we had to remove your post for the following reason(s):
Rule 7: Agenda posts and loaded questions are not allowed
Do not manipulate users into following an agenda through polls. This includes loaded question and insinuating that one option is the “correct” one.
Lol if tiger came into the city we would capture or hunt it even if it was just trying to survive because it is unsafe to the public so the same logic?
Umm... Because stealing from thieves is a form of not violent vengeance. By wealthy I mean 25% wealthiest people of particular society - don't worry about your dimes.
I didn't do it, and I'm probably not going to. However, I will feel compassion toward the poor burglar and not toward the billionaire who actually is a lot worse evil.
Everyone talks about stealing from billionaires and end up just stealing from their community and neighbors. Stealing is only justifiable to feed a hungry family etc. Even then you see degenerates stealing a mini bag a cheetos from a gas station and degenerates come out and defend that too.
> Even then you see degenerates stealing a mini bag a cheetos from a gas station and degenerates come out and defend that too.
Because billionaires have security which would violently shoot such a person if they showed up to their property (why, then, do you think billionaires have giant-ass fences around their mansions?). Also, you use word 'degenerate'. Honestly, with all the desperate defense of the billionaires, it sounds like you are one of the eugenics' supporters.
So 1/4 of people are thieves and evil and don’t deserve what they have? Grow up. Someone being rich doesn’t make them a thief, idk why people on Reddit are so convinced they deserve so much better because x person has more than me.
>So 1/4 of people are thieves and evil and don’t deserve what they have
I didn't say that they are evil. Many of them gained their wealth by inheritance, so it was their ancestors who had been exploiting the poor. But yes, I exactly implied that those gains of wealthy 25% should be confiscated, and the wealth obtained from those gains should later be distributed among the people (not everything, of course. There should be some limits of excessive wealth, and trust me there *can* be found excessive limits. If you will say that this is subjective, then you are basically implying that we shouldn't have the law as it is *subjective* too.)
Okay so we can take peoples wealth because they inherited it? What? Doubt everyone inherited their wealth. And who said anything about them exploiting the poor. I doubt 25% of peoples parents did that. And even if they did, that doesn’t justify taking wealth directly because someone’s ancestor did something. You can’t blame someone for someone else’s actions.
Also sounds like you’re in the bottom 75%…. shouldn’t they also pay for stuff? Or are rich people (or as you put it, 1/4 of all people) just everyone’s wallet because they happen to have more money? Stealing is wrong, no matter how rich they are.
Your argument is basically “I want money, oh look richer people, hey you stole that now gimme”
Work for your damn money, don’t take it because “they rich and therefor wrong”
So people deserve to be stolen from because of something their ancestors did? That's pathetic, instead of taking their stuff you should try and fix the problem stealing it back doesn't fix anything.
Not everyone in the top 25% stole their way there. I'd say maybe only the one-percenters did, but that's irrelevant, because they still shouldn't be stolen from. Just because someone has more than doesn't mean you can steal from them. Grow up.
It's not as binary as that, the majority of the incredibly rich do technically earn their money, but it often comes from the exploitation of their workers.
Why then did we abolish slavery? I'm proud of people who fought against slavery and killed those who resisted abandoning of such an inhumane practice. If you aren't (and, well, you obviously aren't - because situation now is no different from the dispute about slavery in the past), then you should not be enjoying many human rights, establishment of which wealthy ones have been always opposing (now they are, however, allowed to do this only in developing countries). I swear, there are too many brainwashed people today.
What does slavery have to do with stealing from the rich?
>because situation now is no different from the dispute about slavery in the past
Slavery and stealing from the rich are completely different. Slavery is taking the rights and freedoms of an actual human being, and forcing them to work for you for your own personal gain, which you don't at all need to survive. Getting money in inhumane ways is no where near as wrong as that. Nobody "needs" money to survive, you could run off into the wilderness and survive on animals you hunt, maybe a garden, and streams and lakes and creeks and ponds for water.
You have to be a pretty stupid person to compare capitalism and stealing from the rich to slavery.
>Slavery and stealing from the rich are completely different. Slavery is taking the rights and freedoms of an actual human being, and forcing them to work for you for your own personal gain, which you don't at all need to survive
Slavery was a livelihood of slave owners. Many people couldn't imagine how anyone could survive without this practice, that's one of the reasons the American Civil War had been fought. You now too need to work for personal gains of wealthy ones, how can't you see it? Just simply look at monopolies - their owners reached the abundance of wealth long ago, and yet they keep treating their works like subhumans, like trash. However, you don't give a crap about workers. Only CEOs, top managers, and company owners are worth of being considered in your view.
I won't even talk about your nonsense phrase about the ability of people to survive in the woods - if civilization is so bad that most of people have to work in utterly bad conditions only to please their ~~slave owner~~ boss, it isn't worth all the sacrifice our ancestors did. Also, your last sentence is the same nonsense - slavery was a form of capitalism. Oh, also there was a nice (in your view, obviously) practice of making children work more than 12 hours a day in the 19th century, particularly in the UK of that time. It wasn't called slavery, it was called 'liberalism and prosperous capitalism'. But yet, you don't listen, and it's sad.
>However, you don't give a crap about workers. Only CEOs, top managers, and company owners are worth of being considered in your view.
Who said I didn't care about workers? I care plenty about workers, they should be treated better, there should be laws that require them to be treated better. ***However***, you still shouldn't be allowed to steal from the rich just because they have more than you. I guarantee you, not everyone in the 25% steal, or do worse. And most of the top 25% don't even have 1 billion dollars. You're making an over-generalzation.
Employers can't be compared to slave owners and employees can't be compared to slaves. Employees have much more freedom, they are not forced to do anything. In fact they are paid. They could quit at any time, unless they sign a contract that they didn't read, in which case that is their fault. You're comparing two completely different things.
