Poll: Can crime be acceptable in certain cases?
Poll Options
View poll results: Can crime be acceptable in certain cases?
Always unacceptable
6 9%
Depends on the case
57 88%
Always acceptable (wrong only if you get caught)
2 3%
Voters: 65.
#1
In your opinion, is crime always unacceptable? Always acceptable? Or are there some cases where it is excusable? For example if a person is starving and steals food, does that justify breaking the law to meet a basic human need? When I say crime, I mean breaking the law, breaking a serious law that you could face serious consequences for, not random arbitrary laws that involve walking giraffes on the sidewalk in Alabama. Also some people say "It is only wrong if you get caught." Do you agree? I'm reading Crime and Punishment right now so this topic interests me.
Last edited by EnemyWolf at Jun 17, 2010,
#2
Always is.
Quote by Pleasure2kill
The truth is, Muslims never apologized for their faith having something to do with the attacks on 9/11.
#3
It depends on the case and I personally find some laws to be unjust and break them (aka doin' drugs).
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#4
The way I see these types of things is: Yeah it's wrong, but I'm willing to turn the other cheek in that type of situation because if I was in that situation, I would be doing the same thing.
Quote by Son.Of.TheViper
Hmm... seems the thread has been taken over by a swimming pool filled with sperm.

Quote by iantheman
Whenever I run out of tissues, I get worried that I'll be caught hopping through the hallway with my pants around my knees, a dying erection, and a fist full of semen.
#5
Honestly I think almost all laws that don't have to do with the direct harm of another are unnecessary.
Quote by Arthur Curry
it's official, vintage x metal is the saving grace of this board and/or the antichrist




e-married to
theguitarist
minterman22
tateandlyle
& alaskan_ninja

#6
I believe that in certain cases crime is acceptable, even if it isn't legal. For example, If someone kidnapped your daughter and there is a man who lives on your street, is a convicted child molester, and always eyed your daughter, i find it perfectelly okay to abduct his ass and question him. Or if you and your family are starving you should be able to take food. just my .02$.
Gear:
American Strat (Modded with Kinman Pickups and more )
PRS Paul Allender (Don't like Cradle of Filth though )
Line 6 Spider Valve 212 (Broken )
Blackstar HT-5 Combo Amp


DR.ZOIDBERG!!!!! (Very inspirational)
#7
Eh, there is too much bureaucracy surrounding the justice system... people get owned for things like stealing food to feed a starving family or whatever, and murderers walk free on technicalities... it's an imperfect system.

But yes, I think that the law should be 'fluid' to the extent that exceptional circumstances should be able to be used to alter the legality of the action in question.
Marshall amplifiers are the truest purveyors of rock and roll known to man.

"And give a man an amplifier and a synthesizer, and he doesn't become whoever, you know. He doesn't become us."

Holy crap, check this out!
#11
Quote by RockGuitar92
It depends on the case and I personally find some laws to be unjust and break them (aka doin' drugs).



This.


Would I fault someone for stealing a loaf of bread or a can of soup because they are poor and starving? Not at all.


Would I fault a rich guy for stealing a can of soup? Hell yes. He can obviously afford it and has no need to steal it.


Plus some laws are just stupid. Who cares if a 12 year old smokes cigarettes? It's their choice if they do.
#12
A "crime" can be a legal crime, or a moral crime. Technically its illegal to have a license plate that vibrates, but I doubt anyone has any moral problems with that, so legal crimes can have exceptions; but moral crimes, i.e. crimes against nature, never OK.

EDIT: To all the people who think it's OK to steal food to feed your family, what about the guy they stole from? I doubt he's comfortable with it.
I'm rgrockr and I do not approve of this message.
Last edited by rgrockr at Jun 17, 2010,
#14
Quote by daytripper75


Plus some laws are just stupid. Who cares if a 12 year old smokes cigarettes? It's their choice if they do.


The reason for that would be that they are way too immature to make a decision that leads to a potential life long addiction, basically they have no idea what a consequence is. And I think I would be inclined to agree with that judgement.
#15
I really don't know. There are laws I do and don't agree with, but I follow them anyways. I think we should obey the law and try to legally change it if we don't agree not say it's okay to break it...
#17
Quote by EnemyWolf
The reason for that would be that they are way too immature to make a decision that leads to a potential life long addiction, basically they have no idea what a consequence is. And I think I would be inclined to agree with that judgement.



Well, 12 might have been a bit young, but say 15 or 16. They're old enough to know the consequences.
#18
I don't think the law should dictate human morals. Right and wrong isn't as easy as beauracracy.
Quote by Arthur Curry
it's official, vintage x metal is the saving grace of this board and/or the antichrist




e-married to
theguitarist
minterman22
tateandlyle
& alaskan_ninja

#19
I think a major part of this is whether a victim is involved. Drug possession/use is victimless (presuming you're not injecting random people with heroin) but theft involves someone suffering a loss.

Quote by vintage x metal
I don't think the law should dictate human morals. Right and wrong isn't as easy as beauracracy.

So who should dictate morals? If someone gets murdered you would support vigilante justice?
I'm rgrockr and I do not approve of this message.
#20
Quote by rgrockr
I think a major part of this is whether a victim is involved. Drug possession/use is victimless (presuming you're not injecting random people with heroin) but theft involves someone suffering a loss.


So who should dictate morals? If someone gets murdered you would support vigilante justice?

That depends. The law dictates that many people get murdered from death row. And what dictates that one?


