6 ms·

Once you take the emotional factor out of theft, it's basically solved by the concept of insurance. Just replace your things, and you should be mostly whole ag

Once you take the emotional factor out of theft, it's basically solved by the concept of insurance. Just replace your things, and you should be mostly whole again.

butwhywhyoh 5y ago
Solved by insurance? We should normalize the idea of theft because some large entity will replace our goods whenever they are stolen? This seems like it sets up an incentive to steal, since "don't worry, it will be replaced for them by insurance anyways". Not to mention the emotional factor isn't the only factor by far. I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to have my car available to me on demand, rather than have to wait to make a claim with insurance and finding a replacement. Has nothing to do with my emotions.
- TameAntelope 5y ago
  Yes, we should normalize not reacting violently to theft because items can be replaced by insurance. Theft is not a problem at the volume you're suggesting it is a problem. Most people don't have most of their things stolen most of the time, and AirTags have absolutely nothing to do with addressing the threat of theft. And yes, it absolutely has to do with your emotions; everything has to do with emotions, the entire concept of reacting unemotionally is literally not possible for a human being to successfully execute unless you have a severe mental disorder (you don't, I gather).
  - silisili 5y ago
    There's a lot to unpack in this back and forth. Violent reactions are really the only deterrent left to keep thieves at bay. If everyone was so laissez faire about it, well, I'd eventually expect my house to be emptied daily, and my insurance to cost about $30k a month. I get your point that theft isn't currently -that bad-, but realize that using that info to justify thievery just keeps compounding the problem.
    - TameAntelope 5y ago
      > Violent reactions are really the only deterrent left to keep thieves at bay. This is objectively false. There are laws, which are enforced by courts, that provide sufficient deterrent. I cannot stress this enough; if you respond to property loss with violence, you deserve anything bad that happens to you.
      - silisili 5y ago
        > This is objectively false. There are laws, which are enforced by courts, that provide sufficient deterrent. Round and round we go. The OP of this chain was correctly stating that police rarely even investigate theft. > if you respond to property loss with violence, you deserve anything bad that happens to you. What a horrible thing to say. I don't think I'll reply here anymore, it's obviously going nowhere good.
        TameAntelope 5y ago
        What's actually horrible is committing acts of extrajudicial violence.
        CamperBob2 5y ago
        That's up to the thief to decide. It's pretty easy to avoid such "extrajudicial violence," simply by respecting the property rights of others.
        TameAntelope 5y ago
        What you're doing now is victim blaming. There are a million things that can and often do go wrong already with our criminal justice system, but it does function, more or less, as a way of arriving at a just conclusion; your suggestion that we throw all of that out is, literally, barbaric. I can't believe I have to say this, but society is worse off without laws and a just mechanism by which to enforce them.

Once you take the emotional factor out of theft, it's basically solved by the concept of insurance. Just replace your things, and you should be mostly whole again.

butwhywhyoh 5y ago

Solved by insurance? We should normalize the idea of theft because some large entity will replace our goods whenever they are stolen? This seems like it sets up an incentive to steal, since "don't worry, it will be replaced for them by insurance anyways". Not to mention the emotional factor isn't the only factor by far. I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to have my car available to me on demand, rather than have to wait to make a claim with insurance and finding a replacement. Has nothing to do with my emotions.

TameAntelope 5y ago
Yes, we should normalize not reacting violently to theft because items can be replaced by insurance. Theft is not a problem at the volume you're suggesting it is a problem. Most people don't have most of their things stolen most of the time, and AirTags have absolutely nothing to do with addressing the threat of theft. And yes, it absolutely has to do with your emotions; everything has to do with emotions, the entire concept of reacting unemotionally is literally not possible for a human being to successfully execute unless you have a severe mental disorder (you don't, I gather).
- silisili 5y ago
  There's a lot to unpack in this back and forth. Violent reactions are really the only deterrent left to keep thieves at bay. If everyone was so laissez faire about it, well, I'd eventually expect my house to be emptied daily, and my insurance to cost about $30k a month. I get your point that theft isn't currently -that bad-, but realize that using that info to justify thievery just keeps compounding the problem.
  - TameAntelope 5y ago
    > Violent reactions are really the only deterrent left to keep thieves at bay. This is objectively false. There are laws, which are enforced by courts, that provide sufficient deterrent. I cannot stress this enough; if you respond to property loss with violence, you deserve anything bad that happens to you.
    - silisili 5y ago
      > This is objectively false. There are laws, which are enforced by courts, that provide sufficient deterrent. Round and round we go. The OP of this chain was correctly stating that police rarely even investigate theft. > if you respond to property loss with violence, you deserve anything bad that happens to you. What a horrible thing to say. I don't think I'll reply here anymore, it's obviously going nowhere good.
      - TameAntelope 5y ago
        What's actually horrible is committing acts of extrajudicial violence.
        CamperBob2 5y ago
        That's up to the thief to decide. It's pretty easy to avoid such "extrajudicial violence," simply by respecting the property rights of others.
        TameAntelope 5y ago
        What you're doing now is victim blaming. There are a million things that can and often do go wrong already with our criminal justice system, but it does function, more or less, as a way of arriving at a just conclusion; your suggestion that we throw all of that out is, literally, barbaric. I can't believe I have to say this, but society is worse off without laws and a just mechanism by which to enforce them.