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

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

#261

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:07 PM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #254

dragonwriter wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a counterexample. That's an example of the short and defined list of prohibited axes of discrimination (the specific law at issue included sexual orientation as an enumerated category protected) discussed upthread in the US and contrasted with the Finnish rule against discrimination on any broad category. So, its not an example of the US having a rule like the Finnish open-ended rule.

What makes you think the Finnish law prohibits discrimination based on "any broad category"?

The upthread claims were that it does, and that this is different from the US system of a limited set of specific things it is illegal to discriminate based on. I haven't endorsed either claim, merely pointed out that the example of the wedding cake case (which was based on a law explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in public accommodations) is not an example contradicting the claim that the US has laws prohibiting discrimination on specific axes rather than the kind ascribed upthread to Finland.

If you have questions about the basis for the claim about Finland, you should as the poster several posts upthread who made it.

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

#262

Post by Camillo » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:07 PM UTC

CajunAlexTrebec wrote: post #110

akrigline wrote: post #90

The way the judges worded this decision makes it a lot less of a slippery slope. This was only accepted because it was an "Immediate and essential need for nourishment." I expect that if more people started stealing, they'd be put through a court process to prove that they were in this condition. What this doesn't do is fix the problem though, it just recognizes a symptom. Why are these people forced to resort to ste…

Italy is falling apart, financially speaking. The people of Italy are suffering as a result. Nearly 50% of bank loans are non-performing (in default). The EBC is conducting a stealth bailout via Target2. Just look at the major Italian bank stocks. They are trading at deep, deep discounts. Maybe the market knows something the EBC and others don't want to admit?

The guy was Hungarian.

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

#263

Post by protomyth » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:08 PM UTC

zo1 wrote: post #250

vidarh wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 beli…

The supermarket owner does have that right, and likely would if asked discretely. People are generally good and would probably forgive. Many do. That's why it is so important to donate to food shelters (don't forget toys for children - feed the body and mind).

But saying stealing is ok is wrong.

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

#264

Post by thaumasiotes » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:08 PM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #192

talmand wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Could have been lower... Yes, that's what I said. I find it interesting that in one sentence you admit something with no proof is not a given but the other part with no proof, that supports your negativity towards this store, IS a given.

Why in god's name would they just lower their prices? To be nicer to people? Do you understand how capitalism works? They already dominate their market at the current prices. They have no need to lower the prices - doing so would only create a backlash if they ever needed to raise the prices again. Keeping them artificially high is part of how you have sales anyway, which drive consumer interest. Yes, it would be nic…

> Why in god's name would they just lower their prices? To be nicer to people? Do you understand how capitalism works?

A great example of the point-and-splutter method of argumentation.

In a greedy capitalist system, the traditional answer to "why in God's name would they lower their prices??!?" is "to sell more stuff". You can reverse the question: why in God's name don't they raise their prices now?!??!?

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

#265

Post by Tomte » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC

When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.

When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour's standing corn.

Deuteronomy 23, 24-25

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

#266

Post by pasquinelli » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:14 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…

would a person who's starving to death ever follow a law preventing them from taking food? i can't believe they would. in fact, i think if a person starved to death when they could've just walked into a grocery story and gotten plenty to eat must have had something deeply wrong with them. i don't even think it's a matter of choice. so such a law is at odds with reality.

and consider what the consequences are for the theft. maybe they get a fine. they won't pay it, of course, because they can't even pay for food. then the fines accumulate, which has no immediate effect on the thief and does nothing to stop them thieving, because if they can't pay for food then they can't pay a fine, no matter how much they owe. on the other had, they may, eventually, be thrown in prison for their crimes, where they'll get fed on the regular, which is practically encouragement to commit crimes. you could also kill them, but i feel that's problematic.

if you don't punish the thief at all then, in the off chance they have the chance to get back on their feet, they won't have a pile of debt keeping them down, they won't have a criminal record because they were starving, and they won't be dead.

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

#267

Post by [deleted] » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:15 PM UTC

Tomte wrote: post #265

When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel. When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour's standing corn. Deuteronomy 23, 24-25

[deleted]

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

#268

Post by pyrale » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:16 PM UTC

tmptmp wrote: post #258

from the article >>Stealing small quantities of food to satisfy a vital need for food did not constitute a crime, the court wrote. What about the loss sustained by the owner? Or perhaps if the "not-so-rich clerk" at the supermarket was in charge of the goods and had to pay for the losses? Whose going to give that "not-so-rich clerk" the lost money? Tomorrow if a thousand "hungry" people stole "small quantities of foo…

Maybe we can care about this problem the day it actually happens, much like we would do if we were coding ?

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

#269

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:16 PM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #56

garyrob wrote: post #30

It's a little hard to understand how this ruling won't cause a certain degree of chaos. Can any hungry, homeless person now steal food from any store in Italy without repercussion? Certainly as a matter of compassion, this ruling can be argued as being reasonable, but how can it work as a practical matter?

No, it's just no longer a crime - IF you were hungry. You'll still get arrested and put through a lengthy trial process if you're caught stealing food. The shop can decide to let the thief have the food, or take it away from them, or call the cops. Theft is commonplace in markets and supermarkets. It's calculated into the cost of doing business. Back when I was a teenager working in a supermarket, one store claimed 1…

> Theft is commonplace in markets and supermarkets.

And, having known several people who worked in loss prevention, it is well-established that the lion's share of that theft -- both of cash and goods -- is by employees.

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

#270

Post by eveningcoffee » Tue, May 03, 2016, 4:17 PM UTC

mbillie1 wrote: post #198

eveningcoffee wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are right! We should provide aid for people who are in danger of starvation, but it does not give anybody right to steal from fellow human. I have a personal experience with possible abuse. I saw a man, probably a foreign (so he is probably not supposed to be familiar with local aid system), with a sign that he needs money for food because he is starving and he indeed did not look alright. After consideri…

As though 10 euros is enough to satisfy his hunger in perpetuity? Do you quit your job and stop working when you have 10 euros in the bank, or do you put it away and try to accumulate more? This "anecdote" is pretty short-sighted.

Starving means that you have not eaten several days and are in desperate need for food immediately. 10 should give you an opinion to end this situation.

If you choose not to then the changes are that you were actually not starving.

Of course, like I told, this is a case of possible abuse. I have no idea what was actually going on.