Posted: 3/20/2013 10:21:39 AM EDT
|
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se.
I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. |
|
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... |
|
Quoted: The thief stole his ill-gotten gains from someone else. Stealing from him just passes those gains along to you - and they are still ill gotten by you. Unless you are stealing from the thief and returning the money/property to the original owner. This. Unless you are returning it to the rightful owner, stealing something and keeping it is wrong. Speed |
|
Quoted:
The thief stole his ill-gotten gains from someone else. Stealing from him just passes those gains along to you - and they are still ill gotten by you. Unless you are stealing from the thief and returning the money/property to the original owner. That's a good point that was brought up in my discussion as well, but in this instance you do not know who the original owner is, what then? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... Who's there? |
|
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. If an argument allows you to justify stealing, then you should re-examine that argument. 
|
|
Quoted: Quoted: The thief stole his ill-gotten gains from someone else. Stealing from him just passes those gains along to you - and they are still ill gotten by you. Unless you are stealing from the thief and returning the money/property to the original owner. That's a good point that was brought up in my discussion as well, but in this instance you do not know who the original owner is, what then? Then don't fucking steal shit.  WTF are you getting at...even possession of stolen property is a crime in itself for moral reasons in most civilized countries. This doesn't seem like a real moral quandary here... Speed |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The thief stole his ill-gotten gains from someone else. Stealing from him just passes those gains along to you - and they are still ill gotten by you. Unless you are stealing from the thief and returning the money/property to the original owner. That's a good point that was brought up in my discussion as well, but in this instance you do not know who the original owner is, what then? Taking something from someone else that doesn't belong to you is theft. That makes you a thief. Anything else is just some kind of rationalization meant to let you do whatever you want without feeling bad about it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The thief stole his ill-gotten gains from someone else. Stealing from him just passes those gains along to you - and they are still ill gotten by you. Unless you are stealing from the thief and returning the money/property to the original owner. This. Unless you are returning it to the rightful owner, stealing something and keeping it is wrong. Speed You wouldn't be "stealing" it back. Just returning it to its rightful owner. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... Who's there? For OP. 
|
|
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Sounds very similar to how the leftists view the whole "Pay their fair share thing" - "You didn't earn that, you got it off the backs of women and minorities!" So, I guess what I'm saying is, theft is theft. Period. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... 
that was quick. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... Didn't go with the No-Knock ban this time? |
|
I advocate any revenge or retribution available for thieves.
If that means stealing what they stole so they can't profit from it so be it. Return it if possible, donate it to someone in need otherwise. But ruining their best laid plans in any manner is OK in my book. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Sounds very similar to how the leftists view the whole "Pay their fair share thing" - "You didn't earn that, yu got it off the backs of women and minorities!" So, I guess what I'm saying is, theft is theft. Period. I think you're right, that does put it in a different light and makes a good argument against the rationalization. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Sounds very similar to how the leftists view the whole "Pay their fair share thing" - "You didn't earn that, you got it off the backs of women and minorities!" So, I guess what I'm saying is, theft is theft. Period. Came in here to post this. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... Ken?! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. Knock, knock... Ken?! 
|
|
Quoted:
I was having a discussion with a friend about whether it is wrong to steal from a thief, knowing what he has is ill-gotten (Let's say for hypothetical purposes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt). One position is that theft is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances. Another is that it's only wrong to steal what was rightfully earned and that the thief has no rightful claim to what he took in the first place, so it can't be considered "stealing" per se. I can see a little of both sides, I'm curious what other people think about it. BTW I am not advocating thievery, this is just a hypothetical morality question. You seem ... familiar. |