Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 5/21/2003 3:46:18 PM EDT
I remeber a while back a CNN embedded journalist was recapping his experience and he mentioned that he saw a US Army soldier eyeing a watch on a dead Iraqi soldier. He then claimed to have lectured the soldier on how "you do not steal from a dead man". First off, I don't believe the story. I never saw any POWs with watches. But anyhow, lets talk about the ethics of "stealing" from dead people. If you were hiking in the mountains and saw a dead dude with a billion dollars in gold what would you do? Leave the money becuase it "belongs to a dead guy". I mean WTF? Hell, I wouldn't have to think twice about it. I don't even think the situation warrants thinking. You would be an idiot to not take it. I don't even understand why it is considered stealing. They are just going to get burried and that good watch (if it ever existed) is going to waste. It is almost a crime and is at least wasteful to discard something that can still be of use. If it was a rifle and the soldier was low on ammo, would that be the same thing? Is there a religious reason for not "stealing" from DEAD people? Where does this reporter get of saying "Don't steal from a dead man". Why not? He doesn't have any use for it. His family aint comin for it. "Stealing" from a dead man seems like a no brainer. Once you pass on, you are no longer a person and you can't use yer stuff no more. Please enlighten me as to why "you do not steal from a dead person". Personally, I would have told the reporter to go fuck himself and I would have taken the watch. Later, I would have planted it on him and accuse him later of "stealing" from a dead guy, just to soil the name of CNN some more. What to you guys think.? How do I make a poll?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:49:04 PM EDT
I have no qualms with taking from the dead if there are no heirs or other people with a rightful claim to the property.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:49:53 PM EDT
Hey if you don't have a problem with being a piece of shit, then by all means go for it.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:54:01 PM EDT
"Thou shall not steal."
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:55:02 PM EDT
So if you can take a dead guys' watch, then I can take the dead guys' wife/daughter/girl. What a deal.... [BD]
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:55:06 PM EDT
They're dead, they don't care.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:56:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2003 3:58:02 PM EDT by RAMBOSKY]
A long time ago, in a land far, far away...the land of rice paddies..... I use to collect ears and hung them on a necklace. Back then I was turned into an animal. But now I am civilized. In the heat of battle you do things that you wouldn't normally do.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:56:35 PM EDT
Even if it's just a name it's funny "Sewer Urchin" posted this. You compare a billion dollars to a watch???? Had I come across the hundreds of millions in those houses, I'd be thinking about it. A watch on a dead Iraqi solder? I doubt it would be worth much. I wouldn't take it. But then I'm not there in that situation.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:58:25 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2003 3:59:37 PM EDT by raven]
Reminds me of an old black and white photo in a gun shop. Shows a GI in battle fatigues holding a Ppsh-41 SMG. I ask the old guy who runs the shop, Me: "Hey! Is that you in the photo?" old dude: "Yep. Me in Korea." Me: "Cool. And did you capture that gun in combat?" old dude: "Uh huh. The previous owner no longer had any use for it." What's the difference between the GI who took the gun from a dead NK and some Iraqi's watch? Someone else will take it if you dont. Not like the guy included the watch in his will.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:58:51 PM EDT
"The dead only know one thing...It is better to be alive" (Pvt. Joker full Metal Jacket) Really I am a firefighter/Emt, does that mean when we code someone out after dong 45 min of CPR I can take his watch? Come on people think, If it is not yours...Don't take it.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:04:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By R-32: "The dead only know one thing...It is better to be alive" (Pvt. Joker full Metal Jacket) Really I am a firefighter/Emt, does that mean when we code someone out after dong 45 min of CPR I can take his watch? Come on people think, If it is not yours...Don't take it.
View Quote
The point is once the dude is dead its not ANYONES (barring a will etc).
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:06:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CerebralAssassin: I have no qualms with taking from the dead if there are no heirs or other people with a rightful claim to the property.
View Quote
There it is.....And I would search with due diligence, (and discretion), for them.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:08:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:09:06 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CerebralAssassin:
Originally Posted By R-32: "The dead only know one thing...It is better to be alive" (Pvt. Joker full Metal Jacket) Really I am a firefighter/Emt, does that mean when we code someone out after dong 45 min of CPR I can take his watch? Come on people think, If it is not yours...Don't take it.
View Quote
The point is once the dude is dead its not ANYONES (barring a will etc).
View Quote
Sure the dead have no need for material things, but really it's a reflection of your character when you take something off a dead person's body that will benefit you.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:11:37 PM EDT
One would have to actually have character first...
