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.

 

Doesn't all crime boil down to "Theft"

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   
SO….my question is twofold.

One…. aren't all crimes basically just theft and
two….can’t we use this to decide if a crime really is a crime?

I was thinking about how murder really is just the taking of or the theft of someone’s life. This got me thinking about crimes in general.

Murder – theft of someone’s life.

Rape – theft of someone’s sexuality and dignity.

Arson – theft of someone’s property via flames.

Assault – theft of someone’s personal comfort and peace.

Sexual assault of a minor – Theft of innocence and dignity and sexuality.

Fraud – theft of trust and money

DUI – this is kind of pre-crime but theft of public safety and trust.

And on and on…..Don’t want to write a whole book but you can get the point.

Now what about other crimes:

Drug use – theft of…………………..?

Gambling – theft of ……………………?

Prostitution – theft of …………………?

Again….I hope the point is made.

My question is…..can’t all real crime be boiled down to theft and at the same time prove that victim-less crimes should not be classified as crimes at all?

What say ye…..




posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I wrote a thread on history of law & order. And really didn't fill it the way I was hoping, (As I read from dozens of more sources and about double the eras) but summed up in a few words.

Law & order was always about protecting people from asshats. Simple as that. Whether it was arbitrary and corrupt, protecting elite classes, or in many circumstances protecting regular people (keep in mind there are slaves in these times)…

Now, that being said. To compare to todays laws you can argue almost the same thing. The law protects the people at the top and the slaves are now the middle class.

(I am not comparing slavery to middle class, simply the indignation and indifference.)

But if you look at the very first laws, it all dealt with similar to civil law but with greater consequences. Someone stole your _____, so you are allowed to cut off _____. Someone took your daughter, so you can have their wife, etc.

While the criminal code covers nearly every kind of crime, it's interesting to note that the richest powers usually go straight to civil law before they ever go near the criminal courts, even if they are the victims.

And vice versa, most multi-national corporations with a lot of clout usually end up in civil cases when the government cracks down on them. The odd time someone in justice is trying to make a name for themselves or public trust is lost, the corp may get criminal convictions but no one goes to jail.

See:

Pharm industry convictions.
Oil
Defence contractors

edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


nice...I am going to check out that post ...

It is also hard to stay on top of every law that we slaves are under when they make 40,000 new ones per year.....right?



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   

UxoriousMagnus
reply to post by boncho
 


nice...I am going to check out that post ...

It is also hard to stay on top of every law that we slaves are under when they make 40,000 new ones per year.....right?


That's relative as that's individual state laws summed up into one number. But in reality, you aren't living in every state. But yes, you have a point. There are so many laws on the books that I believe everyone could be convicted of something (state & federal combined) no matter where they are living.

An example of law & order and its effectiveness can simply be summed up by how well your society is doing as a whole. And probably gauged on things like: happiness, how content the people are, how adjusted they are to the human condition.

I mean, these things are never considered in western society for the most part. Media will cover how many people have anxiety and social disorders, eating disorders, etc. And they will then air commercials for drugs for all these things, but rarely address the underlying causes.

In some places, crime rates are really high. But the crime is petty, and people just sum it up to things like "stupid kids" "this guy never grows up", etc.

Which isn't really a bad thing, letting these people keep making stupid mistakes, because it's the stigma of general society, the pressure of the community that helps with people making changes in their behaviour.

SO…

You can proudly say you locked up everyone in sight that you could find breaking the law (yet laws are enforced on political positions so that shows hypocrisy) and claim your country is great…

But,

The aforementioned places I was talking about also have softer hard criminals because hey aren't so hard on the other ones. Or they let society have some say in people's behaviour.

What I see in the west is, there might be an emerging trend, of say ____group (a)____, bullying, taking advantage of ______ and a new law comes into place, that stops, but they keep targeting ___(a)____ after the (a) group has lost its bad element. Turning the system meant to stop something into the bully.

This applies to social stigmas too. Say for instance a LBGT group is being harassed, then they win over, laws come into place, next thing you know they are using the same laws to get regular people they don't like in trouble. (This guy harassed me at work.)

Insert race, gender, etc with sexuality for the above.
edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   
One…. aren't all crimes basically just theft and
two….can’t we use this to decide if a crime really is a crime?

no

Murder – destruction of someone’s life.

Rape – theft of someone’s sexuality and dignity. its about power so lump this in with assault

Arson – destruction of someone’s property via flames.

Assault – theft of someone’s personal comfort and peace. unwanted physical contact

Sexual assault of a minor – Theft of innocence and dignity and sexuality. deathwish

Fraud – theft of trust and money

DUI – this is kind of pre-crime but theft of public safety and trust. not theft, life endangerment

And on and on…..Don’t want to write a whole book but you can get the point.

Now what about other crimes:

Drug use – theft of…………………..? if marijuana no crime, use of drugs that kill in large doses could be murder attempt for seller and suicide attampt for purchaser.

Gambling – theft of ……………………? no theft financial endangerment

Prostitution – theft of …………………? no theft just disease spreading and unsanitary, why bang when you can wash dishes, mow a lawn. i mean gross who the fuch has an excuse to do that?

