4 ms·

Booby traps are incredibly illegal, even if they're "non-injurious" by your personal definition. This also applies to the classic tale where someone is stealin

Booby traps are incredibly illegal, even if they're "non-injurious" by your personal definition. This also applies to the classic tale where someone is stealing food from a communal fridge so an enterprising idiot puts laxatives in a sandwich. Congratulations! You've just committed a felony by poisoning someone.

dheera 2y ago
- Fart spray isn't a booby trap and doesn't injure anyone, it will just make the police office stink like ass - It isn't a trap if it is in my possession all of the time. Anyone who takes it out of my possession forcefully, it's their fault
- pc86 2y ago
  Again, even if what you're saying is logically consistent, it is absolutely completely 100% wrong with regard to the law. A booby trap is still a booby trap even if you throw your hands up and say "that's not a booby trap." "This shotgun attached to a string isn't a trap if it's in my possession all of the time. If you take it out of my possession forcefully and it blows your head off, that's your fault!"
unethical_ban 2y ago
I'm not saying you're wrong on the facts. But altering my lunch and getting in trouble when someone steals it is insanity.
- pc86 2y ago
  Not who you're replying to but I've spent a lot of time reading about this particular aspect of law. I more or less happen to agree with you, but this is one of those examples where I think we've taken a lot of small steps in one direction and all of a sudden it looks crazy to an outside observer who doesn't understand the full context. There's a concept of you "altering" your lunch such that it becomes dangerous or inedible but still leaving it out, e.g. in a fridge, where a reasonable person would assume that the lunch is edible. If you put rat poison in your lunch then throw it in the garbage, it's going to be harder to argue that you intentionally hurt that person who stole it. Even harder is if you put in a biohazard disposal bag. There's the concept of the severity of the offense - poisoning someone is worse than stealing their lunch. Nobody is calling the cops because their lunch got stolen once. There's intent. If you poison your lunch and put it back in the fridge, you're accepting there's a chance someone takes it. Can you prove someone intentionally took your lunch as opposed to accidentally taking it? You can accidentally take the wrong takeout container, even multiple times. You can't accidentally poison your own food.
  - deadlyllama 2y ago
    Would this work: * put a warning wrap on your sandwich - danger - this sandwich may have laxatives added * if your sandwiches continue to go missing, label them AND add laxatives
    - banannaise 2y ago
      well then you're specifically poisoning people who can't read English. Legally, there's really not a way around it besides simply not doing that.
      - dheera 2y ago
        What if you needed the laxatives, medically?
        banannaise 2y ago
        Do you really think you're the first person to think of this? If you actually need a certain medication, and you absolutely must take it by putting it in your lunch, then I suppose you can feel free to explain that in a courtroom, but you should be reminded that perjury is a vey bad legal strategy and judges don't like to play games.
  - alex_lazarin 2y ago
    How about this? Set up a recording that shames the thief when triggered, inflicting emotional damage.
  - dllthomas 2y ago
    > You can't accidentally poison your own food. Sure you can, it's just off topic.
  - mrandish 2y ago
    I agree with you that it's a complex and subtle area of law. For more color on this, it's helpful to keep in mind the difference between criminal liability and civil liability. Also, the concepts of "reckless endangerment", "negligence" and "due care." Factors which can change what may be "okay" to "not okay" include private vs public property, intent and, the ever present catch-all, reasonableness. The likelihood of getting in legal trouble, as well as the potential severity of the trouble, can vary widely depending on where, how, who and other surrounding context.

dheera 2y ago

- Fart spray isn't a booby trap and doesn't injure anyone, it will just make the police office stink like ass - It isn't a trap if it is in my possession all of the time. Anyone who takes it out of my possession forcefully, it's their fault

pc86 2y ago
Again, even if what you're saying is logically consistent, it is absolutely completely 100% wrong with regard to the law. A booby trap is still a booby trap even if you throw your hands up and say "that's not a booby trap." "This shotgun attached to a string isn't a trap if it's in my possession all of the time. If you take it out of my possession forcefully and it blows your head off, that's your fault!"

unethical_ban 2y ago

I'm not saying you're wrong on the facts. But altering my lunch and getting in trouble when someone steals it is insanity.

pc86 2y ago
Not who you're replying to but I've spent a lot of time reading about this particular aspect of law. I more or less happen to agree with you, but this is one of those examples where I think we've taken a lot of small steps in one direction and all of a sudden it looks crazy to an outside observer who doesn't understand the full context. There's a concept of you "altering" your lunch such that it becomes dangerous or inedible but still leaving it out, e.g. in a fridge, where a reasonable person would assume that the lunch is edible. If you put rat poison in your lunch then throw it in the garbage, it's going to be harder to argue that you intentionally hurt that person who stole it. Even harder is if you put in a biohazard disposal bag. There's the concept of the severity of the offense - poisoning someone is worse than stealing their lunch. Nobody is calling the cops because their lunch got stolen once. There's intent. If you poison your lunch and put it back in the fridge, you're accepting there's a chance someone takes it. Can you prove someone intentionally took your lunch as opposed to accidentally taking it? You can accidentally take the wrong takeout container, even multiple times. You can't accidentally poison your own food.
- deadlyllama 2y ago
  Would this work: * put a warning wrap on your sandwich - danger - this sandwich may have laxatives added * if your sandwiches continue to go missing, label them AND add laxatives
  - banannaise 2y ago
    well then you're specifically poisoning people who can't read English. Legally, there's really not a way around it besides simply not doing that.
    - dheera 2y ago
      What if you needed the laxatives, medically?
      - banannaise 2y ago
        Do you really think you're the first person to think of this? If you actually need a certain medication, and you absolutely must take it by putting it in your lunch, then I suppose you can feel free to explain that in a courtroom, but you should be reminded that perjury is a vey bad legal strategy and judges don't like to play games.
- alex_lazarin 2y ago
  How about this? Set up a recording that shames the thief when triggered, inflicting emotional damage.
- dllthomas 2y ago
  > You can't accidentally poison your own food. Sure you can, it's just off topic.
- mrandish 2y ago
  I agree with you that it's a complex and subtle area of law. For more color on this, it's helpful to keep in mind the difference between criminal liability and civil liability. Also, the concepts of "reckless endangerment", "negligence" and "due care." Factors which can change what may be "okay" to "not okay" include private vs public property, intent and, the ever present catch-all, reasonableness. The likelihood of getting in legal trouble, as well as the potential severity of the trouble, can vary widely depending on where, how, who and other surrounding context.