4 ms·

>there are products where, if someone were to steal them in small amounts, I'm kinda okay with it. Okay. I am not. We could have a national referendum, "are yo

by dankiz 8y ago

>there are products where, if someone were to steal them in small amounts, I'm kinda okay with it. Okay. I am not. We could have a national referendum, "are you okay with people stealing your stuff?". Let's see what happens. The day the bread disappears from your bike, I can assure the chances that someone is going to eat it are slim. He'll probably just throw it away for laughs.

dijit 8y ago
This is a really odd stance to take; and a horrible argument. It's not "OK" to steal anything, but you risk toilet paper being stolen by having it in a public place. The loss of a roll (or 2) of toilet papers is very low compared to the convenience of not having to bring your own toilet roll everywhere. We live in a society and that involves a certain level of (policed) trust, if the cost of having a great convenience is that it sometimes gets stolen then if the cost is low enough and the convenience is high enough it's worth it.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  Toilet paper containers are usually locked in public places.
  - dijit 8y ago
    You could very easily create containers for tampons and pads that only give you one at a time. If you wanted to be slightly more "evil" you could easily make it so removal of the pads would pull away part of the plastic seal; making them impossible to sell and harder to hoard.
    - jessaustin 8y ago
      In fact such dispensers have been created. https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/H-1018/Bathroom-Supplies/Feminine-Hygiene-Dispenser https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/H-1018/Bathroom-Supplie...
simonh 8y ago
Society decides that a certain degree of criminal activity is 'acceptable' in some sense all the time. That's why, even though it would reduce crime, we don't double our policing budget. At some point we decide that the expected reduction in crime isn't worth the extra expenditure.
- mises 8y ago
  No, we deem that the return after a certain point is smaller than the return when invested elsewhere. That does not mean we accept or condone crime. I know someone who lives in Houston. Houston is the "human trafficking capital of the world", so the police are rather busy. This friend had someone smash his window and steal his brand-new leather briefcase with his brand-new laptop inside. The police barely managed to take a police report, because they are "busy". The problem with allowing a "certain amount of crime" is that it's inherently a bright-line issue. What level is acceptable? What dollar amount? Bread is okay but a laptop is wrong; where in between those does the line fall?
  - matt4077 8y ago
    Love how you managed to slip some xenophobia in this completely unrelated argument.
  - simonh 8y ago
    Accepting something might happen, while explicitly stating that it's wrong as mcv did, isn't equatable to condoning it. Nothing that has been said in this thread can be reasonably construed as condoning crime. It's pretty obvious what was being said. I don't think nit picking technical objections based on exaggerations and then extending from minor tampon pilferage to robbery with violence is constructive.
    - mcv 8y ago
      For me it's a bit more than accepting it might happen. If someone is so hungry that they have to steal bread, I hope they will steal my bread. For two reasons: bread is a really basic necessity. You starve if you can't eat. Fortunately almost nobody is that desperate, but if they are, I can't blame them for trying to stay alive. Secondly: bread is cheap. I can easily afford to lose some and not care. If it helps someone stay alive, then I'm glad. And I'm not the only one who thinks this way. A Dutch bishop has said something similar a decade or so ago. To some controversy, because condoning crime, but if your life is at stake, you've got to do what you've got to do. Of course society has some responsibility to ensure nobody ever gets that desperate, and seems to be doing a reasonable job at that, since nobody has stolen my bread yet. But if they did, I'd be fine with it. To get back to the original topic: I don't think sanitary pads and tampons are quite on the same level of bread, but I still don't see theft from public toilets as a serious source of concern.
mcv 8y ago
> The day the bread disappears from your bike, I can assure the chances that someone > is going to eat it are slim. He'll probably just throw it away for laughs. Why? What's so funny about throwing away someone's bread? If you think destroying someone's property is funny, then throwing the entire bike into the canal, or destroying a car, is probably far more laughs. And indeed there are people who do that, sadly. But it's fairly rare, and nobody seems to care much about bread. What does happen is people using the crate on my bike as a trash can. I hate that. That's not something I'm okay with.

by dankiz 8y ago

dijit 8y ago

This is a really odd stance to take; and a horrible argument. It's not "OK" to steal anything, but you risk toilet paper being stolen by having it in a public place. The loss of a roll (or 2) of toilet papers is very low compared to the convenience of not having to bring your own toilet roll everywhere. We live in a society and that involves a certain level of (policed) trust, if the cost of having a great convenience is that it sometimes gets stolen then if the cost is low enough and the convenience is high enough it's worth it.

whatshisface 8y ago
Toilet paper containers are usually locked in public places.
- dijit 8y ago
  You could very easily create containers for tampons and pads that only give you one at a time. If you wanted to be slightly more "evil" you could easily make it so removal of the pads would pull away part of the plastic seal; making them impossible to sell and harder to hoard.
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    In fact such dispensers have been created. https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/H-1018/Bathroom-Supplies/Feminine-Hygiene-Dispenser https://www.uline.com/Product/Detail/H-1018/Bathroom-Supplie...

simonh 8y ago

Society decides that a certain degree of criminal activity is 'acceptable' in some sense all the time. That's why, even though it would reduce crime, we don't double our policing budget. At some point we decide that the expected reduction in crime isn't worth the extra expenditure.

mises 8y ago
No, we deem that the return after a certain point is smaller than the return when invested elsewhere. That does not mean we accept or condone crime. I know someone who lives in Houston. Houston is the "human trafficking capital of the world", so the police are rather busy. This friend had someone smash his window and steal his brand-new leather briefcase with his brand-new laptop inside. The police barely managed to take a police report, because they are "busy". The problem with allowing a "certain amount of crime" is that it's inherently a bright-line issue. What level is acceptable? What dollar amount? Bread is okay but a laptop is wrong; where in between those does the line fall?
- matt4077 8y ago
  Love how you managed to slip some xenophobia in this completely unrelated argument.
- simonh 8y ago
  Accepting something might happen, while explicitly stating that it's wrong as mcv did, isn't equatable to condoning it. Nothing that has been said in this thread can be reasonably construed as condoning crime. It's pretty obvious what was being said. I don't think nit picking technical objections based on exaggerations and then extending from minor tampon pilferage to robbery with violence is constructive.
  - mcv 8y ago
    For me it's a bit more than accepting it might happen. If someone is so hungry that they have to steal bread, I hope they will steal my bread. For two reasons: bread is a really basic necessity. You starve if you can't eat. Fortunately almost nobody is that desperate, but if they are, I can't blame them for trying to stay alive. Secondly: bread is cheap. I can easily afford to lose some and not care. If it helps someone stay alive, then I'm glad. And I'm not the only one who thinks this way. A Dutch bishop has said something similar a decade or so ago. To some controversy, because condoning crime, but if your life is at stake, you've got to do what you've got to do. Of course society has some responsibility to ensure nobody ever gets that desperate, and seems to be doing a reasonable job at that, since nobody has stolen my bread yet. But if they did, I'd be fine with it. To get back to the original topic: I don't think sanitary pads and tampons are quite on the same level of bread, but I still don't see theft from public toilets as a serious source of concern.

mcv 8y ago

> The day the bread disappears from your bike, I can assure the chances that someone > is going to eat it are slim. He'll probably just throw it away for laughs. Why? What's so funny about throwing away someone's bread? If you think destroying someone's property is funny, then throwing the entire bike into the canal, or destroying a car, is probably far more laughs. And indeed there are people who do that, sadly. But it's fairly rare, and nobody seems to care much about bread. What does happen is people using the crate on my bike as a trash can. I hate that. That's not something I'm okay with.