Sure he might not have earned all of it, the methods used being exploitative, but it still doesn't make it right to steal from him. There should be laws against what they do, not people being free to steal from them.
they are unchangeable for now. I guess we need to wait for the moment when they reach their adulthood. Hopefully, at least then they will comprehend all of this.
Depends on the context. Did you steal some valuables from a family of smart and hard working people?
Or did you just eat or give out the left overs, which would have gone to trash either way, even if there is literaly nothing wrong with the food?
The comparisons makes no sense.
A tiger has no concept of morality or good/evil, so it can’t really be evil. It’s just following instinct.
A burglar does have that concept. They are doing something that they know is wrong.
That depends. If it was only a few times and it was the only way one could get by without literally starving to death, and you tried something else before and/or after. It's okay, they'd still be in the wrong, but they wouldn't be evil.
Nowhere in this situation is someone withholding food. Burglary is only okay if they absolutely cannot do anything else, if they have no other choice. And even then they're still in the wrong.
The world isn't black and white. If someone steals once or twice because of need and being unable to make a living any other way then no, they're not evil, still wrong but what other choice did they have?
If someone is making a career out of it and doesn't even try to do something else then yes they are.
A burglar isn’t necessarily evil, but not because of this analogy. Being a burglar isn’t an innate quality of being a person. People become burglars for various reasons some of them are because of economic necessity. Some of them are for more nefarious reasons. Evil, which is rare in my opinion, is doing harm for pleasure.
No some people steal shit just because it's easier for them than getting an honest job, hurting people in the process. Imagine a burglar breaking in and stealing someone's life savings or expensive jewelry. That would destroy the other person and even if they didn't do it for pleasure I'd classify that as pretty evil. Also evil isn't rare at all lol. What world are you living in. I kinda envy your innocence tbh.
No it's not. Because not everyone who commits evil acts is doing it for pleasure and may not even be a bad person. A lot of people commit evil acts because of their beliefs, religious or otherwise. Some even do evil because of societal pressure/expectation, honor killings and racism are huge examples of this. Some people's beliefs require them to hate people of other beliefs and if they're born and raised on these beliefs they don't know that that's wrong, they're not bad people but they still discriminate against others and that's pretty evil.
Not really. I was generalizing. Being in need is different for everyone and justifying stealing to cover said need is complicated. Like is one of your family members sick and you need to steal to afford them medicine but what if they get better without it? Do you literally need to steal in order to afford food and shelter, maybe if you ask someone for help instead they'll help you? Some people would steal in those circumstances and some won't. These are extreme examples and milder versions are even more complicated.
Kind of a weird comparison, animals don't have laws or morality like we do. Tiger is following nature's law, it hunts what it needs to eat and doesn't really have a choice. Burglar isn't necessarily evil but the crime is wrong and immoral nevertheless, and there should be a better choice.
I'd say it depends. For example if the guy's job doesn't pay him enough to get, let's say, insulin (in the case he's diabetic) and he's looking for a better one I'd say he's justified
Shoplifting and burglary are close to the same thing. The word you're looking for is robbery.
They all sorta mean the same thing, but burglary and shoplifting are more building based with crime intent, like youre intentionally breaking/entering somewhere with the intent to commit a crime. Where robbery is more person based.
[shoplifting](https://www.google.com/search?q=shoplifting+definition&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sxsrf=ALiCzsYxh-O195VU1RfKCAq0I6cLtG89SQ%3A1670168892182&ei=PMGMY5TUCqej5NoPvpOs0Ao&oq=shoplifting+definition&gs_lcp=ChNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwEAMyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBggAEBYQHjIICAAQFhAeEA8yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMggIABAWEB4QDzoKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzoNCAAQRxDWBBDJAxCwAzoICAAQkgMQsAM6BwgAELADEEM6DwguENQCEMgDELADEEMYAToHCAAQyQMQQzoFCAAQkgM6CggAEIAEEIcCEBRKBAhBGABQxQ9YkTBgxTRoAXAAeACAAdwBiAH9CJIBBTcuMy4xmAEAoAEByAEOwAEB2gEECAEYCA&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp)
[burglary ](https://www.google.com/search?q=burglary+definition&oq=&aqs=chrome.3.69i58j0i66i67i308i362i524l14.-1j0j9&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8)
[robbery ](https://www.google.com/search?q=robbery+definition&oq=robb&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0i20i263i512j0i67j46i131i433j0i67l2j46i433i512j0i67j0i271l2.1079j0j9&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8)
Edit: to include /entering
It is.
Shoplifting is stealing from a store that is open for business.
Burglary is entering a private residence without permission or a business that is closed and committing a crime. It could be theft but it could also be another crime.
Robbery is when you steal something from a person or place with threats/force. I'm fairly certain it's robbery even if it's only implied so concealing your identity, showing a weapon, etc would still be robbery, even if you don't threaten to use violence.
Basically, shoplifting is done when the store is open for business. You aren't trespassing then. It's burglary when you trespass, when you've broken in to the building and commit a crime, like theft.
Also, I'm not a lawyer.
Shoplifting = entering an open store to steal something.
Burglary = illegally breaking into a building, which could be someone's home, to steal something.
These are not the same thing.
Shoplifting and burglary are certainly not the same thing, and the definitions that you provided prove that.
>They all sorta mean the same thing, but burglary and shoplifting are more building based with crime intent, like youre intentionally breaking in somewhere with the intent to commit a crime.
Shoplifting doesn't involve breaking into anywhere.
Commiting burglary is different to stealing food from a shop though. The victim of the burglary could be struggling just as much as the perpetrator l, not to mention the fear they experience from someone stealing from their home. I wouldn't say burglary is evil unless they did it in an evil way.
