Sigh...

[pecunium]

What's wrong with these pictures?





Nothing, right?

Well, if you go and look at them here and here you will see that the couple in the first picture are just grabbing needed food, where the kid in the second has looted a grocery.

The only differences I can see between them are the color of their skin, and the bag of food the kid has (and the guy has a knapsack, so it's possible they have more than a "bottle of milk, a loaf of bread and come home right away." Absent knowledge of what's in the bag, and of how many people the kid might be taking it too; or of when he might be rescued, I'm willing to cut him the same slack the ones in the top picture get.

The food in those groceries is doomed. The perishables will perish and the semi-durable (canned goods) will probably be unsalvageable by the time they get the waters out of the city for not only are the pumps not capable of more than an inch an hour (as I recall reading) but they put the water into Lake Ponchartrain, which would be, until they repair the levee breaches, a Sysiphean task, since it will just run right back into town, charging anyone with looting; for food, is pointless, but the distinctions made here... sigh.

Comments

[zaimoni.livejournal.com]

I can't blame the police for not wanting to hide behind the aegis of martial law.

Residents weren't the only people raiding abandoned stores.

Two police officers stood guard outside a drug store on Canal Street as Ritz-Carlton Hotel employees packed large laundry bins full of medication, snack foods and bottled water.

"This is for the sick," Officer Jeff Jacob said. "We can commandeer whatever we see fit, whatever is necessary to maintain law."

Legal? Yes.

Ethical? Haven't thought that out, although it looks like one of those inversions when going from individual to government.

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

Ethical or not, the police were earlier trashing what the looters stole. I'd rather see stuff be commandered than wasted altogether.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Gov't (at least the sorts we prefer here) involve a willing constraint on some liberties, in exchange for a more comfortable life.

I don't really have to worry about someone breaking my doors in because he want's something he thinks I have. I don't have to worry about a dispute with my neighbors turning into a multi-generational fued; to be ended only when both sides are worn out, or one is eliminated. This was a commonplace in the Scottish Highlands until after the Battle of Culloden, and in the Highlands of New Guinea until the 1960s.

Given the number of people who are going to need medications, and the certain destuction of them, I don't have a real problem with the gov't taking it.

Absent a real need (kidney stone, diabetes, habit, etc.) I can't see a likelihood for private persons taking it, other than personal gain and that's not acceptable.

TK

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

Doesn't the Ritz-Carlton still have a lot of guests stranded in it? It would seem to me that making sure they have what they need to stay alive - as all of that stuff might be - is as reasonable as calling a jug of milk or a loaf of bread "finding."

I'm in agreement with those who say - better looted and used, than left to rot while people die for want of it.

[zaimoni.livejournal.com]

Yes, the Ritz-Carlton still has guests (pending evacuation, fuel for the backup generator runs out tonight).

Hate to say this, but the comandeering operation is more reasonable
than calling a jug of milk "finding": the terminology is honest.