Is it? They rung me up with it - it's up to them to decide what to charge me. I'd put as "bank error in my favor." I only noticed later when I was making sure they didn't overcharge me when looking at my bank account. (They had to charge and refund about 3x)
It's still stealing, the correct move would be to go back and pay the correct amount as you likely would have done if they overcharged you.
That said, I doubt you could legally be held responsible and I see no problems with what you did morally either. If you noticed at the time I'd find it morally questionable, but you can't fix every mistake.
Not just that, but like, the parent commenter actually got his items rung up in the store. So the parent wouldnt have even noticed they didn’t get charged for those items unless they were constantly checking their bank account for actual dollar amounts charged for every purchase. I find it difficult to believe that anyone would be able to claim that the parent commenter is at fault here.
I walk up to a cashier, and he by accident drops $10 in my shopping cart (without me noticing). Then he proceeds to inconspicuously take those $10, look at it, and silently put it back in the bag (again, without me noticing). I discover those $10 only when I get home. I had no idea it was even there, and the store employee definitely looked through every single item in my bag and saw those $10, but just decided to put it back there. Did I steal those $10?
I struggle to even call it something like "theft by accident", which would be if the cashier forgets to scan an item because they didn't notice it. In my hypothetical scenario, the cashier noticed and picked up the item.
Yes. You have acquired it without the intentional consent of the owner, who presumably thought it was your $10. I don't think it's a crime nor would I find you personally responsible.
>If you saw someone drop it, sure. If you know the owner of the hundred dollar bill, sure. But otherwise?
Presumably the owner would retrace their steps and try to find what was lost. Most people would do this for a hundred dollars, but you can also imagine a child doing it for a quarter. Is it theft if you say you haven't seen it? How about if you never run into the person but intended to say you haven't seen it?
At what point it becomes "theft" is tenuous at best. I'd rather call many things "theft" and withhold judgment until I learn the details as it limits instantaneous judgments upon hearing of a thief.
As for your definition, at what point something becomes unlawful is never clear, and nobody's actual definitions for concepts ever mirror a dictionary definition.
I think you're just taking a word that already has a definition and redefining it. Or at least greatly stretching the definition.
And assuming theft unless otherwise proven? That's weird to me too, especially combined with your follow up of limiting instantaneous judgement. How on earth is assuming someone committed theft limiting judgement?
There are common definitions of what words mean. If the meaning of words become arbitrary then we lose the ability to communicate effectively.
An action was taken, e.g. picking up a quarter off the side walk. There is no need to put another label on it randomly, just call it what it is, picking up a quarter. By using a word that already has a commonly accepted meaning, and a negative one at that, and associate it with an innocent action you're already labeling it in a negative way for everyone else. Everyone (or at least majority of other people) thinks a thief is a bad person. If only you don't think so and label someone else doing nothing bad a thief, then you're labeling someone a bad person.
It's like me calling you a rapist. But I don't mean rapist in the typical way, I just mean anyone that has sex. So to me a rapist is not a bad person and I'll withhold judgement until I have more information. So I can just go around calling you a rapist right?
What are they? People assume their definition is common, but everything is much less clear than that. This causes frequent disagreements, and it's best to get more information.
>There is no need to put another label on it randomly, just call it what it is, picking up a quarter.
There is no need for me to label the action at all unless I'm in a position to explain what I mean. My position on the action is primarily private. Changing the definition is more useful in the other direction, when you call someone a thief I don't assume I have any idea what they did or what kind of person that makes them.
>Everyone (or at least majority of other people) thinks a thief is a bad person.
Using such labels to judge an entire persons worth is ridiculous in a number of ways. There are too many ways that both of us would consider innocent that can get you labeled a thief. I was almost booked for stealing $40 of gas after realizing I lost my wallet after filling the tank. Am I a bad person because of that?
>So I can just go around calling you a rapist right?
This started as me labeling an action as theft. If I walked around blindly calling people thieves I would expect the misunderstanding to cause problems for me.
That's what I mean with the rapist example too. If you have sex with someone, do I have the right to call you a rapist first and withhold judgement until I have more information? If for me a rapist isn't necessarily a bad act.
No, you are jumping straight into calling someone a rapist. If I described perfectly consensual sex and you replied "it's rape" with no explanation, you should also expect repercussions for the misunderstanding.
Labeling an act primarily privately and publicly labeling a person are vastly different.
This might answer your question though. If you pointed at someone and said "this person is a rapist," I would withhold judgment until learning more details. A label is not enough to evaluate someone's life. And I try to limit who i casually toss such labels onto, preferring to give some detail into their act.
"bank error in your favor" is not a real thing and a bank will definitely hold you accountable for that. But I honestly read your description as HD just giving you the extras as a gift for your hassle.
