 |
what do you think
This poll is closed. |
| looting is looting no matter whats taken |
   |
14 |
17.28% |
| its ok if its food or water and your situation is desperate |
   |
61 |
75.31% |
| i don't know |
   |
1 |
1.23% |
| banana... well someone will complain if theres is no banana option |
   |
5 |
6.17% |
| Total: |
81 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Kuci has already explained adequately why this is an idiotic argument. |
No, he's just put forth another idiotic argument. The waters have stopped rising a while ago. If it's not dumped in the water and thus useless already, then where do you get the idea that it's going to get dumped in the water if you don't help yourself to it now?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
"Assume that Reuven is carrying his jug of wine and Shimon is carrying his jug of honey. Honey is worth much more than wine. Shimon's jug of honey developed a crack in it and the honey will pour out. Reuven, seeing this, spills out his wine and places his now empty jug beneath the honey and all of the honey is now caught into Reuven's jug. Reuven will be compensated for his efforts in saving Shimon's honey but will not be paid for his lost wine. Since Shimon is there, if Reuven wants to be compensated for his efforts and also for the wine he is to spill out, he should so stipulate to Shimon. If Reuven states he will save Shimon's honey by pouring out his own wine, and Shimon says nothing, then Shimon must pay for the wine as well as for Reuven's efforts.
Conversely, Shimon could have suggested that Reuven pour out his wine to save Shimon's honey and that Shimon pay Reuven for his efforts and for his wine. Reuven runs no risk since the honey is now in his jug and in his possession until he is paid. Reuven can set a reasonable time limit for payment and need not have to sue for payment. If Shimon does not pay within such reasonable time, the honey belongs to Reuven.
Assume that Reuven leaves his jug of wine on the ground and Shimon is there with his jug of honey, which cracks. Shimon may take Reuven's jug of wine, spill it out, and let his honey flow into Reuven's now empty jug. Shimon owes Reuven the value of the wine.
The foregoing laws hold true only if Shimon could somehow have saved his honey in some manner or form. If it is obvious that he could not have saved his honey, then if Reuven puts his jug under that of Shimon's jug as the honey pours out, the honey belongs to Reuven as abandoned property.
The law is the same in similar situations. For example, there is a fire in the town and all of the residents are evacuating the town, which will surely burn down. Reuven runs into someone's home and takes something; it belongs to Reuven. The property is deemed to be abandoned property. However, if the owner of the property could have rescued his own objects with great effort, Reuven is to receive wages for the rescue, as determined by Beth Din, but the object belongs to the owner, and not to Reuven.
In all events, there are laws of the land and rules of Beth Din that control many of these situations.
In all those situations in this lesson where Reuven stipulates with Shimon that Shimon will pay to Reuven more than the going rate for such efforts, the stipulation will be enforced only if Reuven will suffer some damages by his rescue effort. But if Reuven does not suffer any damages by his effort to save the objects of Shimon, Shimon need pay only the amount that a person receives for such efforts. Thus in the above example, if Reuven's jars were empty and Reuven, before rescuing Shimon's honey, insists that Shimon pay him an exorbitant sum. Shimon need pay only such sum as Beth Din will fix for the amount of labor Reuven expended. Shimon's promise to pay the exorbitant amount is deemed to be a promise made without any intent, more in the nature of a jest.
Another example given in the codes is where Shimon is escaping from captors who have wrongly imprisoned him. He comes to a ferry and pleads for Reuven, the ferry operator, to take him across the river. Reuven demands an exorbitant fee, or Shimon himself offers an exorbitant fee. Once Shimon is taken across the river, he need pay only the normal fee. However, if the person with the boat is a fisherman who is fishing and Shimon offers to pay the fisherman an exorbitant fee for leaving his nets and for getting him across the river, and the fisherman leaves the nets and takes Shimon across the river, Shimon must pay to the fisherman that which he promised.
[snip]
The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in Volume VIII Chapter 261 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via website: www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores.
Questions to quint@inter.net.il"
Note though - the words WILL SURELY burn down. Is there certainty in this situation, that the item will go to zero value? If not, it seems to me that the "salvager" should turn over the property to the owner, and be compensated with a wage. Alternatively, and perhaps more feasibly in modern conditions, the salvager should keep the property, and send partial payment for it to the owner. The payment should be less than the full value, reflecting the effort that the "salvager" went to in rescuing the object.
Note also that this refers to civil law - what recourse, if any, does the owner have against the salvager. In the course of maintaining order, the authorities may well decide that it is preferable to stop all looting, even looting that could be justified under civil law. I think that better matches the case in NO, today.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Az
How about teethering buildings, and goods on their upper floors - when you see a building crumbling before your eyes? |
Now what percentage of these looters are entering buildings that are teethering? Surely you have a link to such a fascinating story.
quote:
How about refrigerated food, with refrigerators left without power? |
There's a big difference between someone taking water and food for nurishment and that starving baby mentioned pages ago compared to someone taking a television and jewelry "that might be destroyed".
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:36
|
|
quote:
What if it's your stuff getting saved, by an opportunistic thief? That's the benefit of this protection. |
Better the thief than noone at all.
quote:
the benefits - 1. encourages property owners to evacuate when asked, rather than staying around to protect their NOT total loss items .
|
That's why there should be a differentiation between stuff just stolen, and stuff rescued - a blanket ban on looting won't do any better than a differential ban. Both can be enforced with the same amount of success, btw.
quote:
2. Encourages would be salvagers to depart, rather than stay behind to collect salvage, in circumstances of danger
|
It does? it surely didn't now.
quote:
3. Simplifies the job law enforcement faces, in distinguishing between "bad salvers" (those seizing guns, seizing relief supplies, or seizing items in no danger) from "good salvers"
|
This is pretty weak stuff. So, now you gonna blanket ban looting - now it's time for law enforcement to establish ownership of the salvaged goods.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
Part of the problem is this assumption that everything is going to get destroyed. Supposed you and your family lived in New Orleans and managed to get out before the hurricane hit. Now, you're lucky enough that your house was build on slightly higher ground, so the flood waters only covered the first couple of feet of the lower floor of your house. When you inevitably came back to pick through your remains, you'd probably prefer to have all the stuff on the second floor of your house still there rather than picked clean.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-09-2005 01:07
|