The Poverty Excuse

[pknopp]

We have poverty because of the greed of others.

That's why we have poor people? Why don't you give us an example or two of what you're talking about.

The stimulus would be a great example of one. The people got a small check. Tom Brady got almost a million dollars.

Brady got a million dollars from the "stimulus?"

Yes.

Tom Brady's company — TB12 Inc. — received nearly $1 million from PPP loan in 2020

 

[bripat9643]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Yet, you believe Michael Flynn and Roger Stone should receive long prison sentences, but Hillary and James Comey should get off scot free.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

Generally they do, dumbass. It's Trump haters who support unequal justice.

There was a ton of fraud and illegal actions that lead up to the 2008 crash. No one was held accountable. Banks then stole billions more in the way they addressed forclosures and no one was held accountable.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Yet, you believe Michael Flynn and Roger Stone should receive long prison sentences, but Hillary and James Comey should get off scot free.

I believe Hillary committed treason. I had no opinion on the rest of the stupid political arguments.

 

[martybegan]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

 

[bripat9643]

We have poverty because of the greed of others.

That's why we have poor people? Why don't you give us an example or two of what you're talking about.

The stimulus would be a great example of one. The people got a small check. Tom Brady got almost a million dollars.

Brady got a million dollars from the "stimulus?"

Yes.

Tom Brady's company — TB12 Inc. — received nearly $1 million from PPP loan in 2020

It's a loan. He has to pay it back, and the purpose is so he can keep people on the payroll that he would have to layoff otherwise

 

[bripat9643]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Nope. Greed, as you call it, made this country wealthy.

 

[martybegan]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

 

[pknopp]

We have poverty because of the greed of others.

That's why we have poor people? Why don't you give us an example or two of what you're talking about.

The stimulus would be a great example of one. The people got a small check. Tom Brady got almost a million dollars.

Brady got a million dollars from the "stimulus?"

Yes.

Tom Brady's company — TB12 Inc. — received nearly $1 million from PPP loan in 2020

It's a loan. He has to pay it back, and the purpose is so he can keep people on the payroll that he would have to layoff otherwise

You know you are lying. Typical though.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Nope. Greed, as you call it, made this country wealthy.

And created a huge underclass of poor people.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

You are right. Raising the minimum wage will get businesses attracting more illegals to replace them and they will do that because as a country we allow that because greed is good.

 

[martybegan]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

You are right. Raising the minimum wage will get businesses attracting more illegals to replace them and they will do that because as a country we allow that because greed is good.

No, they will find people worth the $12 or $15 or whatever the forced wage is, or they will try to do more with less employees, or they will automate.

You can't stay in business if you pay someone $15 an hour for $8.50 an hour worth of labor.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

A national $15.00 minimum wage will create a domino effect so everybody's pay is increased. As you already stated, it will encourage more automation investments, more offshoring, more companies moving overseas, increase cost of goods and services, and create inflation like we haven't seen in this country for decades.

 

[pknopp]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

You are right. Raising the minimum wage will get businesses attracting more illegals to replace them and they will do that because as a country we allow that because greed is good.

No, they will find people worth the $12 or $15 or whatever the forced wage is, or they will try to do more with less employees, or they will automate.

You can't stay in business if you pay someone $15 an hour for $8.50 an hour worth of labor.

Yet we give people 60 million for killing people and almost bringing a company down.

Fired Boeing C.E.O. Muilenburg Will Get More Than $60 Million

 

[martybegan]

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

A national $15.00 minimum wage will create a domino effect so everybody's pay is increased. As you already stated, it will encourage more automation investments, more offshoring, more companies moving overseas, increase cost of goods and services, and create inflation like we haven't seen in this country for decades.

Not just automation, If I got a choice between giving more work to someone I am already paying $20 an hour who I know will be able to do it $25 an hour to get rid of two people providing $8 an hour of value who I now have to give $15 an hour, I am going to do that.

 

[pknopp]

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

A national $15.00 minimum wage will create a domino effect so everybody's pay is increased. As you already stated, it will encourage more automation investments, more offshoring, more companies moving overseas, increase cost of goods and services, and create inflation like we haven't seen in this country for decades.

But the trillions being pumped into the markets won't, right?

 

[bripat9643]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

Generally they do, dumbass. It's Trump haters who support unequal justice.

There was a ton of fraud and illegal actions that lead up to the 2008 crash. No one was held accountable. Banks then stole billions more in the way they addressed forclosures and no one was held accountable.

The bottom line: Trump was not charged with fraud.

 

[martybegan]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

You are right. Raising the minimum wage will get businesses attracting more illegals to replace them and they will do that because as a country we allow that because greed is good.

No, they will find people worth the $12 or $15 or whatever the forced wage is, or they will try to do more with less employees, or they will automate.

