News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves by stanleydrew on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @04:11PM (#18710615)
It comes down to proportionality.

I don't think anyone would disagree that generally stealing is wrong and people who do it in general deserve to face consequences. But the consequences should be proportionate to the crime. I don't think anyone deserves to die for petty theft, regardless of circumstances.

It seems like you are suggesting that if someone takes a $50 package off of my front porch, and then I come outside to confront them, and in the altercation this person makes a threatening gesture towards me then I would be within my rights to use lethal force.

That seems like a disproportionate escalation to me.

Anyway I think we just disagree about some of these proportionality issues.

If someone steals something, that doesn't mean they automatically lose all of their rights to life and property simply because in your mind they are now a "criminal".

Re:Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves by weberc2 on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @06:48PM (#18711699)
Defense is not about punishment. Thieves don’t deserve to die, but it’s okay that it’s a risk they run. As an aside, I see this all the time, usually in conversations about self-defense—“a rapist doesn’t deserve to die”; maybe not but they sure deserve to run the risk and they certainly deserve worse than their victims. At least they have a _choice_.
Re:Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves by stanleydrew on Tuesday December 18, 2018 @08:59PM (#18712411)
> Thieves don’t deserve to die, but it’s okay that it’s a risk they run.

Why is that okay?

Re:Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves by weberc2 on Wednesday December 19, 2018 @08:51AM (#18715549)
Because they have the agency and can trivially choose to forego the risks. Why should thieves be guaranteed safety? What else should we fournish for them? A guaranteed minimum haul? :)