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:14:27 PM EDT
The watch is something he will be using in the afterlife. There are many cultures that send things with the departed to use in the afterlife.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:15:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2003 4:23:01 PM EDT by _twist]
If you were hiking in the mountains and saw a dead dude with a billion dollars in gold what would you do? Leave the money becuase it "belongs to a dead guy". I mean WTF?
View Quote
this reminds me of a joke: a man is talking to a woman he knows, let's say at a bar. Man: Would you sleep with me for a million dollars? The woman takes a second to think about it. Woman: Yeah, I'd sleep with you for a million dollars. I guess I'd be stupid not to, it's just sex. Man: OK then, would you sleep with me for a hundred dollars? Woman, shocked: Of course not, what do you think I am, a prostitute? Man: Oh, we've already established that. Now we're just haggling the price. i wouldn't take the watch because it belittles me. i'd take the billion dollars because i'm a whore. moral qualms are always relative, and that's why dogma seldom reflects reality. god put me on this earth to survive, not to stroke the egos of my fellow man. but sometimes that is surviving - especially in this pussy ass society.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:19:35 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Old_Painless: "Thou shall not steal."
View Quote
Ahh, but our middle eastern muslim brothers don't have the 10 Commandments, do they?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:22:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Phil_A_Steen:
Originally Posted By Old_Painless: "Thou shall not steal."
View Quote
10 Commandments
View Quote
Oh christ just lock this thread now and get it over with
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:23:55 PM EDT
originally posted by old_painless: [b]l"Thou shall not steal."[b] He's dead. It isn't stealing anymore. As far a being a peice of shit, think about this one for a second. I read on this board about U.S. soldiers who would take AK-74s and use them instead of their M-4s. Is there anything wrong with this? The swap definately took place after the previous owner passed on to the next life and the trade is one of convenience NOT life or death. The M4 will do the same job as a ak-74. As far as the watch being compared to the billion dollars, I don't see any difference at all. I just raised the stakes. The central ethics still remain. So can you take a billion dollars in gold but not a worthless watch? Take it from this perspective. You are in battle and someone on the other side is trying to shoot and kill you. In this battle, your enemy comes out second best and is on his way to meet his 70 virgins at the river of wine. After someone attempts to take my life, they owe me something, and I will take it from them. Their family are not property though and I wouldn't try to take them. We are talking about personal property here. They guy is dead. He was trying to KILL you. That makes him a dirty son of a bitch. I can appreciate firefighters/emt's not taking anything, but that is something totally different. I'm talking about in war, what is the matter with taking a war trophy. I think that in war, all the rules change.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:24:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sewer_Urchin: Personally, I would have told the reporter to go fuck himself and I would have taken the watch.
View Quote
And you would have been the first to scream "Those fucking barbarian war criminals!" if one of the Red Team would have taken as much as the boots from one of _our_ soldiers.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:27:18 PM EDT
First of all, I don't steal. Second of all, I don't need any moral lessons from any reporters. ED
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:31:56 PM EDT
wow , after reading all the posts i guess it is preety well divided, both extremes. not sure how i feel, but i guess thousands of years of wars fought for land, gold, women silks , fur,spices. all fought and people died, and the victors took what they wanted.it has been like that since we walked upright. to take a watch off a dead guy when you are an emy is not the same as taking a watch off a guy that died trying to kill you. if you try to kill me, and i kill you instead ,what you have is mine, if i want it. if i found a dead guy from a car accident and take his watch that is stealing, might be a fine line between the two but it is a line its not stealing, its the spoils of war i guess the 21st century is too civilized for me
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:36:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sewer_Urchin: originally posted by old_painless: [b]l"Thou shall not steal."[b] He's dead. It isn't stealing anymore. As far a being a peice of shit, think about this one for a second. I read on this board about U.S. soldiers who would take AK-74s and use them instead of their M-4s. Is there anything wrong with this? The swap definately took place after the previous owner passed on to the next life and the trade is one of convenience NOT life or death. The M4 will do the same job as a ak-74. As far as the watch being compared to the billion dollars, I don't see any difference at all. I just raised the stakes. The central ethics still remain. So can you take a billion dollars in gold but not a worthless watch? Take it from this perspective. You are in battle and someone on the other side is trying to shoot and kill you. In this battle, your enemy comes out second best and is on his way to meet his 70 virgins at the river of wine. After someone attempts to take my life, they owe me something, and I will take it from them. Their family are not property though and I wouldn't try to take them. We are talking about personal property here. They guy is dead. He was trying to KILL you. That makes him a dirty son of a bitch. I can appreciate firefighters/emt's not taking anything, but that is something totally different. I'm talking about in war, what is the matter with taking a war trophy. I think that in war, all the rules change.