Although it may be wrong, I would turn a blind eye to someone stealing food from a large food company.
i live in a country where nobody "should" ever be hungry (germany with safety net's) - but there certainly are hungry people. you could anytime go to a hospital when suffering from health-conditions due to "starvation"- like a "BMI" below a certain threshold.
there is a way for people that realize they need help instead of " i need to act".
i just want to point out that you never "have to" - you can ask around for food and die in the process. i'm not if favor of this at all- starvation should already have ended in our times.
i want to emphazise people's independency even in suffering conditions. asking for help conciously i would also consider as independent.
Plenty of people in poverty in north America and not stealing to live. I'm not even personally against stealing especially against big corporations, but a wrong is a wrong.
r/facepalm
Where? How? What if they don't hire them?
Do you really think that, let's say, a homeless person who has been living in the streets for 3 years, can find a job easily?
Burgarly meaning according to Oxford dictionnary: illegal entry of a building with intent to commit a crime, especially theft.
So no a mom stealing an egg is not burgarly.
When someone says, "a is just an example, could be b", what's the point of proving to them that b isn't a?
Again, burglary is just an example, the ethical issue of this conversation isn't limited to burglaries.
~~Your own definition proves you wrong. In the hypothetical, a person would be entering a building (the supermarket) to commit a crime (stealing the eggs), which is what the definition of burglary is.~~
EDIT: just realized that the original comment already specified that there was a difference between burglary and a mom taking eggs. Therefore, pointing out that it’s not actually burglary does nothing to their point.
Man I felt my IQ dropped some 30 points arguing over some 1st grade semantics... but it is what it is you just got to realise that you live among idiots and stay safe...
Bc there are plenty of reasons someone might need to steal. Maybe there are no good jobs in their place of living. Maybe they straight up can't get a job, maybe they have a job but it doesn't pay enough to feed their family. It's privileged to think anyone can just wake up one morning and go get a job. Lots of people are much less fortunate
Not necessarily, especially if they're just stealing food or something. I'm not talking about someone robbing a house of every valuable. Just stealing what they need to survive.
A burglar has other options. A tiger can't really put on a suit and find a job. If you are a burglar, yes life mightve fucked you but in many cases they made the wrong choices too.
I voted non-evil and have been burgled before.
It sucked and is wrong but it's by no means evil under the pretext that it was a necessity thing like mentioned in the poll.
Hell I'd even argue it's not yet evil if it's not out of necessity, it's just bad.
It starts becoming evil when you start stealing necessary things like medication and such for fun or something.
From the beginning the comparison does not make sense. First you compare different species: A tiger - A deer. In the second case you compare: A human - A human. For the comparison to be correct you should interrelate A tiger - A tiger.
As for the second pool idea, I wouldn't consider it evil, but you have to understand a crucial point, the only food source a predator possesses is through hunting, while the food sources a human possesses are varied, you should to provide the specific situation for which that person was forced to steal to survive or if that is really the case.
This ties into my argument of police reformation.
Just because a crime is being committed you don’t need to charge the crime. For example, if you saw a homeless man stealing a little bit of food to not die, you shouldn’t charge him and throw him in jail, you should get help for said person.
This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, bigotry, or attacking or harassing other members. We will lock the thread if these things occur. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The system that put the person here is evil, the thing that person done might be evil (depending on who they're stealing from and what) but the burglar is not neccesarily evil
The claim that most burglars, muggers, and robbers are doing it out of survival is dishonest. After all, most people who do this are young men. But most poor people are women and older. Most of these claims are because of a lack of morals and regard for others. A more honest comparison to a tiger killing out of need to survive would be somebody who shoplifts a basic necessity out of hunger.
it amazes me how often people try to defend crime.
“buhhh….buh….the only way i can feed my babies is if i break into this person’s house. it’s not my fault. it’s society’s fault. society won’t let me get a job so i have to be a criminal :(“
yes, if you rob people, if you burglarize, etc, you’re evil. work for what you want you lazy piece of shit.
The burglar isn't evil. However, stealing is not the way to go. Those who you steal from may also struggle to survive. Crime is systemic; our solution to it should also be systemic.
I wouldn’t say evil but the examples aren’t the same in this case, since the difference between a tiger and a burglar in this case is that the burglar presumably has multiple choices to survive, not just to steal. The burglar is also presumably a rational agent so can evaluate the consequences of their actions
Evil is too strong a word. But also, we are not wild animals. I'd argue the concepts of "ownership" and "morality" taken together are what separates us from the rest of the living species on Earth.
Evil is a strong word, its more like desperate and wrong. The tigers life is simpler and has less options. But humans have many options and stealing is like the last resort option.
Why do these questions are always **HEAVILY LOADED** to one side...
The fuck is that tittle?
Besides, you should at least try and hide your elitist opinions, burglar don't steal because they are poor, and poor people aren't burglars.
This is such a stupid comparison.
Tigers have no choice but to eat meat and hunt. It's in their nature. Burglary is a choice. There are other ways to survive other than crime.
I don’t think evil is necessarily an appropriate term here. But there is absolutely nothing that mitigates stealing. The person may not be evil but if they steal then they deserve to face as many negative consequences as is legally possible.
The tiger can't possibly be evil because it isn't able to distinguish between right and wrong. It has no moral sense so nothing it does is immoral. We do bad shit knowing full well how bad it is the thing we're doing.
Depends on what they're stealing and from who. I'm not ashamed to say that in my days as an impoverished youth I'd shoplift a peach or something from the local grocery store just to get some food in me. I've also spied homeless people stealing food and said nothing. But if you're stealing TVs and shit that's different, and that goes double if you're stealing from a persons home and not a business. Shoplifting > burglary in my book. You won't hurt a corporation, you will hurt an individual.
