erm, just a guess. you're saying that it's the mother's fault. 100%. but what of the thief? it's not his fault for stealing, but what he did was wrong?In a store? Then they're idiots. In their home? Breaking and entering/Robbery.and you say it's the mother's fault 100%.Did I say that it would justify stealing from a store? No.also, thanks. i'd use that as my reason to justify stealing from a store.
You can justify stealing all you want, but you're still going to pay the price if you get caught, and it is still immoral.
okay well, i'll just look for someone who leaves their stuff unattended.
It is still wrong and immoral.
Can you truly not see the point I'm trying to make? Or are you at the point where you're disagreeing with me simply because you're upset with me?
though i say, both are at fault and is wrong. think of the saying it takes 2 to tango. you're using it one way. but because there are 2 dancers, it can also be used another way.
nothing can be stolen if there wasn't a thief. non-thief would just simply ignore the baby and the iphone.
or would you have stolen the iphone yourself?
@JustAnotherGamer
i'm not saying the thief is faultless. yes it could have been lower. and the thief could have been avoided.
but why was there a thief then.
to elaborate my disgust in this argument.
1. it could have been avoided if the mother was watching/keeping her child close.
2. it could have been avoided if the thief wasn't in need of stealing.
3. it could be avoided if there was no iphone.
4. it could have been avoided if they didn't go shopping.
5 it could have been avoided if the thief found something else to steal.
too many possibilities don't you think. what i don't like is all the "blame the mother" stuff that's going on. even though i agree she was at fault.
she could have
she could have
she could have.