I personally don't think there is a true right or wrong, I think there is only societal status quo.
Quote by Arthur Curry
it's official, vintage x metal is the saving grace of this board and/or the antichrist




e-married to
theguitarist
minterman22
tateandlyle
& alaskan_ninja

#22
I'm sure there was some reason for me voting always acceptable, probably just trolling, but I honestly forgot what it was on the scroll down to where I write my post.
Quote by rgrockr
A "crime" can be a legal crime, or a moral crime. Technically its illegal to have a license plate that vibrates, but I doubt anyone has any moral problems with that, so legal crimes can have exceptions; but moral crimes, i.e. crimes against nature, never OK.

EDIT: To all the people who think it's OK to steal food to feed your family, what about the guy they stole from? I doubt he's comfortable with it.

I approach that with the take from the rich give to the poor mentality, of stealing is OK if you steal from rich people, because they're rich so who gives a rip about them, and giving to the poor is OK, because poor people need some, that they might one day be rich and stolen from.
Last edited by cornmancer at Jun 17, 2010,
#23
Quote by cornmancer
I approach that with the take from the rich give to the poor mentality, of stealing is OK if you steal from rich people, because they're rich so who gives a rip about them, and giving to the poor is OK, because poor people need some, that they might one day be rich and stolen from.



So you work hard and make a lot of money so you can get stolen from?

Also: what if the thief steals food from someone who barely makes ends meet?
I'm rgrockr and I do not approve of this message.
Last edited by rgrockr at Jun 17, 2010,
#24
Quote by EnemyWolf
Morally

Tough question. I'm inclined to say it's acceptable so long as it's against a morally wrongful law. But even I can see a whole lot of loopholes in that...

edit: although, to be fair, what exactly is "morally justifiable"?
#25
Quote by rgrockr
I think a major part of this is whether a victim is involved. Drug possession/use is victimless (presuming you're not injecting random people with heroin) but theft involves someone suffering a loss.





So a child that grows up in a home with a drug addict mother/father and a mother/father who abandoned them because of the drug abuse isn't a victim in your eyes?

To me that child is definitely a victim of the drug abuse.
#27
Quote by rgrockr


So you work hard and make a lot of money so you can get stolen from?

Also: what if the thief steals food from someone who barely makes ends meet?

I'm not saying stealing from the rich and giving to the poor is bad, I think it's perfectly fine, because the rich own the world while the poor starve to death, I'm just pointing out a horribly ironic tradgedy that could result of it. A poorly worded tragedy, but a tragedy nonetheless. And before anyone says anything, yes I realize I spelled tragedy wrong that first time, but I just don't feel like right clicking it.
#28
Quote by cornmancer
I'm not saying stealing from the rich and giving to the poor is bad, I think it's perfectly fine, because the rich own the world while the poor starve to death, I'm just pointing out a horribly ironic tradgedy that could result of it. A poorly worded tragedy, but a tragedy nonetheless. And before anyone says anything, yes I realize I spelled tragedy wrong that first time, but I just don't feel like right clicking it.

Who exactly are the rich? People with good jobs? People with a certain amount of money? CEOs? According to the tax man my family is rich, but we don't control the world.

EDIT: We should continue this in the political thread, this is mostly what they talk about.
I'm rgrockr and I do not approve of this message.
Last edited by rgrockr at Jun 17, 2010,
#29
Obviously it depends on the situation. The actual act of stealing in itself is wrong, in my opinion. However, I would be less willing to imprison someone for stealing bread because they are starving. Also, most people nowadays that are actually caught and imprisoned for stealing steal more valuable items than some bread or an apple.
#30
Quote by daytripper75
So a child that grows up in a home with a drug addict mother/father and a mother/father who abandoned them because of the drug abuse isn't a victim in your eyes?

To me that child is definitely a victim of the drug abuse.

While I agree, there are many "legal" ways one's family could go to shit. It wouldn't stop social services from coming in and helping the child(ren). My point is fairly weak, I know, but you must get what I'm trying to say.
Quote by Tyler Durden
It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.

Erowid
#31
Quote by cornmancer
I'm not saying stealing from the rich and giving to the poor is bad, I think it's perfectly fine, because the rich own the world while the poor starve to death, I'm just pointing out a horribly ironic tradgedy that could result of it. A poorly worded tragedy, but a tragedy nonetheless. And before anyone says anything, yes I realize I spelled tragedy wrong that first time, but I just don't feel like right clicking it.

So where do you stand on benefit fraud?

It's the poor stealing from everyone.
#32
Quote by rgrockr
A "crime" can be a legal crime, or a moral crime. Technically its illegal to have a license plate that vibrates, but I doubt anyone has any moral problems with that, so legal crimes can have exceptions; but moral crimes, i.e. crimes against nature, never OK.


Quote by Wikipedia
Crime is the breach of rules or laws for which some governing authority (via mechanisms such as legal systems) can ultimately prescribe a conviction.


Ahem...
Quote by Dirtydeeds468
Holy Crap.

I love you more than life itself.
#33
Quote by rgrockr
I think a major part of this is whether a victim is involved. Drug possession/use is victimless (presuming you're not injecting random people with heroin) but theft involves someone suffering a loss.


So who should dictate morals? If someone gets murdered you would support vigilante justice?

Causing something negative to happen to someone, purposely or negligently.
This is why I don't like arguing on the internet.
Quote by damian_91
If only you could back that statement up.
Quote by Zombee
Wolfgang's Philadelphia Study. Look it up yourself.
Quote by damian_91
No need to, absurd generalizations aren't my thing.
#34
Crime is a social construct, therefore it is fluid and ever-changing, therefore there is no stability to crime, therefore it cannot be "always acceptable," nor "always unacceptable."
#35
A thread about crime?

I should be invovled in this.
Thor! Odin's son Protector of mankind Ride to meet your fate Your destiny awaits Thor! Hlödyn's son Protector of mankind Ride to meet your fate Ragnarök awaits


E-ARCH NEMESIS of girlgerms007