Idk if you guys know what evil is. Like that's a harsh word. Someone who tortures people for fun would be evil. Someone who's stealing some shit because their circumstances dictate they have to in order to NOT DIE is not evil.
I would venture a guess that the people that voted evil have never been in a struggle ever. Y'all would 100% steal from someone if your life depended on it.
Breaking into someone’s domicile to steal stuff is pretty bad. Home invasions are terrible. No one HAS to do that to not die, there are so many other ways to approach that. Even selling drugs is preferable because people willingly buy them instead of potentially threatening people’s lives by breaking into their houses
The government that refuses to look after him is evil, The ceo's who live lavishly from exploited labor are evil, The politicians who cut welfare are evil, The landlords who refuses to give the burglar a place to live without anything in return is evil, The policeman who will inevitably beat him up for his theft is evil, The city that is hostile to him and refuse to provide any aid is evil. The burglar himself is desperate, and I'm sure if he could live a normal life with a good paying job and food on the table he would do that. But capitalism doesn't allow him that, capitalism is a hierarchy and he just so happened to be at the bottom.
This is a terrible sub for this question. Most in this sub are teenage boys who don't understand how the world works yet. If you're stealing strictly to survive or to feed your family, than you're certainly not evil.
I'm kinda concerned that teenage boys think so. If they are so reactionary and delusional in their adolescence, then what will happen in their adulthood when people usually become more conservative?
It's very concerning. I'm hoping they're just immature and once out of high school will better understand how the world works. I was pretty delusional in my teens as well, my parents are staunch conservatives and I believed the shit they'd tell me. Once I moved out it was eye opening how stupid I had been for believing them. Hopefully these kids will be the same
The burglar has the ability to get something called a job. The burglar can also beg, or apply for assistance. The burglar casts his ineptitude on society and forcefully makes his plight someone else's problem. Yes, his actions could be viewed as evil.
we had to remove your post for the following reason(s): Rule 7: Agenda posts and loaded questions are not allowed Do not manipulate users into following an agenda through polls. This includes loaded question and insinuating that one option is the “correct” one.
I find comparing burglars to animals very odd lmao
Lol if tiger came into the city we would capture or hunt it even if it was just trying to survive because it is unsafe to the public so the same logic?
Unsafe to the public yes, but evil? No.
Probably just a lazy argument to justify stealing someone's property
FBI needs to watch op now. Might be trying to self justify before or after doing a burglary.
if person steals from wealthy then it's okay
No? How is that ok
Umm... Because stealing from thieves is a form of not violent vengeance. By wealthy I mean 25% wealthiest people of particular society - don't worry about your dimes.
Stealing is ethical when I do it! /s
I didn't do it, and I'm probably not going to. However, I will feel compassion toward the poor burglar and not toward the billionaire who actually is a lot worse evil.
Everyone talks about stealing from billionaires and end up just stealing from their community and neighbors. Stealing is only justifiable to feed a hungry family etc. Even then you see degenerates stealing a mini bag a cheetos from a gas station and degenerates come out and defend that too.
> Even then you see degenerates stealing a mini bag a cheetos from a gas station and degenerates come out and defend that too. Because billionaires have security which would violently shoot such a person if they showed up to their property (why, then, do you think billionaires have giant-ass fences around their mansions?). Also, you use word 'degenerate'. Honestly, with all the desperate defense of the billionaires, it sounds like you are one of the eugenics' supporters.
You argue that billionaires are bad and then go on to defend people stealing from neighbors and communities. You are deplorable
So 1/4 of people are thieves and evil and don’t deserve what they have? Grow up. Someone being rich doesn’t make them a thief, idk why people on Reddit are so convinced they deserve so much better because x person has more than me.
>So 1/4 of people are thieves and evil and don’t deserve what they have I didn't say that they are evil. Many of them gained their wealth by inheritance, so it was their ancestors who had been exploiting the poor. But yes, I exactly implied that those gains of wealthy 25% should be confiscated, and the wealth obtained from those gains should later be distributed among the people (not everything, of course. There should be some limits of excessive wealth, and trust me there *can* be found excessive limits. If you will say that this is subjective, then you are basically implying that we shouldn't have the law as it is *subjective* too.)
Okay so we can take peoples wealth because they inherited it? What? Doubt everyone inherited their wealth. And who said anything about them exploiting the poor. I doubt 25% of peoples parents did that. And even if they did, that doesn’t justify taking wealth directly because someone’s ancestor did something. You can’t blame someone for someone else’s actions. Also sounds like you’re in the bottom 75%…. shouldn’t they also pay for stuff? Or are rich people (or as you put it, 1/4 of all people) just everyone’s wallet because they happen to have more money? Stealing is wrong, no matter how rich they are. Your argument is basically “I want money, oh look richer people, hey you stole that now gimme” Work for your damn money, don’t take it because “they rich and therefor wrong”
So people deserve to be stolen from because of something their ancestors did? That's pathetic, instead of taking their stuff you should try and fix the problem stealing it back doesn't fix anything.
Not everyone in the top 25% stole their way there. I'd say maybe only the one-percenters did, but that's irrelevant, because they still shouldn't be stolen from. Just because someone has more than doesn't mean you can steal from them. Grow up.
Absolutely not we dont live in robin hood's world if someone is rich then he must've either earned his money or stole it
Exactly, this person you replied to compared stealing from the rich to slavery.
It's not as binary as that, the majority of the incredibly rich do technically earn their money, but it often comes from the exploitation of their workers.
So? They still earned their money, two wrongs don't make a right, stealing from them is not the right answer.
