the U.S. still has a long way to go in seeing true freedom being exercised by its citizens.

[Steven Colucci · Rating 5 out of 5]

I took the LSAT because of this book lol I LOVED and still do LOVE IT!

[Will Petrone · Rating 5 out of 5]

WIll Petrone


Ain’t Nobody’s Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Country by Peter McWilliams is a book about, well, just what the title suggests. In this quite lengthy book (an intimidating 653 pages in all) the author takes on “consensual crimes” which he defines as crimes that do not infringe upon the rights of anybody else. His thesis is the very first sentence, and states that “You should be allowed to do whatever you want with your own person and property, as long as you don’t physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other” (3). The first third of the book focuses on the broad idealistic reasoning for his ideas. He goes into things such as the ideas that laws against consensual crimes are unconstitutional, un-American, and are in direct opposition to capitalism and free markets, etc. He spends time examining why such laws are illegal, and the two largest arguments against consensual crimes are that they are dangerous and immoral. He brings up several points to combat the ideas behind their illegality. Generally, he puts forward the argument that while, yes, many of these things are dangerous to the person who would choose to do them, they should not be illegal because of this. His argument is that since the action would not harm anybody else, and the person doing it would be fully consenting, there is no reason it should be illegal. He also argues that the ‘immorality’ of many of these crimes is based in religion, and thus should not be dealt with in the law. He states that most ‘morals’ in the eyes of the law are based on the Christian religion, and to a lesser extent the other Abrahamic Religions. He makes the argument that the country was never intended to be run by strictly Christian ethics and uses a number of ways to support this. One way is tracing our country’s religious history and saying that many of the founders were, in fact, not Christians but Deists. He also points out that a large part of our revolution was being free from religious interference in government. One way he demonstrates this is by pointing out that the king was supposedly selected by god to rule, and that after the revolution, our people saw that we could live with a God outside of our government. The rest of the book focuses on specific consensual crimes. He gives a lot of background on exactly what the crimes are, how they became illegal, and why these reasons are absurd. His principles he put forward in the beginning of the book remain consistent with the rest of his arguments. The most interesting thing about the book, I thought, was the fact that he says that you do not need to read the whole thing. He says that you only need to read its first chapter, which gives a general overview of his arguments, and then he says you should jump around to the issues that you care about most. I thought that this was a very pragmatic approach to the way he views his own book.
His major argument, as stated above, is that “You should be allowed to do whatever you want with your own person and property, as long as you don’t physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other” (3). This applies to an array of things that we have discussed in class, and one I can specifically think of is Tan Mom. There is much controversy over this genetic-defying-melanin-hog. She tans, on average, “way too f*cking much” per week, and as I am sure is common knowledge, this is pretty dangerous. And no matter how dangerous it is, it is not, and should not be illegal. It is her decision to go tanning, and while this may be a very dumb one, it is hers to make. She can choose to tan as much as she wants, or as much as the salon allows her to use their devices. It harms no one else, and should therefore not be illegal. On the issue of her daughter however you could argue that since tanning is dangerous, and she is a minor and would therefore not be able to consent so taking her could be argued to be illegal. Another thing he says is that “Our bodies and our lives belong to ourselves. Our bodies do not belong to the state, to our relatives, or to our friends” (437). This relates to our discussion about the Right to Die or assisted suicide. In class, we debated whether or not you should be able to tell a physician to give you a lethal amount of some drug, rather than make your family face the emotional stress or the medical bills. Whatever your reason for wanting to lose your life, you should be allowed to do so. He says this very plainly, and it is all centered on the principal that our own body is ours, and no one else’s. A third specific statement he makes is about prostitution, saying that “I view prostitution as a purely economic exchange, inherently no more or less degrading for either buyer or seller than any other professional relationship.” (339). This relates to our class discussion of the legality of prostitution, which the author handles just like all the other cases. His basic argument is that prostitution is completely consensual with both the prostitute and the patron, and should therefore not be illegal. If either one of them was forced into the exchange, there would be a problem, but if legal it would be regulated and then would cause no harm to any nonconsenting party.
The author is very biased, but is very open about it. He is trying to tell you why this side of the argument is correct and the other is wrong. He does not pretend to be someone who went into their research with little knowledge and then formed his opinion from the evidence. He, from the first page, tells you what he thinks is the correct way our government should be run. This book is so Libertarian, I’m sure it contains most of Ron Paul’s platform, and I assume that Penn Jillette said it was ‘a little on the radical side.’ And to just to drive home how ridiculously Libertarian it is, Milton Friedman is quoted as saying “This is a wonderful book” (Back Cover). Being a member of the aforementioned party, I had a grand ol’ time reading this book. The author even directly says that the book espouses libertarianism. His audience consists of mainly like-minded people, but also people who are on the fence about many of these issues. The book spends a great deal of time explaining its thought process, rather than just spouting off generalizations to appease the readers who would already agree with it. Overall, this book was great, and should be read by anyone who either agrees, or wants to see what the Libertarian crowd would have to say about the issues.

[Michaela Light · Rating 5 out of 5]

About the crazy "illegal acts" we have on the books in most countries for consensual crimes eg drugs, sex, money use etc. ie crimes that don't hurt anyone else but the adults involved who have agreed to whatever they are doing.

Which are completely different from laws about acts that do hurt others without consent such as robbery, rape, fraud and murder.

The book gives the context of the laws being created, what America was like before those laws, counter-arguments and why they are fallacious.

The book is particular poignant because the author had AIDS-related non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and took pot to help with the nausea he had. He was released from custody on $250,000 bail and with the "condition that he not use marijuana." (this was before medical marijuana laws ) and he drowned in his own vomit while in intense pain while he was waiting sentencing.

[Mike Cross · Rating 5 out of 5]

While over 25 years old, this book is still a classic and holds up today, for the most part. Author gets a little long winded, but all content is relevant and interesting. Should be on every non-fiction readers' list. And a much quicker read than the page count implies.

[Daniel Erickson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the definitive book about crime and culture in America. Peter Mc Williams explores how America changed its views on crime and Law through it's experience with prohibition. Yes this book will piss you off.

[Elizabeth · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society (Paperback)
by Peter McWilliams

[Anthony Holler · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my Top-25.

[Orpheus · Rating 4 out of 5]

There needs to be an updated edition released! This is still so relavent even though many of the statistics are outdated.