View Quote
Your argument have holes in it. First in your original post you gave two situations - a soldier taking a watch off a dead enemy soldier, and a hypothetical situation of finding a billion dollars on a dead man in the woods. In both situations, you do not have the right to take the dead's belongings. As for the AK47 lifted from a dead enemy soldier, that is more acceptable because the rifle does not belong to the soldier - it was issued to him by his government, so it really belongs to the government. As for saying the enemy was trying to kill you, so you are entitled to take his stuff, well, he was doing his job like you were doing yours. It's just not classy, man.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:42:23 PM EDT
If I die, I would want my family to recive whatever I had on me, Although if its something that someone actually has a use for, and my family would just discard into a box somewhere, I would rather someone get some good out of it.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:45:27 PM EDT
Allow me to clarify one thing. If I come across a train wreck and I steal a rolex from a dead guy, I deserve to have my hand cut off. That would make me a theiving s.o.b. On the other hand, if that same dead person was killed under different circumstances, say trying to kill me or my comrades, he is now officially my bitch. Here is a shameless cliche': "All is fair in love and war". Take the damn watch, he would do the same to you and he tried to kill your comrades. A good point was made earlier about how wars have been fought over material things and that is just stealing on a larger scale combined with mass murder. A watch from a dead enemy soldier is nothing. Again, when someone tries to kill me, my friends, family, etc. they are less than human. If one of my fallen comrades had his boots stolen, I would pay it back ten fold. They whole idea of "war crimes" I find absurd because the entire thing should be considered a crime but that is an entirely different descussion.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:46:22 PM EDT
It's wrong to steal, period. The watch (or whatever) may have value beyond monetary. Were it a gift from a loved one or a family heirloom, it should go back to the family.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:48:37 PM EDT
well, I had some long drawn out response, but then I realized that you said the story's origin was the reputable source of CNN. Which would bretty much qualify it as [BS] in my book. And, no I would take a Dead man's watch, or a living man's either
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:51:34 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 4:52:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Andreuha: If I die, I would want my family to recive whatever I had on me, Although if its something that someone actually has a use for, and my family would just discard into a box somewhere, I would rather someone get some good out of it.
View Quote
WHEN you die...
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:01:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CerebralAssassin:
Originally Posted By Andreuha: If I die, I would want my family to recive whatever I had on me, Although if its something that someone actually has a use for, and my family would just discard into a box somewhere, I would rather someone get some good out of it.
View Quote
WHEN you die...
View Quote
nice.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:03:17 PM EDT
If you were wearing the watch your Great Grandfather passed down and you wanted to pass it on to your son would you want someone to take it off your carcass? It doesn't matter what the value is. It may be his ownly family eirloom. Taking of weapons is completly different. One it is for safety and two it its the opposing governments property not the individual soldiers.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:14:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2003 5:15:59 PM EDT by TheLastBoyScout]
Would you guys call my grandfather a thief? He's had a P-38 that he took off of a Nazi who no longer needed it for the past almost 60 years. He also has a whole bunch of other little items their Nazi owners have no use for. Aside from 60 years and a few thousand miles, whats the difference?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:24:58 PM EDT
I thought it was a rule that if somebody was trying to kill you and you kill them first then you get all of their stuff.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:25:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By speedwayrn: If you were wearing the watch your Great Grandfather passed down and you wanted to pass it on to your son would you want someone to take it off your carcass? It doesn't matter what the value is. It may be his ownly family eirloom...
View Quote
Why would someone wear something valuable on a battlefield. Buddy, If it is a real war, plunder the enemy and make them wish they never opposed you. Leave it at home if you think it might be lost at war.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:39:31 PM EDT
[i]Why[/i] does everyone say that stealing is wrong? I thought that the only reason that it was wrong was because it deprived someone else of their property. Once someone has already been deprived of it, a second person who receives said property is not guilty of stealing it. I would say that the soldier with the watch was deprived of his property when he was killed. Now, the watch reverts back to his family. If he has no family, who owns the watch? No one. So, if you were sent to bury this guy who doesn't have a family, and you take him out into the woods, dig a shallow grave, put him in the hole, and start to cover him up, are you going to go ahead and bury the watch? I think that this whole thing is like calling someone a theif because they pick up a penny that the see laying in a store parking lot. That is to say, asinine.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:40:17 PM EDT
I would need to consult the Bible however, I believe that spoils of war and theivery are diferent. that being said I don't think I would take the watch. I would however take the money and ask for forgivness. I'm only human.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:40:19 PM EDT
So for some of you it wouldnt be a problem if the mortuary dude took your dead father's watch from the coffin before they burried him. Thats what some of you are saying. The people who would take personal effects from a dead guy is the problem with our society and some of you wonder what wrong with our children today, remember, you taught them to be worthless. GG
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:41:31 PM EDT
[;D]What if a bomb fell directly on an enemy soldier and all that was left was his watch, then it would be just like finding it on the ground.[;D] What a silly question.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:52:15 PM EDT
I did think that reporter was obnoxious. But I understand we deliberately did not bury dead Iraqis b/c their families were likely nearby and wanted to come and bury them according to the religious rites of their religion. If it's true that their families would come looking for them, and want to bury them, the families had a right to his things. You shouldn't steal from the dead not b/c of the dead man's rights, or even his families, but b/c it degrades you.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 5:54:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TheLastBoyScout: Would you guys call my grandfather a thief? He's had a P-38 that he took off of a Nazi who no longer needed it for the past almost 60 years.
