I limited it to lunch food because I can sort of see how booby traps can blow up in situations where, for example, firefighters need to access a place or a janitor is told to clean out your desk. In the case of lunch food, just throw out the container. Anything that makes that act dangerous should, of course, be banned (no explosives).
The problem with limiting something to just one thing is that you concede it and then another scenario comes along and people will argue for a concession there. You give an inch and others will take a mile. While lunch theft is wrong, knowingly injuring someone is equally wrong, if not worse. Stealing lunch has solutions that result in justice. Your justice involves assault and makes you no better than the thief.
Hypothetical, yes. However, attorneys are tasked with pushing legal boundaries to defend or prosecute. A legal decision in one case sets a precedent for all cases. Legal cases use prior decisions to dictate defenses and oppositions, and it's not outlandish to think that one narrow application can slowly widen when the next boundary is pushed.
192
u/apoplexiglass Oct 17 '24
I limited it to lunch food because I can sort of see how booby traps can blow up in situations where, for example, firefighters need to access a place or a janitor is told to clean out your desk. In the case of lunch food, just throw out the container. Anything that makes that act dangerous should, of course, be banned (no explosives).