posted
Xavier, don't get me wrong, here, but if she'd asked me for the diapers, I would have given them to her or bought them for her, but if she had stolen them from me, I would have stopped her. When the situation became apparent, I probably would have given her the diapers anyway, but I don't think the shopkeeper was wrong to stop her in the first place.
posted
And if welfare weren't so abused sometimes. I'm not trying to step on any toes on this one. I am only saying that I have seen this done. A guy goes up to the counter with items. Pays for booze and cigarettes with cash. Then pays for food items with food stamps. That guy needs to wake up. Reprioritize his life. I do realize that not all of them do this and probably not even most of them.
Posts: 2208 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
That said, I still don't think we can fault the storekeeper for his attempt to stop her. The real test of his character is in what happens after she is stopped.
posted
I think we're making some rather drastic assumptions. What we know:
It was a women She stole toilet paper and diapers She ran to a car
And from this we can now assume that she's dirt poor and unable to proved for her family? I think it's likely enough that she has at least one kid to work with that, but the rest is just a random guess. Sure, I'd put money down that she's poor, but who knows how poor? Plenty of rich people steal, and there's multiple degrees of "poor". For one, she probably owns a car (if she was running towards one with a man so close on her heels he managed to stun her I think we can safely assume that she wasn't going to try and pick the lock and hot-wire the engine).
Second off, she's in her twenties, and able to run, carry things, and stay up after being hit with a stun gun. She's clearly in at least good physical shape. Admittedly it's possible that even then she couldn't get a job, but I find it unlikely that she was uncapable of finding any job anywhere. I don't know if she had one or not, but even if she didn't I would bet that the only possible reason she didn't was A)a very checkered past or B) she didn't want to take some awful position.
I wouldn't want to do it either, but that doesn't make stealing all right just so I don't have to get a job I would hate.
Also, she didn't just come to the store and ask for clothes and some diapers. Had she done this I'm sure the clerk would've kindly directed her to a charity center, or some place similar. Instead she choose to steal. I didn't say I'd come into your house and ask for some things because I was poor, I said I would come in and take them, that's what she did. You honestly think if I walked into your home (or your office or wherever) and just took your stuff and tried to leave you would've just figured I was poor and let me go?
As for having no idea what it's like to be poor: you're absolutley right. I'm not exactly loaded with cash, but I have plenty to get buy on, I've never had to subside on welfare or wonder where my next meal was. I fail to see why that affects the morality of someone else stealing.
posted
I seem to have come off snarky. I'm deeply sorry, I hope no one got mad. If you took offense at what I said please do the following:
1) Remind yourself that the person who posted that should've gone to bed 3 hours ago 2) Write down all the times you've thought that poster wrote something completely inchomprehensible (and figure he's just bad at expressing himself in general) 3) Please forgive me?
posted
Not really fallow. I do do that a lot. One of the guys that works for me may be short 5...10 bucks. Eh, here. Pay me back next payday. They do.
Posts: 2208 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mack, often times making the right choice is very hard, you should know as you've continually had to fight to do the right thing (and you have done the right thing ) but just because it's hard, doesn't mean doing the wrong thing is right.
Still though, this doesn't really effect the store owner either. I mean all he knew about this women was that she stole stuff from him, he didn't exactly have a psychological and economic profile on her (or do we for that matter), he acted on what he knew, and nothing about what he knew really seems convincing to me as a good enough reason not to try and stop her.
posted
I know. I was just talking to matt about it--I prefer to understand people and their motivations. Which, I suppose, is why I'm a social worker and not a judge. Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
It may not ever be right, perpetual newbie, but would you argue that there is never a circumstance in which it might be necessary?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Noemon, I would argue that, in America, there is no likely circumstance in which stealing is necessary.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sure, I wouldn't argue with that, but I can imagine that there are people who are unaware of the possibilities available to them, who *feel* that the only way to get some staple item is to steal it. People can be remarkably blind.
I'm not saying that feeling this way exhonerates the person doing the stealing, but I do think that understanding where they're coming from can be helpful in maintaining compassion, and in having a more nuanced understanding of the world around us.
I'm also not arguing that this woman was in such a position, by the way; we have way too little information to be able to judge her motivations.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I do think that understanding where they're coming from can be helpful in maintaining compassion."
Absolutely. As long as that waffling doesn't stop us from tackling the thief before we try to figure out her motivation.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |