When is "snitching" not "stealing"?

As kids we used to steal from the orchard all the time, btw. We didn't know any better. But the orchard was not actually being used, it had been purchased by the Hwy. department as part of the master plan for a freeway, so nobody was picking the fruit anyway.

Blenheim apricots. Nothing better.

Did anyone come buy with a brush and some paint and fix the sign?

__________________
"Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil and you're a thousand miles from the cornfield." Dwight D. Eisenhower

Seriously. THAT might justify some trespassing.

__________________
"I'm not mean. You're just a sissy." - Happy Bunny

"I think you should be able to flush anything you want. Just don't call me when your toilet clogs." - BlueHeron Farm

Maybe one lesson here for your kids is that you need to respect the rights of others, even if you don't agree with them, or like them. This holds true in so much of life that it is a good lesson to learn early. It seems that you don't like the new owners, but that does not mean that you should ignore their rights to their own land and take something from it. If it is the local custom to go on others land, that is fine for the folks who know the local custom, but these neighbors do not appear to know that, so you can't assume it is okay. If you want berry bushes, buy them or ask the neighbors. If you can't stomach a call to the neighbors, then do without their berry bushes. Just my thoughts.

To Mike in Ohio:
It is a Discussion. A talk. A debate around the dinner/breakfast table. It is a Debate topic for our Philosophy Class. It is a true and real life situation, I did not make it up, we use real life topics for class - but it is a Talk.

Thank you Moosemaniac for pointing it out, again, it is a Homeschool (we happen to homeschool but it can be a good topic for debate for any group) Study Group Discussion.

No one from this house has taken / stolen anything. No blue berry plants - nothing.

To recap:
We were asked two weeks ago by other neighbors for "permission" for them to "take" blue berry bush babies from another property. We have for years taken care of the blue berry both with and without permission. When asked, we pointed out that we did not own the plants and thus could not give permission for their removal. Later we were told by the same neighbors that they had in fact removed plants, and two other neighbors did so as well. ( one is an 82 year old woman whose family used to live on the same land - if that makes any difference )

We hiked over and saw there was no damage, in fact you cannot even tell the plants were removed and we saw there are many many other baby plants there. We did not remove any plants at that time, however I am not ruling out whether or not we will remove any in the future.

As part of our class, we opened up the debate about the blue berry plants...........
and not to confuse it here but we also are debating
A) public access to private lands AND
B) public access to publicly owned but restricted access lands (such as water sheds) AND
C) private access to private lands for recovery of property (the example being used is dogs or other live animals) AND
D) private access to private lands for recovery of non-live property being held for legal and or illegal reasons (the example here is also a real life example of a 4 wheeler that is being held without permission after being taken by force by landowner who caught teenagers tearing up garden with said 4 wheeler)............

So - the topic is much larger than a few blue berry bushes.....

In any event - our first round resulted in the following positions:

1. My husband said yes go get the plants and it is not stealing as long as you do not make a mess and as long as you do not kill the Mother plant since, to put it in words that are allowed here, since the owners are "jerks" and the rights of the Plants out weight the rights of the "jerks"

2. Son #1 (age 19)` said yes to get the plants since the Rights of the Earth out weight the property rights of those who do not respect the property nor the plants nor the neighbors

3. Son #2 (age 15) said no do not get the plants it is stealing and one should not steal no matter what. He also, however, accurately pointed out that he admits his decision may be "clouded" he said by the fact that he does not even eat blue berry and he did not want to have to plant a bush he will not eat from. He said if he ate blue berries, his decision may be different.

4. Son #3 (age 9) said yes go get the blue berry bushes and his only reason is that he has been the one to take care of the bushes for 4 yrs now, one year before that with permission, and so he believes that the suckers and shoots are in fact, HIS property in that his actions created the circumstances that resulted in the baby plants. He is indignant that they "have" his plants and he wants them back!

5. Me - the Mom - took the position that it was in fact certain, stealing and there was no way around it. Stealing is stealing and that is that.

(I am compelled by my somewhat hurt feelings and surprise at some of the harsh replies here to point out that I never said I believed I was entitled to steal the blue berry and in fact none of you knew what my decision was or what opinion I had rendered to the children during our class discussion. I just ASKED for opinions and input. We like to get many responses and enjoy and learn even from the opinions with which we do not agree -- and maybe we even learn more from those that are new thoughts and beliefs. There was no need to attack here. It was / is a LEARNING experience. )

Two other members of our group (people who help work the land and who have also helped care for the blue berry plants) have input here and both have said they believe under the circumstances as they know them to be, the plants should be removed.

We have not made a decision here as to whether or not we will remove any plants. One option, as most of you have pointed out, is still to call the neighbors and ask for permission and my husband has said he will call them. I will not. So as for the actual details of the plants in real life, we have not decided what to do yet.

As for the Class Discussion: Thank you again for the replies, even the ones we do not understand and the ones we find a bit harsh in light of the facts, and even for the ones that seem to us quite rude and uninformed. It is all fodder for Learning.

The barn on my (weekend) neighbor's property was stripped of about 2/3 of the corregated metal siding. I'm sure someone thought it was "abandoned" and figured they could put it to better use. It's stealing, and it would be stealing regardless of whether someone took plants, shoots, fruit, or panels off a barn.

To address the other question: I live on about 12 acres, surrounded by a couple hundred acres (mostly wooded). Biggest town in the county is less than 1000.

I have 45 acres I live on now, and I own another property with 10 acres where I used to live(where I don't get back to very often). Somebody started breaking into the mobile home and sheds a few years back and stealing stuff since the place was "abandoned" and wasn't being taken care of(to their high standards). They took everything they wanted and vandalized the place.
I guess the answer to the original question is, it's "snitching" and not stealing as long as the person doing it decides it is.