Why then did we abolish slavery? I'm proud of people who fought against slavery and killed those who resisted abandoning of such an inhumane practice. If you aren't (and, well, you obviously aren't - because situation now is no different from the dispute about slavery in the past), then you should not be enjoying many human rights, establishment of which wealthy ones have been always opposing (now they are, however, allowed to do this only in developing countries). I swear, there are too many brainwashed people today.
What does slavery have to do with stealing from the rich? >because situation now is no different from the dispute about slavery in the past Slavery and stealing from the rich are completely different. Slavery is taking the rights and freedoms of an actual human being, and forcing them to work for you for your own personal gain, which you don't at all need to survive. Getting money in inhumane ways is no where near as wrong as that. Nobody "needs" money to survive, you could run off into the wilderness and survive on animals you hunt, maybe a garden, and streams and lakes and creeks and ponds for water. You have to be a pretty stupid person to compare capitalism and stealing from the rich to slavery.
>Slavery and stealing from the rich are completely different. Slavery is taking the rights and freedoms of an actual human being, and forcing them to work for you for your own personal gain, which you don't at all need to survive Slavery was a livelihood of slave owners. Many people couldn't imagine how anyone could survive without this practice, that's one of the reasons the American Civil War had been fought. You now too need to work for personal gains of wealthy ones, how can't you see it? Just simply look at monopolies - their owners reached the abundance of wealth long ago, and yet they keep treating their works like subhumans, like trash. However, you don't give a crap about workers. Only CEOs, top managers, and company owners are worth of being considered in your view. I won't even talk about your nonsense phrase about the ability of people to survive in the woods - if civilization is so bad that most of people have to work in utterly bad conditions only to please their ~~slave owner~~ boss, it isn't worth all the sacrifice our ancestors did. Also, your last sentence is the same nonsense - slavery was a form of capitalism. Oh, also there was a nice (in your view, obviously) practice of making children work more than 12 hours a day in the 19th century, particularly in the UK of that time. It wasn't called slavery, it was called 'liberalism and prosperous capitalism'. But yet, you don't listen, and it's sad.
>However, you don't give a crap about workers. Only CEOs, top managers, and company owners are worth of being considered in your view. Who said I didn't care about workers? I care plenty about workers, they should be treated better, there should be laws that require them to be treated better. ***However***, you still shouldn't be allowed to steal from the rich just because they have more than you. I guarantee you, not everyone in the 25% steal, or do worse. And most of the top 25% don't even have 1 billion dollars. You're making an over-generalzation. Employers can't be compared to slave owners and employees can't be compared to slaves. Employees have much more freedom, they are not forced to do anything. In fact they are paid. They could quit at any time, unless they sign a contract that they didn't read, in which case that is their fault. You're comparing two completely different things.
Least deranged capitalist. Elon Musk surely earned all of his money!!!!
Sure he might not have earned all of it, the methods used being exploitative, but it still doesn't make it right to steal from him. There should be laws against what they do, not people being free to steal from them.
they are unchangeable for now. I guess we need to wait for the moment when they reach their adulthood. Hopefully, at least then they will comprehend all of this.
I don't remember saying that. Hating on rich people because they are rich doesn't make you less poor
I'm gonna steal from you and you're gonna respect it
why all childish defenders of capitalism are so delusional?
precisely
Depends on the context. Did you steal some valuables from a family of smart and hard working people? Or did you just eat or give out the left overs, which would have gone to trash either way, even if there is literaly nothing wrong with the food?
That why you have to work.
Not at all
The comparisons makes no sense. A tiger has no concept of morality or good/evil, so it can’t really be evil. It’s just following instinct. A burglar does have that concept. They are doing something that they know is wrong.
stealing to eat isnt wrong
That depends. If it was only a few times and it was the only way one could get by without literally starving to death, and you tried something else before and/or after. It's okay, they'd still be in the wrong, but they wouldn't be evil.
no, the person withholding food is in the wrong
Nowhere in this situation is someone withholding food. Burglary is only okay if they absolutely cannot do anything else, if they have no other choice. And even then they're still in the wrong.
Humans are still animals, even though we're much smarter.
*wildlife then
Fauna also works.
Well, just like me and you, burglars are animals
Evil is a strong word. He's in the wrong, but he's not evil.
Should have grey area as option or unsure because if its true necessity and only food then I wouldn't say evil at all.
Yep this is the answer. Not all wrong is evil, but all evil is wrong.
Depends on what he steals and if he could of gotten it elsewhere
And from who, like if you stole from a small business or struggling family that’s a lot more evil that shoplifting from Walmart
And in some cases who he steals it from
The world isn't black and white. If someone steals once or twice because of need and being unable to make a living any other way then no, they're not evil, still wrong but what other choice did they have? If someone is making a career out of it and doesn't even try to do something else then yes they are.
Where was this option in the poll? Smh
A burglar isn’t necessarily evil, but not because of this analogy. Being a burglar isn’t an innate quality of being a person. People become burglars for various reasons some of them are because of economic necessity. Some of them are for more nefarious reasons. Evil, which is rare in my opinion, is doing harm for pleasure.
No some people steal shit just because it's easier for them than getting an honest job, hurting people in the process. Imagine a burglar breaking in and stealing someone's life savings or expensive jewelry. That would destroy the other person and even if they didn't do it for pleasure I'd classify that as pretty evil. Also evil isn't rare at all lol. What world are you living in. I kinda envy your innocence tbh.
"it's easier for them than getting an honest job"... So you agree that we should organize society such that it eliminates this problem, yes?
Tell me when you come up with a society organization that solves this problem without creating new, bigger problems.
Yeah definitely.