You can't stay in business if you pay someone $15 an hour for $8.50 an hour worth of labor.

Yet we give people 60 million for killing people and almost bringing a company down.

Fired Boeing C.E.O. Muilenburg Will Get More Than $60 Million

Boeing was dumb enough to sign a contract with those terms.

How much is Cash, and how much is Stock? It's behind a paywall.

 

[bripat9643]

During the Great Depression, with much of the United States mired in grinding poverty and unemployment, some Americans found increased opportunities in criminal activities like bootlegging, robbing banks, loan-sharking—even murder.

Crime in the Great Depression - Rate, FBI, Prohibition | HISTORY

The Great Depression saw a rise in criminal activity and the glorification of the characters involved, from daring bank robbers to the G-men hunting them down.

www.history.com

Criminal activity was illegal then, Seattle wants to make a lot of it acceptable. Time were different then, most of the country wasn't as mobile as it is now. So, if you stole something, people knew who you were and you didn't get away with it. Seattle wants to change that. Throw in the fact the Seattle and other cities want to defund the police, right? How does anyone not see the writing on the wall?

Criminal activity has long been legal for the rich. Did Trump go to prison for his theft?

What a useless deflection.

The reason for a criminal justice system is to take justice from the victims of a crime, and let the State handle it. If the State decides to relinquish that job, then it goes back to the people.

So the people should have resorting to stringing Trump up?

Talk about not wanting to debate the actual topic at hand.

I stated exactly what I think. I'm absolutely OK with it. We are not supposed to have a two tiered justice system.

I believe that all should be treated equally, however that has to be done.

Until it's your shit being stolen.

So how are businesses supposed to handle the deluge of shoplifters that will occur if said shoplifters know they can claim poverty?

I suppose what they do is support a justice system that treats everyone equally.

I look forward to the next round of whining about "food deserts".

Also, what happens when some shop owner decides that he is willing to protect his property with force?

What happens when the only shops surviving, are ones owned by such people?

An owner can protect his property but I have no idea how they relates to what I said.

So it is ok for the thief to steal AND it is ok for the shop owner to use force to stop him?


Is it ok for the thief to use force to steal?


Do you envision cops showing to the aftermath of gun battles and finding it to be just fine, nothing to see here, this is the new normal?


And does that change if the shop owner is white?

Depends on the force.

A kid stealing a candy bar is not a threat to the store clerk's life.

A hundred "kids" stealing thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, is a threat to his livelihood.

again when do 100 kids enter a store at the same time outside of a riot?

A store owner can prevent a single kid from shoplifting if he's paying attention.

But do you deny that for some that stealing can be an act of survival?

Like I said when I was a teen sometimes the only thing I ate in a day was the bag of chips, or a candy bar I could pocket. I guess i should have been shot for that huh?

Funny, it is so easy for a store owner to stop, then how did you pull it off?

I got caught plenty of times but I was faster than the clerk who didn't want to chase me for the cost of a candy bar

But there were days I still had to eat something so even though I would get caught sometimes I still needed to eat something

So, you dropping that 'easy to stop" claim?

no because i still got caught by the people who were paying attention. After a while you get to know the clerks who are stoned or who would real a magazine at the register instead of doing their jobs

Sure. Some poor clerk is bored and that makes it ok to steal.

Where did i say it was OK?

I said that there were times the only thing I ate in a day was a candy bar I could pocket.

You want to deny that poverty is a cause for not all but some crime

The bit where you shift responsibility to the clerk. That is implicitly stating that the actions of the thief are not to blame, ie OK.

Perhaps your guilt is making it hard for you to be objective.

Where did I ever say that?

You asked me how I got away with it. I told you.

And I don't have any guilt. I will not apologize for stealing a 50 cent candy bar because it was the only thing I would eat that day. I was 14 and it was survival.

You don't or refuse to understand that some people are put in a situation where they can see no alternative

No soup kitchens? No churches?

I call bullshit.

Wow you sound just like Scrooge

Re there no prisons, no work houses?

YEah I wanted to mingle with the mentally ill homeless and other predators that hung around the shelters. It was safer to steal a candy bar

And that's the mentality of a criminal, whatever is easier and fuck anyone else.

and yet I stopped shoplifting when I was 15 why is that do you suppose?

But I guess I was still a criminal because I sold a little weed to make money but then again I only did that until I got a legit job.

Why do you refuse to even think that some people can see no option under dire circumstances?

Dire circumstances is jumping out of a Higgins boat onto Omaha beach.

You had tough situations.

And yes, selling weed at the time was criminal.

And it was also the only way I could see to earn enough money to live.

And your judgement of another's situation is meaningless.

