Court of Cassation plays a blinder.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Peterkro, May 3, 2016.

  1. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #1
  2. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #2
    I'd say it's still a crime, since this man did deprive someone else of their rightful property. There's still a victim there deserving of redress.

    But it's one that can be addressed far more humanely than a stint in the clink, and a permanent blackmark on a criminal record. Justice doesn't have to always be black and white, with clearly defined rules. A truly just system would always consider the mitigating circumstances behind the crime.
     
  3. Peterkro thread starter macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #3
    I disagree as the judgement says,the right to survival trumps the "right" of private property.
     
  4. BoxerGT2.5 macrumors 68000

    BoxerGT2.5

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    #4
    So then dine and dash is legal in Italy. What he did is a crime, does he deserve 6months in the joint? No. For a sausage and cheese I would have made the guy sweep the sidewalks in front of the store as punishment.
     
  5. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #5
    Yeah, if you slide down the slippery slope far enough, it is kinda legalizing a free-for-all in certain circumstances. This is why you always have to cross your t's and dot your i's when it comes to the law. You don't want to set a precedence where the homeless can raid grocery stores just because they're hungry.

    But it isn't a crime deserving of punishment, just recompense.
     

Share This Page