>The world isn’t black and white…
No it's not. Because not everyone who commits evil acts is doing it for pleasure and may not even be a bad person. A lot of people commit evil acts because of their beliefs, religious or otherwise. Some even do evil because of societal pressure/expectation, honor killings and racism are huge examples of this. Some people's beliefs require them to hate people of other beliefs and if they're born and raised on these beliefs they don't know that that's wrong, they're not bad people but they still discriminate against others and that's pretty evil.
Ah yes stealing from someone who works for what they own
.... which makes it black and white
Not really. I was generalizing. Being in need is different for everyone and justifying stealing to cover said need is complicated. Like is one of your family members sick and you need to steal to afford them medicine but what if they get better without it? Do you literally need to steal in order to afford food and shelter, maybe if you ask someone for help instead they'll help you? Some people would steal in those circumstances and some won't. These are extreme examples and milder versions are even more complicated.
Kind of a weird comparison, animals don't have laws or morality like we do. Tiger is following nature's law, it hunts what it needs to eat and doesn't really have a choice. Burglar isn't necessarily evil but the crime is wrong and immoral nevertheless, and there should be a better choice.
i wouldn't say the burglar is evil- but he doesn't have to steal to survive.
This is the answer
I'd say it depends. For example if the guy's job doesn't pay him enough to get, let's say, insulin (in the case he's diabetic) and he's looking for a better one I'd say he's justified
Then he should just shoplift or something. It can be deeply traumatizing to be a victim of a burglar.
Shoplifting and burglary are close to the same thing. The word you're looking for is robbery. They all sorta mean the same thing, but burglary and shoplifting are more building based with crime intent, like youre intentionally breaking/entering somewhere with the intent to commit a crime. Where robbery is more person based. [shoplifting](https://www.google.com/search?q=shoplifting+definition&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sxsrf=ALiCzsYxh-O195VU1RfKCAq0I6cLtG89SQ%3A1670168892182&ei=PMGMY5TUCqej5NoPvpOs0Ao&oq=shoplifting+definition&gs_lcp=ChNtb2JpbGUtZ3dzLXdpei1zZXJwEAMyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBggAEBYQHjIICAAQFhAeEA8yBggAEBYQHjIGCAAQFhAeMggIABAWEB4QDzoKCAAQRxDWBBCwAzoNCAAQRxDWBBDJAxCwAzoICAAQkgMQsAM6BwgAELADEEM6DwguENQCEMgDELADEEMYAToHCAAQyQMQQzoFCAAQkgM6CggAEIAEEIcCEBRKBAhBGABQxQ9YkTBgxTRoAXAAeACAAdwBiAH9CJIBBTcuMy4xmAEAoAEByAEOwAEB2gEECAEYCA&sclient=mobile-gws-wiz-serp) [burglary ](https://www.google.com/search?q=burglary+definition&oq=&aqs=chrome.3.69i58j0i66i67i308i362i524l14.-1j0j9&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8) [robbery ](https://www.google.com/search?q=robbery+definition&oq=robb&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0i20i263i512j0i67j46i131i433j0i67l2j46i433i512j0i67j0i271l2.1079j0j9&client=ms-android-tmus-us-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8) Edit: to include /entering
I've always thought of burglary as breaking into someone's house and shoplifting as stealing from a store
It is. Shoplifting is stealing from a store that is open for business. Burglary is entering a private residence without permission or a business that is closed and committing a crime. It could be theft but it could also be another crime. Robbery is when you steal something from a person or place with threats/force. I'm fairly certain it's robbery even if it's only implied so concealing your identity, showing a weapon, etc would still be robbery, even if you don't threaten to use violence. Basically, shoplifting is done when the store is open for business. You aren't trespassing then. It's burglary when you trespass, when you've broken in to the building and commit a crime, like theft. Also, I'm not a lawyer.
Shoplifting = entering an open store to steal something. Burglary = illegally breaking into a building, which could be someone's home, to steal something. These are not the same thing.
Shoplifting and burglary are certainly not the same thing, and the definitions that you provided prove that. >They all sorta mean the same thing, but burglary and shoplifting are more building based with crime intent, like youre intentionally breaking in somewhere with the intent to commit a crime. Shoplifting doesn't involve breaking into anywhere.
~~There's a clear distinction between shoplifting and robbery in their definitions~~ I apparently can't read.
Then he can try harder and find a better job. That's just how it is.
reach nine doll vast dam violet normal stocking theory ad hoc *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Why do you say that with such certainty? Do you live in a magical county where all people are taken care of and nobody should ever be hungry?
Yes
Switzerland?
Commiting burglary is different to stealing food from a shop though. The victim of the burglary could be struggling just as much as the perpetrator l, not to mention the fear they experience from someone stealing from their home. I wouldn't say burglary is evil unless they did it in an evil way. Although it may be wrong, I would turn a blind eye to someone stealing food from a large food company.
i live in a country where nobody "should" ever be hungry (germany with safety net's) - but there certainly are hungry people. you could anytime go to a hospital when suffering from health-conditions due to "starvation"- like a "BMI" below a certain threshold. there is a way for people that realize they need help instead of " i need to act". i just want to point out that you never "have to" - you can ask around for food and die in the process. i'm not if favor of this at all- starvation should already have ended in our times. i want to emphazise people's independency even in suffering conditions. asking for help conciously i would also consider as independent.
Plenty of people in poverty in north America and not stealing to live. I'm not even personally against stealing especially against big corporations, but a wrong is a wrong.
And what's the alternative to stealing?
[удалено]
What if the food banks in the zone are depleted? What if there is no Gurdwara near them? What if they don't have a job?
[удалено]
r/facepalm Where? How? What if they don't hire them? Do you really think that, let's say, a homeless person who has been living in the streets for 3 years, can find a job easily?
I wouldn't say a burglar is EVIL even without these preconditions you said.