Cold, hungry and on the streets is pretty dire to a 14 year old kid.

at 14 I had a Pennysaver route, at 16 I was working for $4.25 an hour in a pharmacy. Hell at 12 I was working with my dad shoveling people's houses out for $5 an hour (he charged $10 an hour for me).

You could have found legitimate work, you chose the easier route, the illegal route.

At 14 I was orphaned stuck in an abusive foster home and decided that I was better off if I didn't stay there.

There were no paper routes where i lived and Daddy didn't buy me a bike for Xmas.

When I was 16 I got a job in a restaurant and stopped selling weed. I credit that man for saving my life. He gave me a job 2 meals a day and if I needed to he let me crash in a store room over the restaurant. He helped me become an emancipated minor by being a co signer on a savings account and helping me find a real cheap room to rent.

Tough life I admit, just don't try to excuse your criminal behavior because of it.

I have never once made any excuses.

Unlike some of you I realize that poverty does lead to crime and that some people who commit crimes would not under different circumstances. I learned that at 14 but most people like you never learn that.

Still doesn't make taking something as dumb as a candy bar right.

a candy bar isn't dumb if it was the only thing a kid had to eat that day

It's dumb if that's the thing you reach for.

yeah young kids don't always make good choices

Imagine that

Now I suppose you are going to tell me that at 14 I should have stolen a can of vegetables even though I had no can opener

I figured an enterprising thief like you would have pickpocketed a swiss army knife along the way.

Or started a bogus school to rip people off?

It always goes back to Trump with you, which is disturbing.

Try arguing the point at hand, you room temperature IQ oxygen thief.

Always? In this case yes it does for the very reason we see here. You condemn a poor person for stealing to eat but not a peep about a billionaire stealing for greed. I am arguing the point at hand.

The reason the poor have to steal is because of the greed of others.

Who is or is not condemning? This is about letting people get a pass for stealing from other people, likely other poor people because of some bullshit reason. It would be the same as letting a millionaire off because he "just wants to be a billionaire"

We elected one of those people president and those who did that have absolutely NO place in condemning others.

It's about excusing petty criminality amongst people that are the most impacted by petty criminality.

The entire country is affected by the criminality of the rich. What did the 2008 crash cost us?

A store constantly shoplifted from either goes out of business or raises prices, hurting the same economic level people as the criminal.

A person burglarized, even if it's just a package off their stoop is hurt by the persons stealing, and since criminals tend to steal in their own neighborhoods the disadvantaged people who DON'T resort to crime are the ones hurt.

In a country like the United States there is NO excuse for someone being in the position of having to steal to eat. In a country like the United States there is no excuse for a millionaire to steal to get another beach home.

Again with the Trump comparisons. Trump is NOT a criminal, he has not been arrested, he has not been charged, he has not been convicted. All he is guilty of is you not liking him.

You keep going to "rich people fuh fuh fuh" as some sort of idiotic Pavlovian response.

The issue at hand is excusing criminality because of poverty, and the inevitable abuse of that by career criminals, not people "down on their luck"

We have poverty because of the greed of others. You keep on ignoring that point. If the poor person commits fraud he goes to prison. If a rich person does, he gets a slap on the wrist.

What I am arguing is very much on point.

We have poverty because of poor life choices. Hell we are the only country in the world with fat poor people.

When rich people commit fraud they tend to get more than a slap, because the fraud is so widespread. What mitigates the sentences is that usually it's the first and only time they are caught.

Meanwhile lower level criminals tend to be repeat offenders, which leads to longer incarceration and more frequent incarceration.

Trump made all sorts of poor choices but he had a rich daddy that was able to bail him out. He cost all sorts of people money that he lost. Far more than the price of a candy bar. He put entire businesses out of business.

He also made plenty of good choices, that's business.

Again with the "Trump Trump Trump"

He is simply a perfect figure head for the problem.

No, he is a distraction used by you to ignore the topic at hand, a red herring if you will.

You can disagree all you want but we have poverty because of greed. Business and wall street wants trillions and they get it. The people want a raise in the minimum wage to feed their families and those same people who get the trillions demonize them for that.

Raising the minimum wage actually gets the people of least worth replaced by people who can actually provide the value needed to pay them said raised minimum wage.

or they get replaced by robots.

You are right. Raising the minimum wage will get businesses attracting more illegals to replace them and they will do that because as a country we allow that because greed is good.

No, they will find people worth the $12 or $15 or whatever the forced wage is, or they will try to do more with less employees, or they will automate.

You can't stay in business if you pay someone $15 an hour for $8.50 an hour worth of labor.

Yet we give people 60 million for killing people and almost bringing a company down.

Fired Boeing C.E.O. Muilenburg Will Get More Than $60 Million

Who is this "we?"