Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry • Hacker News Board

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#241

Post by antisthenes » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:55 PM UTC

notsotrue wrote: post #27

sp332 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being poor shouldn't mean you can't get basic life-sustaining things like food, shelter, clothing. That's why being poor is not an excuse for stealing but being hungry is.

Agreed, I'm all for basic income, and social safety nets. But stealing them, isn't the right answer either. The burden should be on the state to provide those necessities, not the local business owners.

There is absolutely no way that a central system (even at the state or county level, if you're in the US) can surpass in allocative efficiency what an individual can do for themselves.

While I agree with you in principle, placing the burden on an entity far removed from the local context will always leave people underserved or forgotten entirely, in which case their instinct to survive will hurt the local business owners regardless of whether they would have helped voluntarily or not.

Unless it really is a true basic income.

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#242

Post by VLM » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:55 PM UTC

stronglikedan wrote: post #133

I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The potential for abuse due to hunger being subjective notwithstanding, there are social programs in place to accommodate the needy. Do they not have these programs in Italy? I am a very compassionate, empathetic (to a fault) person, but I just don't see the justification for th…

Financial taxation of all forms and levels. Expensive government regulations. Participating in a market with a government tolerated monopoly. Ownership of land under zoning board control (essentially all land). Licensing fees on titled registered personal property (cars, boats, homes). Benefiting from government services (national defense, police, maybe some day medical care, all the way down to welfare) without having first paid your share in taxes. Any service ever provided to disabled or handicapped people, unless they were really rich and paid a lot of taxes before the accident. Public education either in schools or libraries. The "public" airwaves. Theft, all of it.

By definition the only people playing the game, are those willing to hold their nose and wade into the cesspool anyway. Nobody currently in the cesspool can seriously convince anyone that they really thought they were wading into a Randian utopian swimming pool, they knew what they were getting into. Given that intentional acceptance of the situation they're voluntarily a part of, a bag of crackers isn't much of an additional theft. Deal with it.

What is likely to happen, is when I was a kid cigarette cartons were like $10 and out on shelves for anyone to steal, but why would anyone steal a $10 carton of cigs? Now they're like $80 per carton and locked up in closets until after payment is made. So there will be changes in supermarket operations. Oh well, disruption happens.

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#243

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

sethhochberg wrote: post #155

rootlocus wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beggars ask for help in the streets, but I personally can't help each and every one of them. You may be sympathetic, but how is the homeless man supposed to find you when he needs your help?

In theory that is the whole point of taxpayer funded support programs... we can't all be there, but we do all pay taxes for the specific purpose of having a better society (including things like food banks, soup kitchens, etc for people in need).

> In theory that is the whole point of taxpayer funded support programs... we can't all be there, but we do all pay taxes for the specific purpose of having a better society (including things like food banks, soup kitchens, etc for people in need).

Presumably, any legal finding of necessity by a judge is based on an awareness of an existence of these programs, such as they may be in the applicable jurisdiction, and a determination that they were not, in fact, sufficient to meet the need in the specific circumstance at issue.

The existence of a government program intended in theory as a general solution to a problem does not logically imply (and, in fact, often falls very short in practice) that the problem is, in fact, adequately and sufficiently addressed in all concrete cases.

> but we do all pay taxes for the specific purpose of having a better society (including things like food banks, soup kitchens, etc for people in need).

And also including judges that review the specific circumstances of particular cases brought before them.

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#244

Post by noir_lord » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

protomyth wrote: post #189

nowprovision wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet you've been pretty privileged in grand scheme of things, university, regular jobs, maybe the lowest point has been backpacking etc... Parent have at least one car, yawn yawn yawn.. No one is stealing from you, they are stealing from a supermarket. Privileged people always seem to think in black and white, theft is theft never an excuse blah blah, quite often making the cliche mistake of associating morality wit…

I've not been privileged all my life. I have a dislike for fish because of some of things and situations we were in. It is never, ever ok to steal. Stealing from a supermarket is stealing from a person or people. Just because you cannot name who is affected doesn't mean it isn't people. It is black and white. The morality and legality are in alignment in this regard. This whole "shades of grey" leads to the blackness…

> This whole "shades of grey" leads to the blackness that destroys people and civilizations.

I'd argue that seeing the world in black and white is what destroys people and civilisations rather more.

Many of the worst abuses of history have come from black and white thinking (people with black skin are not people, jews are not people, people without my political beliefs are not people).

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#245

Post by philh » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:57 PM UTC

jemfinch wrote: post #200

stronglikedan wrote: post #133

I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The potential for abuse due to hunger being subjective notwithstanding, there are social programs in place to accommodate the needy. Do they not have these programs in Italy? I am a very compassionate, empathetic (to a fault) person, but I just don't see the justification for th…

> I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The Catholic Church would agree: stealing is intrinsically evil, and thus wrong always and everywhere. The way they handle situations like this is by defining "stealing when starving" as "not stealing at all, but reappropriating things according to God's design for them." They…

This seems pretty mealy-mouthed. They don't want to give up "stealing is always wrong", and they don't want to give up "stealing to survive is okay", so they redefine the word "stealing". They're basically saying "stealing is wrong, and if it's not wrong, it's not stealing".

(They clearly do not agree with user stronglikedan.)