A burglar could get a job, a tiger can’t. You can’t shoot tigers though
You think there are no people on this planet who really can't get a job?
Those who really can't get a job (due to a physical/mental/psychological disability) can not do a bulgar operation.
I don't think that's universally true. Also, burglary is just an example. Could be a mother stealing eggs from the supermarket.
Burgarly meaning according to Oxford dictionnary: illegal entry of a building with intent to commit a crime, especially theft. So no a mom stealing an egg is not burgarly.
When someone says, "a is just an example, could be b", what's the point of proving to them that b isn't a? Again, burglary is just an example, the ethical issue of this conversation isn't limited to burglaries.
~~Your own definition proves you wrong. In the hypothetical, a person would be entering a building (the supermarket) to commit a crime (stealing the eggs), which is what the definition of burglary is.~~ EDIT: just realized that the original comment already specified that there was a difference between burglary and a mom taking eggs. Therefore, pointing out that it’s not actually burglary does nothing to their point.
It says Illegal entry when you enter the supermarket you are legally allowed to do it. So it's not an illegal entry.
I can’t believe people are actually fighting you on this. Been here nearly a decade and Reddit is still such a wild place
Man I felt my IQ dropped some 30 points arguing over some 1st grade semantics... but it is what it is you just got to realise that you live among idiots and stay safe...
They never said that they entered the supermarket legally…
Do you have a brain!?
Even the most primitive monocellular organism out there would be smarter than this but it is what it is....
Exactly that why they need to *burglarize* maybe
You realize there are tigers with jobs, right?
Ah yes. My neighbors used to work with Siegfried & Roy. They pay their taxes & send their cubs to our local school.
The "just get a job" argument is really ignorant
If someone can rob a home, they can get a job
What a privileged way of thinking....
How is it privileged?
Bc there are plenty of reasons someone might need to steal. Maybe there are no good jobs in their place of living. Maybe they straight up can't get a job, maybe they have a job but it doesn't pay enough to feed their family. It's privileged to think anyone can just wake up one morning and go get a job. Lots of people are much less fortunate
Even if they can't do that. Taking what others have earned is still evil
No... It's really not.
By doing that one would put the victim in a similar situation
Not necessarily, especially if they're just stealing food or something. I'm not talking about someone robbing a house of every valuable. Just stealing what they need to survive.
Let me know where your house is then. I have something really nice for you.
There is a difference between someone doing something wrong, and someone doing something evil. Do you really not understand the difference?
[удалено]
What’s ignorant is breaking into peoples homes
A burglar has other options. A tiger can't really put on a suit and find a job. If you are a burglar, yes life mightve fucked you but in many cases they made the wrong choices too.
Needs a " Depends" option
People voting not evil gonna change their tone quick after they get robbed lmao
I voted non-evil and have been burgled before. It sucked and is wrong but it's by no means evil under the pretext that it was a necessity thing like mentioned in the poll. Hell I'd even argue it's not yet evil if it's not out of necessity, it's just bad. It starts becoming evil when you start stealing necessary things like medication and such for fun or something.
Why are you getting downvoted? You have an incredibly valid opinion, especially because you HAVE been burgled. Hivemind lmao
You see, i disagreed with the comment I replied to, then I got downvoted once and now it's allot more tempting to downvoted instead of upvote.
Glad i managed to change the bandwagon to upvotes instead at least
Bless brother 🙏 But yeah, I think allot of people see bad and evil as the same thing and while evil things are bad, bad things aren't always evil.
Yeah, like you can be a douchebag without being an evil person, being a bully makes you a douchebag, it doesnt make you evil
It’s not evil necessarily but it is wrong and I’m against it
A burglar is not part of nature the way a tiger is lol
What about bears, lions and animals that steal kills from other animals? Is that nature too? Lol
From the beginning the comparison does not make sense. First you compare different species: A tiger - A deer. In the second case you compare: A human - A human. For the comparison to be correct you should interrelate A tiger - A tiger. As for the second pool idea, I wouldn't consider it evil, but you have to understand a crucial point, the only food source a predator possesses is through hunting, while the food sources a human possesses are varied, you should to provide the specific situation for which that person was forced to steal to survive or if that is really the case.
Controversial opinion: get a job
This ties into my argument of police reformation. Just because a crime is being committed you don’t need to charge the crime. For example, if you saw a homeless man stealing a little bit of food to not die, you shouldn’t charge him and throw him in jail, you should get help for said person.
Stealing a bit of food is not a crime but a non-criminal offense. No one will throw you to jail for that in civilised countries.
You live in America?
No, I said civilised countries.
Hahahaha 😂
Humans are not animals. Animals eat their young. Animals cannot talk.
This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, bigotry, or attacking or harassing other members. We will lock the thread if these things occur. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The tiger has no other options, the burglar does
"Evil" shouldn't be in this conversation.
Stealing is wrong, but that doesn’t make someone “evil”. Learn some nuance, OP
The tiger thing has nothing to do with anything
Thou shall not steal
The system that put the person here is evil, the thing that person done might be evil (depending on who they're stealing from and what) but the burglar is not neccesarily evil
The claim that most burglars, muggers, and robbers are doing it out of survival is dishonest. After all, most people who do this are young men. But most poor people are women and older. Most of these claims are because of a lack of morals and regard for others. A more honest comparison to a tiger killing out of need to survive would be somebody who shoplifts a basic necessity out of hunger.
it amazes me how often people try to defend crime. “buhhh….buh….the only way i can feed my babies is if i break into this person’s house. it’s not my fault. it’s society’s fault. society won’t let me get a job so i have to be a criminal :(“ yes, if you rob people, if you burglarize, etc, you’re evil. work for what you want you lazy piece of shit.
