It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who is at fault if you leave your door wide open?

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Take a look at some court transcripts in your area......... you will be surprised as all that matters is what the JUDGE wants to accept as factual evidence (Honest you Honor, he said if he weren't home just to take what we agreed on prior!!!!!).......




posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime

Well, in England trespass is trespass. If you steal property then it's burglary.

Trespass is dealt with differently by the police and courts. If someone walked across my garden then "so what". If they started using my garden as a shortcut then that's a civil matter. If someone walked into my house, then the police and courts (if it got there) may be less tolerant. If things were stolen, then it's a criminal offense.

If, to get into my house they broke the door down, then in court that aggravation may add to the sentence.

Regardless. Back to the OP. If someone stole stuff from a house with an open door, the person committing the theft is a scumbag and IS responsible.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

The person who steals is at fault.

Leaving your door might tempt someone to act wrong and steal something.

But that is like saying it's the rape victims fault because of what she is wearing.

People are capable of doing the right thing. They choose not to. It's that simple.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
I have been having a argument of sorts with a few friends lately about this question. If you leave your door wide open and unlocked are you responsible if someone comes along and steals anything inside?
COmmon sense would say yes you bear soem responsibility correct? but for some reason my friend insist that no they are not at fault period.

What is your opinion on this question ATS?


Ultimately it is only the fault of the one entering and taking things that don't belong to him or her. It is really as simple as that..

Of course there is the comon sense argument and that is "You can't trust everyone" but leaving your door open is not a crime, stealing , is and that really is what it all boils down to.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: yuppa

The person who steals is at fault.

What if you only lock the door and don't deadbolt it.
What if you deadbolt, but don't set the alarm?
What if you set the alarm but don't hire a personal security team to patrol?


Ok so you wont take any responsibility if they DONT BREAK IN and just WALK INSIDE and walk out with something? This would not had Happenned IF you locked the doors correct?

I mean Literally leaving your door open/unlocked. No B and E needed. BOTH the owner and the Criminal are at fault in my opinion.

The reason I ask this question was in response to a reply ABout John podesta leaving his phone in a cab. I said HE was at fault for not watching out for his Phone. Its th e same Principle.


Not the best analogy imo.

If you find a locked phone somewhere you wont be able to just identify who that phone belongs to and bring it back. At best you can deliver it to authorities when you have time for it to do so (hardly your priority) and hope for the best.

When you notice someones front door is open you immediately know for a fact that that is not your house and does not contain anything that belongs to you.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: SRPrime




The bottom line is, if the "victim" created the circumstance that allows the criminal harm him, the victim splits responsibility.


I bet you are one of them people who blames a rape victim because she wore a short skirt.

Glad your not in the field of law.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I think the question is getting muddled by confusing two different kinds of responsibility.
There is the moral and criminal law responsibility for the action of the thief.
There is the moral and civil law responsibility for the loss of the property stolen.
Leaving an open door does not enter into the first issue, but it does enter into the second issue.



edit on 17-12-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: DISRAELI

Whether Morally or Legally the person who takes what isn't theirs to take is responsible for taking it. It doesn't matter.

You didn't ask them to take it or tell them it's a gift. It's not theirs. That is obvious.

Now, it may have been a bad idea or careless of you to leave the door wide open but that doesn't mean you are responsible for someone taking what is yours.

Like the rape victim. Maybe you see a woman who's super hot. laying naked and sleeping in the grass with nobody around. Does that mean you're not responsible if you violate her??? Sure it might be tempting for you to do something, but you're still choosing to act on it. You don't have to. People aren't that weak even though they like to use that excuse.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm
You're focussing on the criminal law issue of the action of the thief, and I agree with you.
I am just pointing out that if you claim on the insurance and have to admit leaving the door open, the insurance company will be less inclined to pay up. Similarly, if you were holding the item in trust for somebody else, they will feel aggrieved by your negligence, and rightfully so. Depending on the nature of the relationship, they may want compensation. That's what I mean by civil law responsibility for the loss of the property.





edit on 17-12-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm



But that is like saying it's the rape victims fault because of what she is wearing.


That comment always leaves me puzzled. Maybe I don't understand it. Would you advise your daughter to head on off to get drunk at a frat party provocatively dressed? Is that responsible parenting?

I don't say that to be argumentative or insulting, Mojom.

I say it, because it seems to me, that if someone suggests some responsibility rests with the home owner who leaves his door unlocked or the victim of rape the rational gate gets slammed shut with a lot of people, I think based on the notion that "guilt" comes from a single well of limited supply, and no one wants to take any away from the thief or the rapist. But I think there are different wells of fault/responsibility and both parties draw from different wells. So I don't see fault/responsibility assigned to a victim as changing the fault/responsibility assigned to a thief or rapist.

Is that even close to clear?

I mean how do we teach our children to be wise to the way things really are, to keep them safe, vs the way we think the world should be?



edit on 17-12-2016 by imwilliam because: spellin



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   


If you leave your door wide open and unlocked are you responsible if someone comes along and steals anything inside?



This is beginning to sound like Rock , Paper , Scissors ..........

1.The thief will be responsible for the lack of moral actions , and to justify why they have possession of the property in question.
2.The property owner will be responsible to prove it is still rightfully theirs barring no obvious breaking & entering, witnesses etc...and for the monetary losses if recovery isn't an option.
3.The authority(Judge, LEO, etc..) is responsible to assign penalty/punishment for whom our legal system deems liable for breaking of laws or statutes.

Responsibility can be taken in any or all of these ways in my mind

edit on 17-12-2016 by novem because: bad grammar



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 07:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Talorc

Yes. So you see the owner is partially responsible. That makes more sense than just saying its all the crooks fault.

