3 ms·

An easy way to verify is to see what is being stolen or looted. It is almost never produce, bags of beans or rice. It is often luxury brands, alcohol, electron

by rdtsc 5y ago

An easy way to verify is to see what is being stolen or looted. It is almost never produce, bags of beans or rice. It is often luxury brands, alcohol, electronics and stuff like that. I don’t think we need more mandatory sentences or stricter laws, but simply turning the other way and not punishing this kind of behavior is also going to backfire. There has to be a balance. I suspect it’s all designed to artificially reduce the crime stats (“if we don’t process or book them no crime was committed”) while at the same time getting extra points for social justice. Two birds with one stone.

wolverine876 5y ago
> turning the other way and not punishing this kind of behavior Where do we have data that that is happening?
- rdtsc 5y ago
  > Where do we have data that that is happening? It’s in the letter being discussed.
HWR_14 5y ago
Of course people aren't stealing fucking bags of rice and beans. Why would they? Stealing a Louis Vitton bag selling it, then buying food, is far better in every way.
- rdtsc 5y ago
  > Why would they? Because one idea is that they have to feed their children. It’s an urgent, desperate need. They are not doing it for fun, they don’t want to be criminals. Well, it is easy to explain stealing a bag of beans to a judge, and most of all, to the starving children at home, than justifying waiting for a train, cutting the lock, getting the luxury Louis Vuitton sunglasses, bringing them home, putting them up for sale on Craigslist and waiting for offers, so then, they can finally go to the store and buy the bag of beans. The story of feeding hungry kids doesn’t work as well in the later case.
  - Miner49er 5y ago
    People also need to pay rent and all kinds of other expenses. Not just eat.
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    You're right, stealing the food directly is more immediate. But assuming you're planning ahead or are selling to a known buyer, the Vuitton bag is far better. Pragmatically - You have to steal fewer items with less security, so less risk of getting caught. It's lighter to move. You can use that money for clothing or rent. You can use that money to buy a lot more food. Meanwhile, it seems as trivial to justify to a judge. You needed food, so you stole something to get food. Certainly, I consider it to be at least as moral as stealing the food directly, so I don't understand why it would be harder to justify. Unless your contending that stealing beans is obviously for feeding kids, but stealing a bag isn't? That is, you're asking for leniency and not debating morals. In which case I would ask you if motive matters to a judge or if that means your kids are more likely to get taken away or can you not get the same effect by just keeping better records? Receipts of how your spent the bag money.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Do we know these people are participating parents (rather than just of reproductive age)? I’m reminded of the children in India who get mutilated by pimps in order to appear more sympathetic to the people who give beggars money —the pimps only care about the money. I see people mentioning children the same way people say children when talking about surveillance. It’s usually a tool for sympathy rather than real motive.
    - rdtsc 5y ago
      I am mainly going with the original narrative that a fundamental reason the people loot and steal is put food on the table —- they hate to have to do it, but they have no other choice when there are hungry mouths to feed. And, how assuming that premise, the actions we see don’t support it well. I also have my personal experience noticing how a good number of people I knew thoroughly enjoyed the rush and the excitement of it. I couldn’t think of many who ever said they had no choice, had children to feed, but rather they would go on about how they hid from the cops, sold the stuff, such and such was stupid to get caught, etc. I would like to believe everyone is kind and nice and doesn’t want to do those things, the reality I have been through doesn’t support it at all, sadly.

by rdtsc 5y ago

wolverine876 5y ago

> turning the other way and not punishing this kind of behavior Where do we have data that that is happening?

rdtsc 5y ago
> Where do we have data that that is happening? It’s in the letter being discussed.

HWR_14 5y ago

Of course people aren't stealing fucking bags of rice and beans. Why would they? Stealing a Louis Vitton bag selling it, then buying food, is far better in every way.

rdtsc 5y ago
> Why would they? Because one idea is that they have to feed their children. It’s an urgent, desperate need. They are not doing it for fun, they don’t want to be criminals. Well, it is easy to explain stealing a bag of beans to a judge, and most of all, to the starving children at home, than justifying waiting for a train, cutting the lock, getting the luxury Louis Vuitton sunglasses, bringing them home, putting them up for sale on Craigslist and waiting for offers, so then, they can finally go to the store and buy the bag of beans. The story of feeding hungry kids doesn’t work as well in the later case.
- Miner49er 5y ago
  People also need to pay rent and all kinds of other expenses. Not just eat.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  You're right, stealing the food directly is more immediate. But assuming you're planning ahead or are selling to a known buyer, the Vuitton bag is far better. Pragmatically - You have to steal fewer items with less security, so less risk of getting caught. It's lighter to move. You can use that money for clothing or rent. You can use that money to buy a lot more food. Meanwhile, it seems as trivial to justify to a judge. You needed food, so you stole something to get food. Certainly, I consider it to be at least as moral as stealing the food directly, so I don't understand why it would be harder to justify. Unless your contending that stealing beans is obviously for feeding kids, but stealing a bag isn't? That is, you're asking for leniency and not debating morals. In which case I would ask you if motive matters to a judge or if that means your kids are more likely to get taken away or can you not get the same effect by just keeping better records? Receipts of how your spent the bag money.
- mc32 5y ago
  Do we know these people are participating parents (rather than just of reproductive age)? I’m reminded of the children in India who get mutilated by pimps in order to appear more sympathetic to the people who give beggars money —the pimps only care about the money. I see people mentioning children the same way people say children when talking about surveillance. It’s usually a tool for sympathy rather than real motive.
  - rdtsc 5y ago
    I am mainly going with the original narrative that a fundamental reason the people loot and steal is put food on the table —- they hate to have to do it, but they have no other choice when there are hungry mouths to feed. And, how assuming that premise, the actions we see don’t support it well. I also have my personal experience noticing how a good number of people I knew thoroughly enjoyed the rush and the excitement of it. I couldn’t think of many who ever said they had no choice, had children to feed, but rather they would go on about how they hid from the cops, sold the stuff, such and such was stupid to get caught, etc. I would like to believe everyone is kind and nice and doesn’t want to do those things, the reality I have been through doesn’t support it at all, sadly.