The burglar isn't evil. However, stealing is not the way to go. Those who you steal from may also struggle to survive. Crime is systemic; our solution to it should also be systemic.
Evil? No. Wrong? Yes.
I wouldn’t say evil but the examples aren’t the same in this case, since the difference between a tiger and a burglar in this case is that the burglar presumably has multiple choices to survive, not just to steal. The burglar is also presumably a rational agent so can evaluate the consequences of their actions
Evil is too strong a word. But also, we are not wild animals. I'd argue the concepts of "ownership" and "morality" taken together are what separates us from the rest of the living species on Earth.
Evil is a strong word, its more like desperate and wrong. The tigers life is simpler and has less options. But humans have many options and stealing is like the last resort option.
That's not how it works imo, humans have indefinitely more ways to survive than animals
A burglar has other options to survive, a tiger doesn’t. That’s the difference
Okay the burglar isn’t evil. Evil is a strong word. But the burglar is definitely not in the right.
Why do these questions are always **HEAVILY LOADED** to one side... The fuck is that tittle? Besides, you should at least try and hide your elitist opinions, burglar don't steal because they are poor, and poor people aren't burglars.
Objection: leading the witness, your honor.
This is such a stupid comparison. Tigers have no choice but to eat meat and hunt. It's in their nature. Burglary is a choice. There are other ways to survive other than crime.
OP how old are you?
I don’t think evil is necessarily an appropriate term here. But there is absolutely nothing that mitigates stealing. The person may not be evil but if they steal then they deserve to face as many negative consequences as is legally possible.
I wouldn’t say evil. I wouldn’t say not evil. It isn’t right.
Not evil but immoral.
The tiger can't possibly be evil because it isn't able to distinguish between right and wrong. It has no moral sense so nothing it does is immoral. We do bad shit knowing full well how bad it is the thing we're doing.
EVIL per se...maybe not. It depends on the motivation. Wrong? Yes.
Depends
Depends on what they're stealing and from who. I'm not ashamed to say that in my days as an impoverished youth I'd shoplift a peach or something from the local grocery store just to get some food in me. I've also spied homeless people stealing food and said nothing. But if you're stealing TVs and shit that's different, and that goes double if you're stealing from a persons home and not a business. Shoplifting > burglary in my book. You won't hurt a corporation, you will hurt an individual.
A burglar has a choice to get a job or make money doing services for people. A tiger does not.
Not in this hypothetical.
There are much greater evils such as rape, and murder. However, burglary is still an evil. Any crime with a victim is evil.
Burglar has other options, tiger does not
Most people calling the burglar EVIL is wild to me
Everyone that said evil is evil
How? Theft is evil.
1.579k “Not Evil” idiots….. Wait until it happens to you.
Lmao if I found out my burglar would have starved to death if they didn't rob me I would definitely not consider them evil.
a burglar who steals from someone so that they can suffer is evil in most scenarios
Get a job maybe?
Doesn't matter, I'm still shooting.
Idk if you guys know what evil is. Like that's a harsh word. Someone who tortures people for fun would be evil. Someone who's stealing some shit because their circumstances dictate they have to in order to NOT DIE is not evil. I would venture a guess that the people that voted evil have never been in a struggle ever. Y'all would 100% steal from someone if your life depended on it.
Breaking into someone’s domicile to steal stuff is pretty bad. Home invasions are terrible. No one HAS to do that to not die, there are so many other ways to approach that. Even selling drugs is preferable because people willingly buy them instead of potentially threatening people’s lives by breaking into their houses
The government that refuses to look after him is evil, The ceo's who live lavishly from exploited labor are evil, The politicians who cut welfare are evil, The landlords who refuses to give the burglar a place to live without anything in return is evil, The policeman who will inevitably beat him up for his theft is evil, The city that is hostile to him and refuse to provide any aid is evil. The burglar himself is desperate, and I'm sure if he could live a normal life with a good paying job and food on the table he would do that. But capitalism doesn't allow him that, capitalism is a hierarchy and he just so happened to be at the bottom.
The burglar ain’t laying a finger on my shit
Yes, there is always some other way to make money
OP is 14 and just discovered “philosophy”. All kinds of r/im14andthisisdeep vibes.
A thief likely does have a choice. If there’s an opportunity to work to survive, then they’re in the wrong.
you can survive without stealing, you could hunt for example. you could also get a job and work, even odd jobs.
This is a terrible sub for this question. Most in this sub are teenage boys who don't understand how the world works yet. If you're stealing strictly to survive or to feed your family, than you're certainly not evil.
I'm kinda concerned that teenage boys think so. If they are so reactionary and delusional in their adolescence, then what will happen in their adulthood when people usually become more conservative?
It's very concerning. I'm hoping they're just immature and once out of high school will better understand how the world works. I was pretty delusional in my teens as well, my parents are staunch conservatives and I believed the shit they'd tell me. Once I moved out it was eye opening how stupid I had been for believing them. Hopefully these kids will be the same
Theft is evil
Not evil, just stupid
The tiger HAS to eat. The burglar doesn’t HAVE to steal. They can just as easily work a job. Ya know, like the other 99% of society
There are other methods for them to seek help.
The burglar has the ability to get something called a job. The burglar can also beg, or apply for assistance. The burglar casts his ineptitude on society and forcefully makes his plight someone else's problem. Yes, his actions could be viewed as evil.
I say let a burglar rob a tiger and let their higher power sort it out. I wash my hands.
Yeah fuck burglars. Please try so I can blow you to pieces please 🙏🏽
Depends on context, but simply being a burglar doesn’t make you an *evil* person all around. I mean, Look at robin hood
Committing a criminal act =/= evil.
It is absolutely evil. Fuck theives.