I can't agree with this at all. There is no law that says you have to lock your doors to retain ownership of your possession, and a locked door sure isn't an effective deterrent for a thief, that wishes to remove something from your home.

Taking something that does not belong to you, without permission is wrong. Period. Ownership is not determined by whether a door is locked or unlocked. You can argue that the unlocked door tempted the thief, but there is no guarantee that locking the door would have reduced the temptation, only that it would have made it more difficult for the thief to remove items from the home.

I don't believe a person that leaves his/her door unlocked bears any responsibility in making a thief a thief.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: imwilliam

I get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that if someone steals from you or rapes your daughter they are responsible for that.

Unless you're going to say that you actually wanted your stuff taken or your daughter wanted to get raped that is. But since you can't decide for other people what they want you can't actually make that decision.

Also, where would be the line. Is it when your door is wide open or your daughter is wearing a mini skirt that does it??? What about if the door is just closed and your daughter just looks super hot in yoga pants?? All your doing is arguing over subjective details now. If you violate someone's private property or person without their consent it's your fault for doing it.

Now, because people are so totally f*cked in the head and can't figure that out on their own or actually know better but do it anyway, it isn't the best idea to wear some skimpy outfit to a frat party. But that doesn't mean you are wanting to get raped because of it. Because people a A-holes.

Someone who is going to steal from you isn't stopped by your locked door. Someone who isn't going to steal from you won't take anything even if they can totally get away with it. Then there is a grey area and because of those people you just can't be sure that your daughter won't get raped, but she probably won't.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

No.

If someone wants to come in your house and steal something, a locked front door isn't going to stop a burglar...leaving it unlocked just makes their job easier.

Edit: oh, wide open? Eh no point in assigning blame. Don't leave your door wide open and house unprotected. It takes multiple stupid conditions for things to happen sometimes. I blame stupid decisions all around.


edit on 17-12-2016 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
HHS says that if we have out-of-date security on our office P.C. and a hacker steals medical records, we pay AT LEAST a $5,000 fine, depending on severity of the breach.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

What if, hypothetically, you invite me into your home and I take something valuable and you see me. I run straight for the door and do not approach you in the process. What rights do you believe you have to against me?

To me and my state, i have the same rights to defend my property in the above case, your case, or in a case of home invasion. That being the right to use deadly force to get my property back up until you get off of my property. After you leave the property its a different story.

I do personally believe in changing that approach depending on the circumstances. Someone obviously armed will be immediately put down. However if I catch an 8 year old stealing bread I'd take a much different approach.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa
I have been having a argument of sorts with a few friends lately about this question. If you leave your door wide open and unlocked are you responsible if someone comes along and steals anything inside?
COmmon sense would say yes you bear soem responsibility correct? but for some reason my friend insist that no they are not at fault period.

What is your opinion on this question ATS?


Right, now,
the doors to my car are unlocked and the keys are in the ignition.


If you come over and steal my car, you're still at fault. You are still the criminal, and I've still done nothing wrong.
Just because it's not bolted down, locked up, surrounded by an electric fence, etc... doesn't mean it belongs to you.

It is *never* my fault if you're a criminal- Where's the miscommunication here? Do you not understand basic right vs wrong?

Is it a little bit the stores fault for letting in idiot kids who come in and shop lift?
If someone gets raped, is it their fault for not being better protected?

Don't steal. There's a reason you'll get your hands cut off in some parts of the world for it.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm


Thanks for elaborating Mojom, clears up some things for me.



What I'm saying is that if someone steals from you or rapes your daughter they are responsible for that.




If you violate someone's private property or person without their consent it's your fault for doing it.


Agreed, the lack of wisdom/common sense/whatever on the victims part doesn't lessen the guilt/fault of the rapist thief at all. Full stop.

I think in my mind, there is just a different sort of responsibility that's different and separate for the homeowner or young woman in the above examples that has nothing to do with the fault/responsibility of the thief/rapist.

Not the kind of responsibility someone would stand in front of a jury or judge for, but a responsibility none the less.



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: imwilliam

Not the kind of responsibility someone would stand in front of a jury or judge for, but a responsibility none the less.

What you are doing is erroneously taking the blame for someone else's wrong doing.

You want to think that you had some control over the situation. You don't. You tell yourself that if you had only closed and locked the door, the items would not have been stolen, but that is not necessarily true. You could have placed them in a safe, sealed it with concrete, and buried it 20 feet deep, and if someone wanted it badly enough they would take it. So what do you tell yourself then? It was your fault because you should have buried it 30 feet deep?

Whenever something bad happens we reconstruct it a millions ways, trying to make sense out of it and trying to figure out a way it could have been prevented. It is so hard for us to accept that few things are really under our control and sometimes bad things happen.

Bad people do bad things. Closed and locked doors won't stop them. Honest people won't take things that don't belong to them even if you drop them at their feet. My sister lost her wallet at Disney World. Someone found it, mailed to her, and every dime and dollar was still in it.

Was she responsible for the person's honesty?



edit on 17-12-2016 by NightSkyeB4Dawn because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
If you own something and don't bother to secure it. It's only the thieves fault that it got stolen.

On the other hand, you're an idiot to not secure your own property.

Ultimately the responsibility lies with the property owner to at least try and secure their own property.

This recently came up in my area, as a bunch of morons were leaving loaded firearms in unlocked cars, which were then burglarized and guns stolen. So... Does the firearm owner then bear at least some small responsibility for not securing their firearm if said firearm is used in a murder?

In my own life, I live in a rural area with low crime. Even so, all my property is secured, to the extent that my car is locked, with no valuables inside, inside a locked garage, behind a locked gate.

If you value your property, you'll at least attempt to secure it.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join