I watched a video on him. Great and very unique story. Sure he stole, but he was harmless and just wanted to live alone. Crazy how he survived some of those winters.
Yeah but apparently he was a terror to those living in the area. They swore it was a ghost because it hard to prove that they were not losing their minds.
I don’t think I’ve ever wanted to be alone that badly, but I lived alone during the pandemic and went about eight months without seeing another human in person and I already started getting weird. After a certain point, you have to readjust to having people around. I can’t imagine how it would be after that long.
Sure, attack me because you have no better argument than a personal insult.
Thanks for proving my claim about your shitty parents— and your incapability of understanding how theft is both injurious and morally despicable is a sign of sociopathy.
Try thinking of someone other than yourself for once
You have it backward. What’s legal or not is not the same as what’s ethical or moral. Their morals aren’t flexible, quite the opposite. They just recognise where the law is wrong.
Theft is the ONLY harm. Taking a life, taking another’s liberty, taking the fruits of another’s labor, taking what you have no right to… it all boils down to theft.
I agree that this guy’s thefts were mostly harmless, but to say theft isn’t a harm is ridiculous.
Second, if you’re going to stretch the word Theft to include murder and kidnapping/imprisonment, we’re both wasting time because we aren’t using the same language at all. Just let me know you’re standing on that principle and I won’t bother you again.
That being said, with the normal usage of Theft, it really depends on what you take from whom, and how much as to whether harm is done.
Secondary to that, even when there is harm from theft, it can still be justified. Me stealing a medication from a pharmacy certainly costs someone something, but if that’s the last ditch option when all else has failed, is it really a situation where the harm of the theft outweighs the harm of the broken society that made it necessary? While two wrongs don’t make a right, some wrongs preclude right in the first place.
In that scenario, the harm is so heavily distributed via tax breaks and insurances that it might even be a benefit overall since without some theft as a reason to exist, there’s entire industries that wouldn’t exist. The individual theft is still a harm tp some link in the chain, but the chain itself is not harmed at all.
Stepping back even further, what about stealing back? I paid taxes and monies into a broken system, thus me stealing necessary medication could be simply taking back what was taken from me in bad faith. Restitutional theft ain’t really theft, in other words.
Again, I never said theft was never harmful, I said it isn’t inherently harmful.
No, you said theft wasn’t “a certain harm” (which is weird phrasing by the way).
Inherently, certainly, or whatever qualification you want to put on it, it doesn’t matter because the rest of your novella is just a bunch of bullshit wherein you try to convince me that a small amount of harm, or justifiable harm, isn’t actually harm. Get real.
His take on the broken window fallacy is pretty hilarious. “Theft can be good because it might create jobs in the woefully underfunded insurance industry! Won’t somebody please think of the insurers?!”
I watched a video on him. Great and very unique story. Sure he stole, but he was harmless and just wanted to live alone. Crazy how he survived some of those winters.
1000 burglaries over span of 27 years is actually respectable. People do a lot worse when they need a lot less
That’s once every 10 days. That’s a lotta robbin
No robberies. Just burglaries. And only of empty vacation homes. And only for cheap essentials.
Yeah but apparently he was a terror to those living in the area. They swore it was a ghost because it hard to prove that they were not losing their minds.
Can you imagine? “Um… where tf is that giant tub of peanut butter we just bought? And half of my underwear is missing…”
Is that the guy who survived sub-zero winter nights with no fire (for maximum stealth) by just staying awake all night?
I don’t think I’ve ever wanted to be alone that badly, but I lived alone during the pandemic and went about eight months without seeing another human in person and I already started getting weird. After a certain point, you have to readjust to having people around. I can’t imagine how it would be after that long.
Yooo, can you send a link to the vid?
Throw that link up
Search: drove until he ran out of gas stole only food
::: spoiler https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/real-life-stories/man-lived-alone-forest-27-10033467 :::
Those two statements are in direct conflict. Both cannot be true.
Edit: wow, you all had some pretty shitty parents
Found the conservative.
Sure, attack me because you have no better argument than a personal insult.
Thanks for proving my claim about your shitty parents— and your incapability of understanding how theft is both injurious and morally despicable is a sign of sociopathy.
Try thinking of someone other than yourself for once
Food, shelter and hygiene should all be basic human rights. If they were, this wouldn’t be a debate.
But they aren’t. And it is.
You can’t just dismiss reality when it becomes inconvenient, and if your morals are so “flexible”, you might as well not have any at all.
You have it backward. What’s legal or not is not the same as what’s ethical or moral. Their morals aren’t flexible, quite the opposite. They just recognise where the law is wrong.
Not so.
Theft in and of itself isn’t a certain harm.
Theft is the ONLY harm. Taking a life, taking another’s liberty, taking the fruits of another’s labor, taking what you have no right to… it all boils down to theft.
I agree that this guy’s thefts were mostly harmless, but to say theft isn’t a harm is ridiculous.
Yeah no, murder doesn’t “boil down to theft”. Murder is murder.
I said it wasn’t inherently harmful.
Second, if you’re going to stretch the word Theft to include murder and kidnapping/imprisonment, we’re both wasting time because we aren’t using the same language at all. Just let me know you’re standing on that principle and I won’t bother you again.
That being said, with the normal usage of Theft, it really depends on what you take from whom, and how much as to whether harm is done.
Secondary to that, even when there is harm from theft, it can still be justified. Me stealing a medication from a pharmacy certainly costs someone something, but if that’s the last ditch option when all else has failed, is it really a situation where the harm of the theft outweighs the harm of the broken society that made it necessary? While two wrongs don’t make a right, some wrongs preclude right in the first place.
In that scenario, the harm is so heavily distributed via tax breaks and insurances that it might even be a benefit overall since without some theft as a reason to exist, there’s entire industries that wouldn’t exist. The individual theft is still a harm tp some link in the chain, but the chain itself is not harmed at all.
Stepping back even further, what about stealing back? I paid taxes and monies into a broken system, thus me stealing necessary medication could be simply taking back what was taken from me in bad faith. Restitutional theft ain’t really theft, in other words.
Again, I never said theft was never harmful, I said it isn’t inherently harmful.
No, you said theft wasn’t “a certain harm” (which is weird phrasing by the way).
Inherently, certainly, or whatever qualification you want to put on it, it doesn’t matter because the rest of your novella is just a bunch of bullshit wherein you try to convince me that a small amount of harm, or justifiable harm, isn’t actually harm. Get real.
Damn, you went from zero to asshole in one comment. Sorry you wasted my time.
The way you twist the meaning of the word in order to rationalize your offense is pretty disgusting
If you can rationalize that, you could rationalize anything
His take on the broken window fallacy is pretty hilarious. “Theft can be good because it might create jobs in the woefully underfunded insurance industry! Won’t somebody please think of the insurers?!”