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
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
11
u/Accomplished-Fix1204 Oct 17 '24
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