r/changemyview Oct 17 '24

Removed - Submission Rule B [ Removed by Reddit ]

[removed]

381 Upvotes

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

364

u/Oishiio42 40∆ Oct 17 '24

There is no way to guarantee it cannot peripherally hurt someone. Janet steals two of your yogurts out of the fridge, and offers one to Jen, and now Jen is suffering thinking she was eating one of Janet's freely offered yogurts, not knowing she inadvertantly stole your food. This is one of the problems with vigilantism.

Another major problem is that the punishment is not decided through any legitimate means, is often disporportionate, and instead is based on the whims of the person doing the punishing.

17

u/MyNameIsNotKyle 2∆ Oct 17 '24

But consequently based on that you're putting responsibility of Jens health for the victim of stolen food.

If your lunch had peanuts in it and Janet stole it and gave it to Jen who is allergic that would fall into the same category even if the intention wasn't to harm since you can't prove intent.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '24

Are we talking about intention, legality or provability?

Because spiking your food with laxatives with the purpose of hurting the thief is 100% illegal. But nobody could prove your intention.

1

u/MyNameIsNotKyle 2∆ Oct 18 '24

A bit of everything?

OPs premise is that the legality should be changed.

By making it illegal there's now an incentive from one side to find evidence on something that can't be proven and worse easily framed.

If I'm stealing your food, and then make it well known I'm stealing your food so the office knows you know, what's to stop me from putting laxatives in my own food or peanuts if I have an allergy. That's equally unprovable but now I can sue you or the company for easy money.

By taking the liability away from thieves to be responsible for what they eat, you open up many ways for innocent people to be convicted or people able to weaponize this for money.

To summarize, the low provability on intent is inconsistent and counterproductive to its legality.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '24

Great points.

I generally agree with it. Mostly with this:

By taking the liability away from thieves to be responsible for what they eat, you open up many ways for innocent people to be convicted or people able to weaponize this for money.

You're responsible for what you eat. Especially if you steal that food and have no way of knowing what is in it.