Again….I hope the point is made.

My question is…..can’t all real crime be boiled down to theft and at the same time prove that victim-less crimes should not be classified as crimes at all? no theft is stealing

What say ye…..
edit on 30-1-2014 by rockoperawriter because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by rockoperawriter because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by rockoperawriter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


You exposition is a bit confusing but from the title of the thread I can at least point out that you are incorrect. All crime is a result of lack of something but not all material stuff (so not addressed by theft),it can go from lack of information (knowledge of the law) to lack of love or good parenting or education. All crime is therefore a product of every society.

Now, there can be unmoral behavior without a society (like unnecessary violence towards non-humans) etc but without any structure to label it as a crime there isn't one. Like in a SHTF situation most societal rules go out of the door, some of what would constitute criminal behavior ceases to be (unless you limit yourself by past regulations and limits that no one else is enforcing or guaranteed to comply with).



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:35 AM
link   
I'd have to disagree, but I'll give you this: Theft is the basis for most crime.

When I catch somebody stealing something ... that's it. You lift a ream of paper from the stack by the copier ... well ... that just cost you your salary ... forever. And, you better not list your employment with me on your resume ... because I'm exactly the person who keeps your next potential employer informed.

I detest thieves!!



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Snarl
I'd have to disagree, but I'll give you this: Theft is the basis for most crime.

When I catch somebody stealing something ... that's it. You lift a ream of paper from the stack by the copier ... well ... that just cost you your salary ... forever. And, you better not list your employment with me on your resume ... because I'm exactly the person who keeps your next potential employer informed.

I detest thieves!!


Initially I was going to contest the OP (point for point). To put it better, crime is based on causing harm to someone (the philosophical basis for origins of commonwealth law). It was looked at that way for a very long time. Whether it be physical or financial harm.*** & *** & ***

If you go back far enough though it is very similar to the rest which are kind of a mix of mob rule and protecting the people with the most influence.

Constitutions greatly changed that and the above link (Blackstone's Formulation) which made law less arbitrary (The second being an influence more than anything).




Of course now you can harm yourself and they might put you in jail for it.

And even in Modern British Law there have always been some oddities like jailing people for attempting suicide:


istorically, suicide was deemed self-murder and those who attempted suicide were subjected to punishment. However, it became recognised that the mental state of suicide attempters needed to be taken into account and that imprisonment should only be considered in the interests of their health and well being (R v Doody 1854). Imprisonment as a punishment for attempted suicides was being used up until the late 1950s. Some concern had been expressed by magistrates over the use of such punishments (R v Trench 1955) and changing social attitudes brought a more compassionate attitude to those who attempted suicide (BMA 1959). Prosecuting those who failed in a suicide attempt did not assist them in their recovery. There was a call by the British Medical Association and the Magistrates’ Association to amend the law, in line with the situation in Scotland, so that attempted suicide should cease to be an offence (BMA 1959). Subsequently, suicide was decriminalised by the enactment of the Suicide Act 1961.


skeptics.stackexchange.com...
edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2014 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Panic2k11
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


You exposition is a bit confusing but from the title of the thread I can at least point out that you are incorrect. All crime is a result of lack of something but not all material stuff (so not addressed by theft),it can go from lack of information (knowledge of the law) to lack of love or good parenting or education. All crime is therefore a product of every society.

Now, there can be unmoral behavior without a society (like unnecessary violence towards non-humans) etc but without any structure to label it as a crime there isn't one. Like in a SHTF situation most societal rules go out of the door, some of what would constitute criminal behavior ceases to be (unless you limit yourself by past regulations and limits that no one else is enforcing or guaranteed to comply with).


give me an example of a crime of lack of love or lack of education so I can see where you are coming from

and in a SHTF situation....I think it resorts to anarchy...everything is legal as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else....if you do something that hurts someone else....then they can .... well .... kill you or steal your life



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 

There is a lot of mileage in the first point, certainly, because law exists in the first place (both criminal and civil) to stop people causing trouble to other people.

I'm just doing some threads on the equivalent laws of the Old Testament, which have already reached the topics of Settling your disputes and Your neighbour's goods (i.e. theft)




edit on 30-1-2014 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Snarl
I'd have to disagree, but I'll give you this: Theft is the basis for most crime.

When I catch somebody stealing something ... that's it. You lift a ream of paper from the stack by the copier ... well ... that just cost you your salary ... forever. And, you better not list your employment with me on your resume ... because I'm exactly the person who keeps your next potential employer informed.

I detest thieves!!


as do I which is kind of what I am getting at here. That theft is the base unethical thing at the core of most crime.

It is the thought of the criminal that he/she "owns" that item....be it a ream of paper or someones life.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


This really is a great post, just in that its seeking to identify the core of crime. That's such a worthwhile question... I'm not sure I agree yet, (there may be a deeper level) but I am really grateful that its being asked at all. This is the kind of question that makes us stronger as a society.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:43 AM
link   
only if you get caught at it up until then you are just a oppertunist or a speculator think like a banker or ask one this they are better qualified on this subject than most and get bonuses
edit on 30-1-2014 by 999zxcv because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 03:47 AM
link   

UxoriousMagnus

Panic2k11
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


You exposition is a bit confusing but from the title of the thread I can at least point out that you are incorrect. All crime is a result of lack of something but not all material stuff (so not addressed by theft),it can go from lack of information (knowledge of the law) to lack of love or good parenting or education. All crime is therefore a product of every society.

