In my eyes it is stealing.

[Accy cyclist]

You sure?

Yes,watch the film to see him do it!

 

[classic33]

Us too now, lesson learned

Something I've always done though.

 

[screenman]

As with Rolls Royces that's an unnecessary luxury,not an essential.

Pretty essential for the people they pay to make them.

 

[screenman]

I understand your sentiment, but assuming you take a salary from your business then it will still hit you harder if stolen from your pocket -losses from your business should be covered by some sort of insurance and will be taken out before any profits, whereas steal from you is direct from your pocket after your tax allowance and should it be insured then the insurance and the rise in price of if any should you claim is also direct from your pocket.

I had to sack 3 people who I paid wages to for nicking. So the fact it may cost me slightly less, although because I do not take a wage it would not then it makes it slightly better.

 

[dantheman]

Yes, but there are always going to be certain instances where this can be wrong, just like any opinion or in fact rule or law...

I bet you'd rather someone stole a rolls Royce from the makers than from your driveway ( should you own one)

My comments are my opinions, and although i will respect others opinions, it doesn't mean mine will be changed (though it can happen)

I still think it's better to steal from a company than a private residence - would you not feel more upset and unsafe/ invaded if someone broke into your house and stole stuff rather than your business premises?

I'm not saying it should be allowed, but for many reasons I personally don't look down on someone who steals from a business as much as someone's home..

For instance, I don't see too much of a problem with someone struggling for food to steal from a bin at a supermarket, but I don't think it was very nice for the people that broke into my grandmotherspam years ago and cooked themselves food and stole from her freezer.. as a women then in her sixties she didn't feel safe after.

 

[slowmotion]

I bet you'd rather someone stole a rolls Royce from the makers than from your driveway ( should you own one)

.

I'd be more upset if someone nicked my Roller than if they nicked my neighbour's one. It doesn't mean that I think one theft was "better" than the other.

 

[dantheman]

No, it doesn't mean that, but in reality.......

 

[PhilDawson8270]

Regardless of who it is stolen from. Everybody pays for it anyway. Stolen off the drive. Insurance pays. Everybody else pays premiums toward the loss.

Steal from a shop. Goods are priced such that they can allow for thefts.

We all end up paying regardless of where it is stolen from.

There have also been numerous reports of stores going out of business due to theft of stock. I’m sure the people who lose jobs because somebody stole the stock look down on it quite harshly.

 

[classic33]

Who was wrong here?

A frozen leg of lamb stolen from a supermarket, shoved down the front of the trousers. Thief intended selling it on in a pub less than 10 minutes away.

Security followed, with one getting in front to slow the thief down. Thief arrested over 20 minutes later, blaming the security for not stopping him sooner. Or at least letting him go.

 

[Drago]

Society, for not giving security guards tasers.

 

[nickyboy]

Yes, but there are always going to be certain instances where this can be wrong, just like any opinion or in fact rule or law...

I bet you'd rather someone stole a rolls Royce from the makers than from your driveway ( should you own one)

My comments are my opinions, and although i will respect others opinions, it doesn't mean mine will be changed (though it can happen)

I still think it's better to steal from a company than a private residence - would you not feel more upset and unsafe/ invaded if someone broke into your house and stole stuff rather than your business premises?

I'm not saying it should be allowed, but for many reasons I personally don't look down on someone who steals from a business as much as someone's home..

For instance, I don't see too much of a problem with someone struggling for food to steal from a bin at a supermarket, but I don't think it was very nice for the people that broke into my grandmotherspam years ago and cooked themselves food and stole from her freezer.. as a women then in her sixties she didn't feel safe after.

Trying to rank different thefts depending on who has stuff stolen is a slippery slope.
You say stealing from a company isn't as bad as stealing from an individual. How about whether it's worse to steal from a poor person than a rich one?

If I own two watches and one is stolen is that not as bad as one being stolen from someone with just one watch?

Please don't give me the "comoanies can afford it more than individuals". Companies are forced to allow for theft losses in the prices they charge us. We all pay increased personal insurance premiums due to personal theft

 

[Mrs M]

Stealing is stealing.
Went into Sainsbury at lunch time today and was not charged for my largest item.
I queried the total bill straight away and sure enough, cashiers mistake.
Didn’t think twice about pointing it out, more important to be able to show my face in that shop again than a “free” item, even if only I knew.

 

[dantheman]

Companies go under because of theft, and I'm sure some people have been bankrupted and even madeasier homeless and put into a position where they feel they have to steal to survive because they've been stolen from ....

And I'm sure there's been plenty of companies that have gone bust from it where the owners of the companies haven't financially been hurt themselves, even if others have. There are ,any morally wrong things that are legal, and if you have the money to start with then they're a lot easier to find out about and exploit...

I'd rather someone stole Joe blogs roller than the single mums 15 year old Fiat punt that she can't afford to replace and relies on... does that make me a bad person for saying that? After all I said I'd prefer, I didn't say I'd like to see..... is it not preferable that something gets stolen in a way/from somewhere/someone where the impact is much less than the other way around?

And also where the act doest cause people to live in fear - yet another thing that money can help with as the poor guy cannot afford to get the front door fixed that they broke down, let alone fit an alarm or get security or even chase up the crime should the police not be interested.....

Is it really just as bad to steal food to feed your family as it is to steal your prized omega sea master so you can get some crack this weekend?


Can you really sit on your high horses and honestly say that all thieving is equal?

Is not stealing a child worse than stealing your prized breitling navitimer?

I don't believe all stealing is equally as bad... its not just who from, it's not just in what manner, it's not just for what reason but these are some of the reasons that affect how bad I see the deed.

 

[slowmotion]

Suppose the guy who nicked a pack of yellow sticker turnips came up before the beak. Suppose I came before the beak having been nicked with that bottle of Taittinger secreted about my person. I would imagine that I would get a stiffer penalty than he would. Rightly so in my eyes.

It doesn't make either of the crimes morally defensible though.

 

[dantheman]

Suppose the guy who nicked a pack of yellow sticker turnips came up before the beak. Suppose I came before the beak having been nicked with that bottle of Taittinger secreted about my person. I would imagine that I would get a stiffer penalty than he would. Rightly so in my eyes.

It doesn't make either of the crimes less morally indefensible though.

We do not live in a black and white world, the whole way you said less morally defensible and have now deleted the less to me says you realise this, include the less and and I'd disagree, in fact I do either way. I think the only reason you'd get a stiffer penalty is because it would be less morally defensible. After all, they were both stolen from the same place, and neither of you were armed were you? Surely it's being humane and seeing the real circumstances behind what pushed each of you to break the law that is the reason why you agree you should get a stiffer penalty?