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

[NineSpine]

True enough, but will some people see that as an open invitation and then claim "hunger" as an excuse.
This sort of thing has the potential to go very badly, as much as the intent is good.

You mean like the epidemic of people speeding and then pretending they were driving to the emergency room?

[TwoNineMarine]

It's almost as if it may be fundamentally morally wrong to erect an economic system that requires some people to starve, isn't it? Weird.

Perhaps.

But it's also morally wrong to condone stealing (which is what this is).

Either way a lot needs to be fixed to amend this situation.

[Captain N]

You mean like the epidemic of people speeding and then pretending they were driving to the emergency room?

It's the same argument every time with the same posters...

If we allow this....it's going to cause the world to implode on itself and chaos will ensue. None which have a basis in reality and is more often being terrified of a "What If" situation that never seems to arise.

See also discussions pertaining to: Wage Increases and Transgender bathroom usage.

[TwoNineMarine]

True enough, but will some people see that as an open invitation and then claim "hunger" as an excuse.
This sort of thing has the potential to go very badly, as much as the intent is good.

That's my thinking as well.

Criminals aren't stupid (most of them anyways) and will use any excuse possible to avoid trouble.

[NineSpine]

Perhaps.

But it's also morally wrong to condone stealing (which is what this is).

Either way a lot needs to be fixed to amend this situation.

Stealing is a loaded term. You can only steal once an economic system has been erected that determines some things off limits to you. If it was wrong to declare those things off limits to you, stealing is not wrong.

[Deleted]

Dont see the big deal about this.

Cant send a hobo to the pokey for stealing 4 dollar. People like that need help, not punishment. With some directed support people like that could be contributing members of society.

Or, ofcourse we can build a giant wall and catapult all the homeless over it for sport.. Cuz we can.. And for safety

G'day

[TwoNineMarine]

Stealing is a loaded term. You can only steal once an economic system has been erected that determines some things off limits to you. If it was wrong to declare those things off limits to you, stealing is not wrong.

It's not wrong to declare a businesses goods as off limits unless you pay for said goods.

All societies throughout time have had rules against stealing things that are not yours. Including food.

The more pointed issue should be figuring out how to get those homeless folk some work so they don't feel the need to steal food.

[NineSpine]

It's not wrong to declare a businesses goods as off limits unless you pay for said goods.

Only if the economic system is just in the first place. For example, if the goods are slaves, then what? Is it right for the government to "steal" child pornography from people who are selling that good?

societies throughout time have had rules against stealing things that are not yours. Including food.

This is an anachronism. You are presuming that modern concepts of property can be extrapolated onto the past. They cannot.

The more pointed issue should be figuring out how to get those homeless folk some work so they don't feel the need to steal food.

There is never enough work for everything, and there never will be. At some point, there won't even be enough work for half the people. That's why clinging to outdated economic models is stupid.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Still haven't told me what my type is.

Also, you can claim you didn't justify it. But you still essentially asked why ask for it when you can just take it?

My original point is that you love to shit all over people for getting help because of your arbitrary qualifications and assumption that most people are gaming the system.

[Mihalik]

A lot of people don't seem to be able to grasp the difference between a Misdemeanor and a Felony. I also think some folks here need to read Crime and Punishment and Les Miserables.

Essentially what happened here is that taking into account the cost of the crime, the attenuating conditions of the perpetrator the court simply ruled that jailing someone on the edge of starvation for committing a 4 euro crime is idiotic. The fact that this ever went to court is idiotic, as the state spent thousands upon thousands of euros pursing this absurd case.

Next time you jaywalk remember why misdemeanors exist and why you aren't sitting in a penitentiary.

[Hiricine]

It's almost as if it may be fundamentally morally wrong to erect an economic system that requires some people to starve, isn't it? Weird.

People starved in nature for tens of thousands of years before any economic system existed. To argue that a system can be at fault for starving someone outside of physically taking food or resources away from them would be an irrational argument.

[lockedout]

4 euros, 30k euros per year to jail them.

So much for being a fiscal conservative.

So I can come to your store and steal 4-5 euros a day with 10 of my friends?
It's only 1400 euros...

[Dextroden]

My original point is that you love to shit all over people for getting help because of your arbitrary qualifications and assumption that most people are gaming the system.

