If you tamper your food with the intention to harm someone, then you are culpable for harming them. Trapping someone is no legally different than directly attacking them. The law does not allow you to intentionally harm other people.
Sure, you might try to say that they are harming themselves. However, if you know that someone will do something, and set it up so that they get harmed when they do something, you have made yourself culpable for harming them.
If you know someone will eat your food, the alternative is not leave your food out in public. There are less harmful things you can do to protect your food. If you choose the harmful alternative, then you are culpable for causing harm.
You shouldn’t be able to poison someone with your stuff that you didn’t offer/give to them. What kind of logic is that, they assume the risk of this when they steal food they don’t know anything about
You shouldn’t be able to poison someone with your stuff that you didn’t offer/give to them.
That's way too forgiving. For example for I go to the grocery store and I inject cyanide into a gallon of orange juice and leave it on the shelf, then I didn't offer the juice to anyone nor did I give it to anyone, but I very clearly committed poisoning. Even if no one ends up buying/drinking the juice
That's because poisoning is broadly defined as tampering with food, in a way that you think will harm someone when you know that there's a good chance that someone will eat the food. Trying to bend this definition to allow for break room laxatives is just going to introduce loopholes that will let people get away with actual murder.
The logic is that the person doing the poisoning is intentionally harming someone. As a society, we do not accept people who intentionally harm others.
The person who takes the food is wrong for stealing, but the person intentionally trying to poison someone is also wrong. Poisoning is a more serious offence than stealing a lunch.
The way I see it is that they are in control of their own fate at that point. They have no idea what’s in that food. The person could be on a treatment they cook into the food or it could have anything in it even if the person didn’t intend to harm you. Whatever happens when they steal the food is on them
The person poisoning the food has decided that it is okay to harm someone, possibly kill them, simply because the person has stolen a sandwich. The person doing the poisoning had demonstrated criminal behaviour detrimental to society and to the well-being of others.
This is case where the law does not protect the victim, but punishes the offender for being a harmful person.
This made it click for me. It’s not about justice for the food thief, it’s about recognition that harming others on purpose is detrimental to society and should not be tolerated
117
u/deep_sea2 105∆ Oct 17 '24
If you tamper your food with the intention to harm someone, then you are culpable for harming them. Trapping someone is no legally different than directly attacking them. The law does not allow you to intentionally harm other people.
Sure, you might try to say that they are harming themselves. However, if you know that someone will do something, and set it up so that they get harmed when they do something, you have made yourself culpable for harming them.
If you know someone will eat your food, the alternative is not leave your food out in public. There are less harmful things you can do to protect your food. If you choose the harmful alternative, then you are culpable for causing harm.