you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 69 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Between highschool and starting uni, I did a small stint as a cashier.

I called the cops on two people, one was stealing beer, the other some keychain. Both cheap items, but not necessities.

I saw multiple people steal baby formula and diapers and there wasn't a bone in my body that even thought of calling the cops on them.

The first are stealing to steal.

The later are stealing to survive.

Imho the law should make a clear distinction between the two too.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Problem is that you open one item to be allowed to be stolen, you then set the precedent of anything being allowed to be stolen. That’s what welfare and social programs are for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    what you did there is called the "slippery slope fallacy"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    The slippery slope argument is not always a fallacy. The strength of a slippery slope argument relies on the ability to show that the initial action will actually lead to the predicted outcome. The fallacy comes in when connections are drawn between unrelated concepts - an easy example of this is the argument that legalizing abortion will lead to the legalization of murder. In this case, I think it's pretty likely that making a certain item legal to steal will pave the way for more items to be legal to steal in the future. After all, who decides which items should fall under that law? I'm sure there will be plenty of people with very strong, differing opinions on the topic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah just because stores sell food doesn't mean they should feed people for free. There are a lot of costs involved in getting food onto the shelves such as planting, growing, harvesting, transporting, packaging, and distribution, and the costs of running the store. This especially applies to small mom and pop stores.

    Same sort of thing with non-food items, track any particular item and they don't just appear on the store shelves, it takes a lot of people and effort and materials to get them there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Hence why stores should deliver unsold goods to food/supply banks instead of tossing it.

    The cost was already made, the item gets written of for not being sold, still does some good in the end.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You probably also thought people were stealing Sudafed because they had colds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This medication in most stores crap doesn't exist here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Ah. My point was that those are some of the easiest to resell. Sudafed is used in the creation of meth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wow! Easily accessible to be stolen? In my country, we have 2 sudafed formulas -- the meth kind (pseudoephedrine) and a different type (phenylephrine). The meth kind is only available by asking the pharmacist and showing your state-issued identification. The other kind is freely available to steal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    creation of meth

    Another thing that barely exists here XD

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Where is "here"? Because there's plenty of meth in my location (I don't do meth, I'm just aware of it).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments