Did I steal?

[Hoosier_Daddy]

And it also isn’t yours. $0.02

It was clearly meant for specific individuals or households, otherwise why did the OP have to go around and collect it from specific mailboxes? It wasn’t right for the JW to leave it there as such, but that doesn’t justify the next action.

This brings up an interesting question. Ownership. To steal, you need to have ownership. Who “owned” the pamphlets? the JWs seemed to give them away. The other recipients had not accepted or rejected them.

What was stolen and from whom?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’m really curious what your answer to this question would be with the other hat on, though.

Me too

 

[BillP]

They were giving them away–fortunately you received them and know what to do. They don’t have control over what people do with the information they give away.

They weren’t giving them all away to the OP, they were giving him one, which he was free to dispose of as he saw fit. They were specifically giving one to each of the OPs neighbors, he saw fit to steal them from his neighbors and dispose of them.

A similar situation is if you have a bag of clothing you’re donating. As you approach the SVP bin, a homeless man comes up and asks you for a coat because he’s cold. you give him one and deposit the rest of the clothing in the SVP bin. After you leave, the homeless man pulls the clothing out of the bin and selects some items, say women’s skirts and burns them in the parking lot because he considers them immodest.

Is that right? Because it is the same exact thing.

When I see the Book of Mormon in hotel rooms, I take it home and recycle it. I’m under the impression that is there for people and they would be more than happy if someone took the Book of Mormon home with them. Again, they have no control over what said person does with the book they give away.

Then you are stealing those books, your sophistry about “they would be more than happy if someone took the book home with them” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) not withstanding. You know that those books are placed there for a specific purpose, to be available for people who wish to know more about LDS. You are attempting to thwart that purpose by destroying someone else’s property and should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[MacQ]

This brings up an interesting question. Ownership. To steal, you need to have ownership. Who “owned” the pamphlets? the JWs seemed to give them away. The other recipients had not accepted or rejected them.

What was stolen and from whom?

REALLY?
How far are we going to go to make stuff up to justify a wrong?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

REALLY?
How far are we going to go to make stuff up to justify a wrong?

I didn’t make anything up. I asked a question.

Why are people so emotional about this?

What is your opinion of the question?
Ownership of pizza coupons would even be different because there is a monetary value to the coupon left on your door. But what is the value of the JWs literate that says Catholicism is false?

The answer may very well be that it is theft. I don’t know. I just asked a question.

There are some pretty quick triggers and egos on this particular thread that really is not that important of an issue. Certainly the sin would not be mortal? Right?

 

[BillP]

This brings up an interesting question. Ownership. To steal, you need to have ownership. Who “owned” the pamphlets? the JWs seemed to give them away. The other recipients had not accepted or rejected them.

What was stolen and from whom?

This is extremely elementary, the JW transferred ownership from themselves to the specific people whose mailbox they placed the book on by virtue of having placed the book there with that intention. The book became the property of whoever owned the mailbox, whether they knew it or not.

They are giving them away to be sure, but they are doing it in a specific, controlled manner, one per mailbox, on individual mailboxes. The OP got his. It was his to with as he pleased, read it, throw it away, burn it, he can even choose to use it in his outhouse if he wants that’s his business.

If my mom sends me a birthday present by UPS and the UPS guy keeps it he’s stealing from me. Even if I don’t know it exists. If the UPS guy leaves it on my porch, and the OP comes by and decides that the present will endanger my soul and takes it and burns it (to “save” me) he is stealing from me because it was my property. It became my property the moment Mom consigned it to UPS.

If a cereal company decides to give away free samples in my neighborhood and leaves a small box of cereal on each mailbox in my neighborhood. The OP tries it and likes it, he’s not entitled to go around and collect the other samples because they “don’t belong to anybody”.

If he sees that the cereal is loaded with preservatives or uses refined flour he’s not entitled to collect and throw away all the samples in the neighborhood “for our own good”.

This applies even if the OP doesn’t know who he is stealing from. A UPS box sitting on my front porch (or a book sitting atop my mailbox) clearly doesn’t belong to HIM. Its not necessary from him to know who it does belong to. It is enough for him to know the HE doesn’t have just title to it and should therefore leave it alone.

Similarly it doesn’t matter if the item has any monetary value. If the present my mom sent me is nothing more than a brief note of affection penciled on the back of a piece of scrap paper it still belongs to me and for the OP to appropriate it for himself is theft.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It was clearly meant for specific individuals or households, otherwise why did the OP have to go around and collect it from specific mailboxes? It wasn’t right for the JW to leave it there as such, but that doesn’t justify the next action.

That may have been the intention of the one who placed the literature there. But their intention was not a legal intention. As such, their intention need not be respected. The material did not “belong” to anyone. The one who placed it there clearly gave up any claim to it. The ones he intended to read it did not claim ownership. Like most advertising, the value is to the one doing the advertising, not the one reading the advertisement.

The fact that this was religious literature is irrelevant. The same action could have been taken for flyers for a lawn care service. It is much the same as when flyers are illegally stapled to telephone poles. Anyone has the right to clean up their town by taking down illegally posted literature. I would be just as upset if the flyers were for a Catholic Church picnic. Those who try to cheat the system to avoid paying postage do not deserve to have the benefit of those misdeeds.

The mailboxes, besides being the property of the Postal Service, are generally placed in the easement of the road. So it is not actually invading anyone’s private property to clean up litter illegally placed.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Then you are stealing those books, your sophistry about “they would be more than happy if someone took the book home with them” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) not withstanding. You know that those books are placed there for a specific purpose, to be available for people who wish to know more about LDS. You are attempting to thwart that purpose by destroying someone else’s property and should be ashamed of yourself.

I agree that the destruction of one’s scripture smacks of fascism. I agree with you on this point. But what if one read the book. Could I take a book of Mormon home to read it? To learn what they believe to better help evangelize them? I wonder what the person (or most likely company) who left it there.

Most Mormons I know would encourage a person to take the book to learn more about the faith.

 

[BillP]

That may have been the intention of the one who placed the literature there. But their intention was not a legal intention. As such, their intention need not be respected. The material did not “belong” to anyone. The one who placed it there clearly gave up any claim to it.

So what about packages left on your doorstep by UPS? Are they fair game? How about bicycles left in front of buildings? Are they abandoned and subject to claim by anyone?

The ones he intended to read it did not claim ownership.

They had no chance. The OP states that he went behind the JWs and collected the books.

How long does it take to give up ownership? Can I leave my bike outside for five minutes without you claiming it is abandoned and therefore “yours”, how about two hours while I watch a movie? Can you take it after two hours?

How about you just leave stuff alone if it doesn’t belong to you?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

That may have been the intention of the one who placed the literature there. But their intention was not a legal intention. As such, their intention need not be respected. The material did not “belong” to anyone. The one who placed it there clearly gave up any claim to it. The ones he intended to read it did not claim ownership. Like most advertising, the value is to the one doing the advertising, not the one reading the advertisement.

The fact that this was religious literature is irrelevant. The same action could have been taken for flyers for a lawn care service. It is much the same as when flyers are illegally stapled to telephone poles. Anyone has the right to clean up their town by taking down illegally posted literature. I would be just as upset if the flyers were for a Catholic Church picnic. Those who try to cheat the system to avoid paying postage do not deserve to have the benefit of those misdeeds.

The mailboxes, besides being the property of the Postal Service, are generally placed in the easement of the road. So it is not actually invading anyone’s private property to clean up litter illegally placed.

This is the type of legal analysis I was looking for!
Good points.

 

[SyroMalankara]

What if a Muslim or Hindu read it and came a half step closer to Christianity, but was now deprived due to the removal?

Heck, theoretically, it could have been an opportunity for evangelization either by the OP or the person doing self-study.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

This is extremely elementary, the JW transferred ownership from themselves to the specific people whose mailbox they placed the book on by virtue of having placed the book there with that intention. The book became the property of whoever owned the mailbox, whether they knew it or not.

They are giving them away to be sure, but they are doing it in a specific, controlled manner, one per mailbox, on individual mailboxes. The OP got his. It was his to with as he pleased, read it, throw it away, burn it, he can even choose to use it in his outhouse if he wants that’s his business.

If my mom sends me a birthday present by UPS and the UPS guy keeps it he’s stealing from me. Even if I don’t know it exists. If the UPS guy leaves it on my porch, and the OP comes by and decides that the present will endanger my soul and takes it and burns it (to “save” me) he is stealing from me because it was my property. It became my property the moment Mom consigned it to UPS.

If a cereal company decides to give away free samples in my neighborhood and leaves a small box of cereal on each mailbox in my neighborhood. The OP tries it and likes it, he’s not entitled to go around and collect the other samples because they “don’t belong to anybody”.

If he sees that the cereal is loaded with preservatives or uses refined flour he’s not entitled to collect and throw away all the samples in the neighborhood “for our own good”.

This applies even if the OP doesn’t know who he is stealing from. A UPS box sitting on my front porch (or a book sitting atop my mailbox) clearly doesn’t belong to HIM. Its not necessary from him to know who it does belong to. It is enough for him to know the HE doesn’t have just title to it and should therefore leave it alone.

Similarly it doesn’t matter if the item has any monetary value. If the present my mom sent me is nothing more than a brief note of affection penciled on the back of a piece of scrap paper it still belongs to me and for the OP to appropriate it for himself is theft.

Your examples are of materials delivered legally. That is an entirely different thing. Interfering with the legal delivery of materials would be wrong.

 

[JSSD]

That may have been the intention of the one who placed the literature there. But their intention was not a legal intention. As such, their intention need not be respected. The material did not “belong” to anyone. The one who placed it there clearly gave up any claim to it. The ones he intended to read it did not claim ownership. Like most advertising, the value is to the one doing the advertising, not the one reading the advertisement.

The fact that this was religious literature is irrelevant. The same action could have been taken for flyers for a lawn care service. It is much the same as when flyers are illegally stapled to telephone poles. Anyone has the right to clean up their town by taking down illegally posted literature. I would be just as upset if the flyers were for a Catholic Church picnic. Those who try to cheat the system to avoid paying postage do not deserve to have the benefit of those misdeeds.

The mailboxes, besides being the property of the Postal Service, are generally placed in the easement of the road. So it is not actually invading anyone’s private property to clean up litter illegally placed.

Wow. See response #85.
The gymnastics to justify this are unbelievable.

They didn’t claim ownership because the OP beat them to the mailbox. That isn’t to say they wouldn’t have thrown it away but that is their decision, not his.

Who knew two wrongs did make a right?

Edit: And I’m pretty sure the JW would argue the value is for the prospective convert. It isn’t a pizza coupon. It is a battle for souls to the JW as well.

 

[BillP]

I agree that the destruction of one’s scripture smacks of fascism. I agree with you on this point. But what if one read the book. Could I take a book of Mormon home to read it? To learn what they believe to better help evangelize them? I wonder what the person (or most likely company) who left it there.

Most Mormons I know would encourage a person to take the book to learn more about the faith.

Sure you can take it home to read. You intended to fulfill the purpose for which it was left. What happens later doesn’t matter. If you read and decide its a load of codswallop (which is what I did) you can throw it away. Even if you never got around to reading it eventually gave up and throw it away, that’s fine as long as you intended to read it when you took it. That’s what it was there for. You weren’t specifically intended to thwart the intended purpose when you took it that’s the key.

 

[BillP]

Your examples are of materials delivered legally. That is an entirely different thing. Interfering with the legal delivery of materials would be wrong.

Horsefeathers!

If the OP was a city policeman or other individual authorized to enforce the law you’d be right. But he wasn’t. If you’re not authorized to enforce the legality of the delivery laws then you have no right to attempt to do so.

When a cop directs traffic he’s doing his job, when you get out of your car and try to so you’re committing obstruction.

 

[BillP]

This is the type of legal analysis I was looking for!
Good points.

Seriously? Theft is okay with the person leaving the property committed some trivial administrative error? Going back to the bike example. My town has an ordinance against leaving bikes propped up against a building, instead requiring them to be parked in designated racks.

I leave my bike propped against a building while I go into a store. No one disputes that the city has the right to impound my bike for violating the ordinance. Nor is anyone disputing that the owner of the building has the right to call the cops to enforce the ordinance. What is in dispute is whether some random person (the OP) can come along and steal my bike because it is illegally parked. Clearly he can’t.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Sure you can take it home to read. You intended to fulfill the purpose for which it was left. What happens later doesn’t matter. If you read and decide its a load of codswallop (which is what I did) you can throw it away. Even if you never got around to reading it eventually gave up and throw it away, that’s fine as long as you intended to read it when you took it. That’s what it was there for. You weren’t specifically intended to thwart the intended purpose when you took it that’s the key.

The purpose is for me to take it home to read and convert.

The purpose I would take it home for is to read and refute.

How do we know what the “purpose” is or how far that purpose must be obeyed?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Seriously? Theft is okay with the person leaving the property committed some trivial administrative error? Going back to the bike example. My town has an ordinance against leaving bikes propped up against a building, instead requiring them to be parked in designated racks.

I leave my bike propped against a building while I go into a store. No one disputes that the city has the right to impound my bike for violating the ordinance. Nor is anyone disputing that the owner of the building has the right to call the cops to enforce the ordinance. What is in dispute is whether some random person (the OP) can come along and steal my bike because it is illegally parked. Clearly he can’t.

The problem is that in your example we can show ownership of the bike. Who owns the pamphlet? Could one dispose of a yard sale sign illegally posted on a telephone pole?

 

[robwar]

That may have been the intention of the one who placed the literature there. But their intention was not a legal intention. As such, their intention need not be respected. The material did not “belong” to anyone. The one who placed it there clearly gave up any claim to it. The ones he intended to read it did not claim ownership. Like most advertising, the value is to the one doing the advertising, not the one reading the advertisement.

The fact that this was religious literature is irrelevant. The same action could have been taken for flyers for a lawn care service. It is much the same as when flyers are illegally stapled to telephone poles. Anyone has the right to clean up their town by taking down illegally posted literature. I would be just as upset if the flyers were for a Catholic Church picnic. Those who try to cheat the system to avoid paying postage do not deserve to have the benefit of those misdeeds.

The mailboxes, besides being the property of the Postal Service, are generally placed in the easement of the road. So it is not actually invading anyone’s private property to clean up litter illegally placed.

exactly!

 

[JSSD]

The problem is that in your example we can show ownership of the bike. Who owns the pamphlet? Could one dispose of a yard sale sign illegally posted on a telephone pole?

Clearly not the OP, other than the individual book left on his individual mailbox. That’s all that matters here.