Food Is Now Free In Italy If You Are Hungry, Preposterous!!!

[sarahtasher]

So basically justice should not happen if it is not worth the money?

This is a bad precedent.

Yes. Even in the most ''virile'' and ''tough'' places in the United States, a 50$ theft is considered a trivial offence.

[NineSpine]

And you don't think destroying the entire food industry will not have any negative consequences?

Sure its just a small incident right here. But where do they draw the line? How 'hungry' does a person have to be in order to be legally able to steal? How often are you allowed to steal food to 'stave off hunger'?

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how law works.

[lockedout]

What if those also cost money?
Why doesn't he go steal food and we'll see what the judge says?


Because you still get arrested and they'll find out that you're just a freeloader.

Find out how exactly? Why am I being arrested if it's legal??

[Dextroden]

Clearly you both have enough wealth to afford a computer and internet connection.

They could just be on a cheap phone, a library computer or a friend's. Weren't you one of the people bitching that having a recent cellphone didn't equal wealth amongst refugees?

[lockedout]

Yes. Even in the most ''virile'' and ''tough'' places in the United States, a 50$ theft is considered a trivial offence.

No it's considered shoplifting, and do it a few times you will go to jail.

[spinner981]

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how law works.

Ok, so you made the post claiming that I am wrong because reasons. Now are you going to make the post explaining those reasons?

[NineSpine]

Ok, so you made the post claiming that I am wrong because reasons. Now are you going to make the post explaining those reasons?

I don't need to explain why your insane slippery slope fallacy is an insane slippery slope fallacy.

[Dextroden]

This wasn't "hunger", this was immediate need of nourishment.

Don't know why people are arguing to jail someone for "stealing water" while lost in a desert.

The wording also sounds similar to someone with a food necessity for diabetic shock, but yeah.

Except the desert of Italy happens to have many sources of water that are free if you ask and are truly in need. Horrible comparison.

And you didn't refute that people are in here justifying all kinds of theft now.

[Hiricine]

Please tell me you are actively attempting to be ignorant, and this isn't just your default operating state... SMH. You're from the USA, aren't you?

I'm fairly certain nobody will be starving to death on the street, but you're trying to pretend that starvation doesn't lead to a whole host of other health problems which I am fairly certain HAVE been the recorded cause of death. At the very least I have exactly as much "proof" of my statements as you do, but at least I'm not spreading ideas that would result in injury to others.

Orlong disgusts me. What a waste of carbon.

The premise of the thread is that without stealing or without free food that people will die or suffer injury, the burden of proof would seem to be with those who make this point that it actually happens. Can you find a single person who would have suffered such an injury if it wasn't for stealing food? As it stands, you're trying to defend a hypothetical person that doesn't even exist, and if your argument that stealing from someone is warranted because of a case you can't prove ever happened then it really doesn't hold any water. Why don't you make a better use out of your time and defend unicorns from poachers?

[NineSpine]

No it's considered shoplifting, and do it a few times you will go to jail.

A system that places the right to property over the right to live is absurd.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Clearly you both have enough wealth to afford a computer and internet connection.

Libraries in the US let anyone use a computer, with internet. You know, for reading, school, work stuff....

[sarahtasher]

No it's considered shoplifting, and do it a few times you will go to jail.

A trivial offence, by definition, can land you in jail if done repeatedly.

[spinner981]

I don't need to explain why your insane slippery slope fallacy is an insane slippery slope fallacy.

How is asking where the line should be drawn a slippery slope fallacy? If its legal to steal food, how much food is a given person legally able to steal and how often? How 'hungry' does one have to be to justify breaking the law to steal food? Do you know what a slippery slope fallacy is?

[NineSpine]

The premise of the thread is that without stealing or without free food that people will die or suffer injury, the burden of proof would seem to be with those who make this point that it actually happens. Can you find a single person who would have suffered such an injury if it wasn't for stealing food? As it stands, you're trying to defend a hypothetical person that doesn't even exist, and if your argument that stealing from someone is warranted because of a case you can't prove ever happened then it really doesn't hold any water. Why don't you make a better use out of your time and defend unicorns from poachers?

Ummmmm.... this whole thread is about a court case where it was ruled that exactly what you are saying doesn't happen, happened.

[Halicia]

Except the desert of Italy happens to have many sources of water that are free if you ask and are truly in need. Horrible comparison.

And you didn't refute that people are in here justifying all kinds of theft now.

Right, cuz Italy is widely known for people dying of thirst in its deserts ?

[Jayburner]

every person on this planet should be able to eat.

[NineSpine]

How is asking where the line should be drawn a slippery slope fallacy? If its legal to steal food, how much food is a given person legally able to steal and how often? How 'hungry' does one have to be to justify breaking the law to steal food? Do you know what a slippery slope fallacy is?

The court ruled on it man. "in the face of the immediate and essential need for nourishment"

[Dextroden]

No. And am I talking to you, lockedout or is this some right-wing collective hivemind?


Stealing food isn't legal.

Yeah, sure you didn't.

I'm talking to you as a person who doesn't know what a public library is.

- - - Updated - - -

Right, cuz Italy is widely known for people dying of thirst in its deserts ?

So you had no clue what you were saying at all when you compared stealing food in Italy to stealing water in the desert.

Good talk.

[spinner981]

every person on this planet should be able to eat.

It's a nice ideal: "Solve world hunger" but in reality the right for a human to eat is just something we made up. Humans used to have to grow their own food in order to eat. They would have to work for that food. People still have to do that. Just because food is easily accessible doesn't therefore mean that people should be able to get as much free food as they want from the people who do work to make it so easily accessible.

The court ruled on it man. "in the face of the immediate and essential need for nourishment"

And that's a very vague statement. One that doesn't answer any questions. How 'immediate' does it have to be? Are they only allowed to steal food if they are within 1 day of dying of starvation? Within 2 days? 3 days? 4 days? How immediate does it have to be?

[sarahtasher]

It's funny to see the usual people berating Europe for being run by ''socialists'' complain about a ruling that will have the obvious side effect of clearing courts for more serious ''crimes''.

But we know the rule : when it's not about buying big guns, big walls or big prisons (for which, to look to look tough and manly, it's okay to ask for increase expenses), it's ''stoopid sucialism lulz fur moochers, cut it kauze they are stealing mah muney''