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#246

Post by RodericDay » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:57 PM UTC

hueving wrote: post #179

nowprovision wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet you've been pretty privileged in grand scheme of things, university, regular jobs, maybe the lowest point has been backpacking etc... Parent have at least one car, yawn yawn yawn.. No one is stealing from you, they are stealing from a supermarket. Privileged people always seem to think in black and white, theft is theft never an excuse blah blah, quite often making the cliche mistake of associating morality wit…

Discursive ad hominem, yawn. Discuss the implications of theft being okay if you are hungry, not the background of the person who suggested they disagree with that notion.

> Discursive ad hominem, yawn.

What kind of environment do you partake in discourse in that this kind of condescending contribution is acceptable? It sounds like you're taking your cues from the Comic Guy from The Simpsons. "Tu quoque? yawn".

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#247

Post by arethuza » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:58 PM UTC

steego wrote: post #214

stronglikedan wrote: post #133

I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The potential for abuse due to hunger being subjective notwithstanding, there are social programs in place to accommodate the needy. Do they not have these programs in Italy? I am a very compassionate, empathetic (to a fault) person, but I just don't see the justification for th…

> I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. * Stealing something back * Stealing Hitler's secret plans * Stealing a portion of everybody's property/income, but providing vital protection, infrastructure and social services in return. * Stealing the heart of a girl from a guy who abuses her. * Stealing land from the commons to efficiently put it to work * Stealing land at market valu…

These kinds of discussions always make me think of this story:

"A Scottish miner was walking home one night with a bunch of pheasants he had poached from a local landowner's estate when the landowner appeared and demanded that the miner hand over the pheasants. "Why should I hand them over to you?", asked the miner. "Because this is my land and those are my pheasants", the landowner replied.

"OK", said the miner, "where did you get the land from?" "From my father", said the landowner. "So where did your father get it?", the miner asked. The landowner replied: "From his father, who got it from his father, and so on. This land has belonged to my family for 500 years!"

"Well", the miner continued, "how did your family get it 500 years ago?" "Oh, they fought for it", answered the landowner. "OK then", the miner said, "take off your jacket and I'll fight you for it!"

NB I first read this in The Poor had No Lawyers - described as "how this country was stolen from its people":

http://www.andywightman.com/poor-had-no-lawyers

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#248

Post by alecbaldwinlol » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:58 PM UTC

steego wrote: post #214

stronglikedan wrote: post #133

I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The potential for abuse due to hunger being subjective notwithstanding, there are social programs in place to accommodate the needy. Do they not have these programs in Italy? I am a very compassionate, empathetic (to a fault) person, but I just don't see the justification for th…

> I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. * Stealing something back * Stealing Hitler's secret plans * Stealing a portion of everybody's property/income, but providing vital protection, infrastructure and social services in return. * Stealing the heart of a girl from a guy who abuses her. * Stealing land from the commons to efficiently put it to work * Stealing land at market valu…

Food is the private property of someone else. Pay for it or ask for it for free.

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#249

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:58 PM UTC

dimino wrote: post #169

stronglikedan wrote: post #133

I'm apparently in the minority, but, after reading the article, I still maintain that there is never a reason to steal from your fellow man. The potential for abuse due to hunger being subjective notwithstanding, there are social programs in place to accommodate the needy. Do they not have these programs in Italy? I am a very compassionate, empathetic (to a fault) person, but I just don't see the justification for th…

Agreed -- I think we should, as neediness increases, lower the penalties per a judge's discretion, but I don't think we should ever completely eliminate the criminal aspect of theft. There is room in a justice system to convict a person of a crime without punishing that person in any meaningful way.

> Agreed -- I think we should, as neediness increases, lower the penalties per a judge's discretion, but I don't think we should ever completely eliminate the criminal aspect of theft.

We certainly complete eliminate the criminality of intentional homicide when there is sufficient need. Seems to me, that the case for doing so for mere theft of chattels is much stronger. (Also, note that this is separate from the issue of whether or not conversion of chattels ought always to be a tort creating a debt for compensation from the taker to the one deprived, which should be resolved through whatever system a jurisdiction has for the resolution of debts and which may requiring repayment when the taker is capable, with interest, unless the debt is qualified for discharge, e.g., through bankruptcy or similar proceedings. But that's a different issue than criminality.)

Re: Italian court rules food theft 'not a crime' if hungry

#250

Post by zo1 » Tue, May 03, 2016, 3:58 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #210

protomyth wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not been privileged all my life. I have a dislike for fish because of some of things and situations we were in. It is never, ever ok to steal. Stealing from a supermarket is stealing from a person or people. Just because you cannot name who is affected doesn't mean it isn't people. It is black and white. The morality and legality are in alignment in this regard. This whole "shades of grey" leads to the blackness…

> It is black and white That you believe this makes it absolutely impossible for me to think you're not in a privileged position. > The whole point of government social programs is to provide for survival. There are organizations that provide and places to go. Great when you know where to go, and they work as they should. They are not perfect. And people are not perfect. Especially not when starving.

The problem with peddling guilt is that not everyone subscribes to it. I pay taxes, and I expect the needy and the poor and the sick and the hungry to be taken care of. If anyone should feel guilty, it should be the government leaders and the people that don't hold them accountable for the duties there are tasked with performing.

I think stealing is wrong, no matter the situation and desperation. However, I also believe that the supermarket (or whoever was stolen-from) has the right to compassion for this individual. And if you ask me, I believe people are generally good, and most would forgive the transgression without hesitation.