__________________
"I don't want everyone to like me; I should think less of myself if some people did."
— Henry James

Interesting responses from your family. Suggested questions for your continuing discussion:
1a. If someone determines that "you" are a jerk, does that entitle them to take something of yours?
1b. Who determines what "rights" plants have?
2a. Who determines what "rights" the Earth has?
2b. By what authority does your son - or anyone - have to enforce the Rights of the Earth? Who hired them for that job?
3. Does morality regarding stealing depend on how badly you want something?
4. Does working on someone else's property give you ownership rights? If my DD works in a horse barn, she will undoubtably get attached to the horses she cares for, but does she then own them? What if the owners of the horses are "jerks" and neglect them?

Sometimes people take short cuts reading these threads. I was the victim in one just yesterday.

Ruth

This thread is probably one of the most intriguing ones I've read in a long time.

I feel the need to give my opinion (again) on a few of your statements, but I opted not to requote, as it take so much space. .

In my opinion, you Have 'taken' from the property. You have taken the right of the property owner to feel secure in the fact that it is His property, and no one can enter without either his permission or due process of law. You have stolen the owner's privacy. Yes, even if he's not there. So, in my view, even your care of the plants beyond your date of permission was illegal trespassing. Hiking over to 'check' was also trespassing.

Just because there is no damage that you see as a visible thing doesn't mean it does not exist in the owner's eyes. If I could buy that much land, I would very purposefully let it go back to Nature, and would be very upset at anyone who decided otherwise for my property.

I am very glad your class discussion is considering the Law, and not just how they Feel about things. Two completely different subjects, of course, but we do have a tendency to let our feelings cloud what is right within the law, and what is right morally.

I did get a kick out of the individual responses of the family. As long as you don't make a mess it's not stealing? And the Rights of the Earth would be to simply let the plants be...they belong to the Earth, right where they are! I especially liked the one who thinks it's stealing, but he may be clouded because he doesn't want them anyway! If you want them, it isn't stealing anymore? The youngest used perhaps more logic than the rest, but since his labor was in fact a result of illegal trespass, getting to take the fruits of an illegal behavior just doesn't quite cut it for me. Two wrongs don't make a right. Mom is the only one sticking by her guns, and not letting Feelings of one sort or another cloud her judgement on what is right and what is wrong. My hat goes off to Mom!

As to the 'other' folk who were also a party to the illegal trespass...having numbers to do wrong just makes you a gang...it still doesn't make it right.

Yes, someone should politely call the owner, and perhaps offer something in return...maybe blueberry jam later from those plants, or offer to buy them. They are his property and they have value; he can sell them to you.

Lovely topic for discussion. We had similar ones back when I homeschooled my kids. They are now grown and gone, and I trust that the values instilled in them live on.

Meg

__________________
All life requires death to support itself. The key is to have an abiding respect for the deaths that support you. --- Mark T. Sullivan

And if you read post #69 in this thread by Nel frattempo you would see that she explicitly states that she does not consider going on these peoples land trespassing.

In that context it is not an academic discussion to examine morality. It is an attempt to rationalize/justify something that is clearly unethical. Apart from the ethical implications, she or anyone else who engages in the activities described would be subject to prosecution for criminal trespass and theft.

Wrong is wrong and trying to find excuses ("they are rude people") is a feeble attempt to justify an action which cannot and should not be justified.

Perhaps she would like to post her address so folks can come by her place and decide what they should take because they feel her family isn't fully utilizing those items.

Consider what her dear husband said:

"My husband said yes go get the plants and it is not stealing as long as you do not make a mess and as long as you do not kill the Mother plant since, to put it in words that are allowed here, since the owners are "jerks" and the rights of the Plants out weight the rights of the "jerks"

Bless their pointy little heads... I'm glad they don't live by me.

Nel, I can relate to the judgmentalism shown in this thread, really I can. Mine got deleted after all the attacks, thank goodness. You just continue discussing these things with those kids. It's good parenting.

Ruth

Post 69:


Post 105:

Apparently you have realized "what it says about [you]." Looks to me like the "jerks" are the only ones in the whole scenario that are behaving honorably!

On their balance sheet:
Alcohol = not illegal, not immoral
Nudity = not illegal, not immoral
Calling people nasty names = not nice, but not illegal, not immoral

How does your family's balance sheet compare? And the other neighbors'? Not favorably, I'm afraid.

I forgot to answer the location question: My moral compass was callibrated long before I was old enough to choose where I live - location is utterly irrelevant.

I can only hope the same for the next generation.

Yeah, this one's going down the tank too.

Hypotheticals are just to much for this crowd.

Ruth

Moose, she admitted to the trespassing. Nothing hypothetical about that.

do you have a garden?

may I come over while your gone and swipe some of your tomatoes, peas, beans,okra and corn? all without you knowing or giving permission?

Do you also steal from the plants at wal mart etc?

Do you have any plants that I can remove from your yard without your permission? Like vines etc

taking something without permission off of someone elses property you dont have permission to be on is stealing

if you do this

well youre a thief in the legal sense

__________________
What we have here...is a failure to communicate.

plants have rights???? wow thats a new one and I thought animal rightists were crackpots

do they read the tomatoes their miranda rights before they put them in their salads lmbo

__________________
What we have here...is a failure to communicate.

A new definition for ACLU=American Carrot Liberation Union.

Ruth I normally agree with you but if its good parenting to tell kids to trespass and steal from people you dont agree with well I must be the worst parent around

__________________
What we have here...is a failure to communicate.