View Quote
This thread is titled "What's wrong with [b]stealing[/b] a watch from a dead guy". Not "Taking war souvenirs". A watch is a personal item. A P-38 is a weapon issued by a government. 2 different things. Taking a war souvenir is a part of war (or was until the P.C. crowd came along). But stealing personal items (ie. watches, wallets, money) I believe is wrong. No, your grandfather is no thief. Just a damn good shoot. My own ex-father-in-law has a Browning Hi-Power he got off a German. ED
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:00:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Gun Guru: So for some of you it wouldnt be a problem if the mortuary dude took your dead father's watch from the coffin before they burried him. Thats what some of you are saying. The people who would take personal effects from a dead guy is the problem with our society and some of you wonder what wrong with our children today, remember, you taught them to be worthless. GG
View Quote
Why would I bury my dad with a watch?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:37:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/21/2003 6:39:37 PM EDT by 199]
Originally Posted By Sewer_Urchin: ... when someone tries to kill me, my friends, family, etc. they are less than human. ...
View Quote
Does that mean whoever killed this enemy soldier is less than human? That very possibly could be you! You can think the two of you are fighting each other over ideas, property, etc., if you wish, but most likely the real issue is simply different birthplaces – nothing more! You’re fighting for your country; he’s fighting for his.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:37:48 PM EDT
It's wrong for the same reason that its wrong to eat shit. It doesn't smell good, and leaves a bad odor about you if you do either.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:39:59 PM EDT
This is [b[MY[/b] rifle. There are many like it but this one is [b]MINE[/b]. [b]MY[/b] rifle is [b]MY[/b] best friend. It is [b]MY[/b] life.... [b]MY, MINE, ME, ME[/b] etc. because I don 't know the rest. The soldiers rifle is his most personal and prized possession. I personally see that as being sacred. If it weren't for other people taking it and using it against me, I would leave it with the soldier out of respect. As for the name of the topic, I named it that because of what the reporter said "you do not steal from a dead man". Hence my question: "What's wrong with stealing from a dead guy?"
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:50:11 PM EDT
If I were in combat and NEEDED a watch, I'd take it and never give it a second thought.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:57:50 PM EDT
I've never been in combat but I always liked the idea of people being honorable soldiers like not shooting an enemy that can't fight or a burial ceremony for the dead and things of that nature. Obviously all curtesy would be gone if it was time to be a SOB. Everyones honor has a price. A watch is not mine.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:57:51 PM EDT
Stealing is wrong. Stealing from people that can't protect THIER property is wronger still. Lecturing a soldier because you think he is planning on committing a crime, and then crowing about it on the news is pretty wrong too. For all mr CNN knows, the soldier might have just seen his first dead body, or been struck by the fact the watch seemed so out of place, or was still running, even though it's owner wasn't.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 6:58:03 PM EDT
Any body got the time?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 7:04:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Sewer_Urchin: If one of my fallen comrades had his boots stolen, I would pay it back ten fold.
View Quote
Thats the second post where you related the looting to some form of "Payback", not that that is so terrible, but it sounds like you are talking about vengeance, not the morality of taking some trinket that a dead guy has no use for anymore. That really makes it a different question doesn't it?
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 7:08:30 PM EDT
Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery, my emphasis added: Stealing is wrong. Stealing from [b]people[/b] that can't protect THIER property is wronger still.
View Quote
No argument there, but the disagreement arises with how we define a person. I say that once they're dead, they cease to be a person, so the watch is open to be taken if there is not an heir. I would have a problem with someone stealing a watch from a person that was dying. I do not think that I would not have a problem with someone taking possesion of a watch that was on a corpse, provided that there was not an heir.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top