Now, there can be unmoral behavior without a society (like unnecessary violence towards non-humans) etc but without any structure to label it as a crime there isn't one. Like in a SHTF situation most societal rules go out of the door, some of what would constitute criminal behavior ceases to be (unless you limit yourself by past regulations and limits that no one else is enforcing or guaranteed to comply with).


give me an example of a crime of lack of love or lack of education so I can see where you are coming from

and in a SHTF situation....I think it resorts to anarchy...everything is legal as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else....if you do something that hurts someone else....then they can .... well .... kill you or steal your life



UxoriousMagnus

My question is…..can’t all real crime be boiled down to theft

What say ye…..


You may be able to make some argument that it (theft) is a secondary consequence of some of the crimes you listed, but it is not a primary effect. A theft involves receivingacquiring something.

Some of the crime you listed rise to a higher level because they involve a victim some are victimless and are more akin to an infraction. Also, the differences between a felony and a misdemeanor come into play, depending on where you live, of course.


A victimless crime is a term used to refer to actions that have been ruled illegal but which are argued not to directly violate or threaten the rights of any other individual. It often involves consensual acts in which one or more persons commit a criminal offence in which no other person is involved.

edit on 30-1-2014 by Harvin because: (no reason given)


Did a cursory search and came across a good primer:

www.nolo.com... crimes-felonies-misdemeanors-infractions-classification-33814.html
edit on 30-1-2014 by Harvin because: Added link



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


don't know if you've heard of mark passio.

he has this same idea, you might want to check him out.

he says a lot of stuff though...

IMO he also has the unfortunate habit of taking 3 hours to present info that could be presented in 3 mins.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 




give me an example of a crime of lack of love or lack of education so I can see where you are coming from


Murder or any other damage by negligence for instance is in general the result of bad education. But if you extend the meaning of education it can cover many more for example defamation and insult, copyright violation, bad driving etc...

Lack of love (or proper socialization that goes in parallel with the above) is the cause of many evils from murder (including lovers, parents and other relatives for a good framing in the requested slot) to rape (frustration and education more that anything else) to child abuse and many many others...

If you think a bit about why people pursue material possession above their needs or usefulness you will realize that "love" (appreciation, value, recognition etc) are at the top of the motivators (even if at times in a subconscious level). People need to feel liked and appreciated and this need is especially twisted in how our idiotic society is organized.
edit on 30-1-2014 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   

sweord
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 


don't know if you've heard of mark passio.

he has this same idea, you might want to check him out.

he says a lot of stuff though...

IMO he also has the unfortunate habit of taking 3 hours to present info that could be presented in 3 mins.



I will check him out

thanks



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Panic2k11
reply to post by UxoriousMagnus
 




give me an example of a crime of lack of love or lack of education so I can see where you are coming from


Murder or any other damage by negligence for instance is in general the result of bad education. But if you extend the meaning of education it can cover many more for example defamation and insult, copyright violation, bad driving etc...

Lack of love (or proper socialization that goes in parallel with the above) is the cause of many evils from murder (including lovers, parents and other relatives for a good framing in the requested slot) to rape (frustration and education more that anything else) to child abuse and many many others...

If you think a bit about why people pursue material possession above their needs or usefulness you will realize that "love" (appreciation, value, recognition etc) are at the top of the motivators (even if at times in a subconscious level). People need to feel liked and appreciated and this need is especially twisted in how our idiotic society is organized.
edit on 30-1-2014 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)


The thread is more about what all crime boils down to not about what causes crime.

My theory is that all real crime is theft of something.

Murder for example.....we even say...."taking" a life. Taking it where? Taking without permission is called theft. I am sure a murder victim did not give permission....therefore it is theft of a life.

If I said "he took that poor woman without consent".....what would you think I meant? Rape right? So we use the "take" word for this as well.



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by rockoperawriter
 


you say that murder is "destruction" of life......

so let's say you have a friend that has an expensive vase and you walk in with a hammer and "destroy" it.....is it gone?

I say no....it is still there....you could pick up all the pieces and even put it in a box and weigh it and it would weigh the same as before.....it is not gone.....

but if you walked in and "took" it and walked out with it......now it is gone and that required "theft"

you can "destroy" a life without "taking" it

edit on 30-1-2014 by UxoriousMagnus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
Drug laws is theft of resources and land of the planet that belong to all people. Homelessness is a crime, also relating to theft. Bad laws are crimes against individual freedom, sovereignity and co-ownership of the world and resrouces, ie slavery. So alot of the theft that is taking place is done by TPTB, Bankers and Royal Families. They're the ones who feel so "entitled" that they steal everything, enslave everyone and throw that word back at anyone who thinks they have rights.
edit on 30-1-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join