Where have I ever done this? I've been in here marveling at people justify theft because "it would cost more to prosecute him".

[Cthulhu 2020]

So I can come to your store and steal 4-5 euros a day with 10 of my friends?
It's only 1400 euros...

Are you in a crisis situation, or are you just being dense?

- - - Updated - - -

Where have I ever done this? I've been in here marveling at people justify theft because "it would cost more to prosecute him".

I boggle when people disregard past threads they've participated in, simply because acknowledging things they've said in the past makes them out to be a hypocrite.

[TwoNineMarine]

Only if the economic system is just in the first place. For example, if the goods are slaves, then what? Is it right for the government to "steal" child pornography from people who are selling that good?



This is an anachronism. You are presuming that modern concepts of property can be extrapolated onto the past. They cannot.



There is never enough work for everything, and there never will be. At some point, there won't even be enough work for half the people. That's why clinging to outdated economic models is stupid.

It'll never be outdated to have laws/rules against stealing. Plain and simple.

Are you ok with someone coming in your home or business that you own and taking food?

And comparing stealing food vs human trafficking/sex trade is a bit...rash isn't it?

And I can't speak to Italy but do they have shelters and churches and other such places that serve food to the homeless?

[Mehrunes]

It's also basic human instinct to shit when you need to no matter where you are, scream and hit when you want something someone else has, and kill those that get in your way or steal from you. We don't encourage any of those behaviors either.

Let's start with how your earlier claim of:

Typically when you break the law you get punished. When you've already been deemed dangerous enough for prison, breaking out is a preetttty clear sign that you refuse to see what you did was wrong, don't care, or otherwise flaunt the judgment while continuing to be a danger to others, which shockingly results in another legal judgment.

is not universal truth. There are some countries where breaking out of jail itself is not illegal. Kinda hard to pull it off without breaking other laws in practice, especially if you have help (and escaping without help sounds very implausible unless the prison staff is full of lazy and incompetent morons), but it is still the case.

Yet, from the start you argued from the position that they are wrong and even outright asked them to tell you what straw-man they want to talk about in an earlier post. Yet you went full straw-lord here yourself. Not punishing breaking out of prison doesn't encourage anything if you're hauled back to it and your sentence is suspended for the time you're out. As such, your comparisons make no sense. Then you mocked their claim that breaking out of prison is just expressing your right to freedom, when it's actually the justification used for such laws in countries that have them.

And then you attack their usage of "you" and accuse them of failure at reading. Sure, you may have attempted a reconciliation, but as you said, the way you chose to interpret it is only a general thing, not the be all end all of how "you" is used. Made perfect sense for me they were making examples. But the best part, is that despite even quoting the post in question to another user, you didn't notice the glaring failure in reading on your own part, even if you interpreted it your way. You see, the "If you threatening someone's life they'll use self-defense." bit didn't mention any murder. You conjured that out of thin air straw. And even if it was murder killing (because self-defense makes killing not criminal, as such, not murder), being an escapee from prison doesn't magically void your legal rights. But that's beside the point.

I don't know if you had a bad day or something, but that exchange was just painful to read.

[Deleted]

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

This is a bad precedent.

It's not justice to penalize someone harshly for trying to survive by stealing food.

[nonameelf]

So I can come to your store and steal 4-5 euros a day with 10 of my friends?
It's only 1400 euros...

You aren't in a situation in which you would need to so you would be fined for stealing.

[NineSpine]

People starved in nature for tens of thousands of years before any economic system existed. To argue that a system can be at fault for starving someone outside of physically taking food or resources away from them would be an irrational argument.

You are begging the question. You are justifying an economic system by appealing to the tenets of the very same economic system, specifically the property arrangements of that economic system. Essentially that you are saying is "It's wrong to steal because it's my property, and it's my property because it's wrong to steal." That's circular logic.

Besides, it's very easy to describe a system where nobody explicitly takes food away from someone but is still an unjust economic system that starves them: Slavery.

[Hiricine]

Wait, so you want evidence that human beings starve to death? For real? Is this real?

Evidence that an adult man has starved in Italy because he could not or would not steal food, yes, or that the specific man in question was in imminent danger of starving. You can't provide either so it doesn't exist, which means by extension you would advocate for stealing from someone out of necessity with no evidence that it was necessary.