I need help understanding this mindset

JihadOnTheRiver · #1 09-07-2005, 09:45 PM

This post is in regards to Celine Dion's comments on Larry King Live. It is not meant to slam liberals or to be a discussion on whether or not the government is doing a decent job responding to this catastrophe. I just really do not understand this comment at all, and I hope somebody can give me a reasonable explanation as to why anybody could think in this manner, because so far, my mind only comes up with Chicken Little type arguments. Here is the statement in question:

"Oh, they're stealing 20 pair of jeans or they're stealing television sets. Who cares? They're not going to go too far with it. Maybe those people are so poor, some of the people who do that they're so poor they've never touched anything in their lives. Let them touch those things for once,"

I can't possibly imagine that any logical person can think this way. Is she trying to validate looting? Or is she just commenting on human nature. Any logical arguments or discussion would be appreciated, but I really think that the question of the governments response has been beat to death, so I'd rather this thread be about the above quote alone.

Thank you,
-JOTR

tolbiny · #2 09-07-2005, 09:51 PM

Shes being a condescending out of touch rich idiot (in my opinion).

newfant · #3 09-07-2005, 09:53 PM

[ QUOTE ]
'Oh, they're stealing 20 pair of jeans or they're stealing television sets. Who cares? They're not going to go too far with it. Maybe those people are so poor, some of the people who do that they're so poor they've never touched anything in their lives. Let them touch those things for once ...'

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this quote. I think there were so many other horrible things going on down there (people dying, tens of thousands of people trapped in the Superdome and Convention Center, rapes, murders, cops and soldiers being shot at) that any looting is just inconsequential.

Looting has been made a much bigger deal than it should have been.

coffeecrazy1 · #4 09-08-2005, 01:19 PM

So...let me get this straight:

A natural disaster dissolves all property rights? Really. Guess I'll remember to burn my house down next time a tornado comes.

The looting would not have been a big deal if it had been foraging for food. I think even the hardest of us libertarian free-market types would agree that people have to able to survive. But, I defy anyone to tell me that a plasma screen TV is both a necessity of life, and understandable in terms of what gets looted...especially in a city not expected to have power for several months.

#5 09-08-2005, 02:06 PM

I remember this one time I was having a very difficult personal experience... not as bad as surving the NO disaster... but it was bad.

I wonder if all the Democrats and liberals in this forum would have been supportive of me coming to their sheltered little communities and stealing from them?

coffeecrazy1 · #6 09-08-2005, 02:13 PM

That brings up another point. This line of thinking seems to suggest that stealing is justified by hardship...any stealing, not just survival needs. They're poor, and what little they have is gone, so it's justifiable that they steal back what was lost, plus interest. Somehow, it's owed to them, or something.

Wish I'd known about this when Bonfire collapsed at Texas A&M...all the mental and emotional trauma I suffered could really have been soothed by a brand new stereo system or a new car.

Can't believe I'm agreeing 100% with Bicycles on something. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

jaxmike · #7 09-07-2005, 09:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I can't possibly imagine that any logical person can think this way.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, you answered your own question.

#8 09-07-2005, 10:40 PM

I don't hold it against the people in NO if they are stealing stuff. Most of them just want to sell the plasma tv's for money to survive. It's not like they're going to take the TV home and plug it into their non-existent electric supply.

Besides, Wal-Mart has insurance anyway.

lehighguy · #9 09-07-2005, 11:14 PM

They have insurance is the stupidest arguement I've ever heard for anything. Try paying car insurance in NJ and you'll see the effect of sky high insurance rates (a result of insurance companies having to pay claims all the time).

coffeecrazy1 · #10 09-08-2005, 12:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
They have insurance is the stupidest arguement I've ever heard for anything. Try paying car insurance in NJ and you'll see the effect of sky high insurance rates (a result of insurance companies having to pay claims all the time).

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, wasn't "he's got insurance" the justification that Robert De Niro employs in the movie Heat? I believe it was...and De Niro was playing...hey, how about that...a THIEF!