[prepend]

There’s certainly people who need food.

I’m not arguing that starvation doesn’t exist. I’m arguing that most shoplifters aren’t starving. And if they were, they wouldn’t shoplift food from dollar tree as the food is all in small packages. People who starve don’t become stupid and would likely shoplift more expensive, nutrient dense items.

[jrflowers]

I like this reasoning. The act of stealing from a dollar store indicates that a person is not starving because a starving person would plan out a more efficient theft at an establishment that carries larger items.

[prepend]

More like there are two piles of food: one large and easy to access, one small and harder. Which is a starving person more likely to take?

Starving people are just as rationale as the next person, there’s no reason to think they stop making decisions the same way a non-starving person would.

I made no logical statement about whether stealing indicates you’re starving or not. I said that starving people are less likely to steal from the dollar store.

Logically, these are very different things.

[jrflowers]

>Which is a starving person more likely to take?

This makes sense, the answer is certainly not “the one that’s in front of them at a store that’s likely in the part of town that they live in.” The first thing a starving person does is sit down and do a SWOT analysis of various foodstuffs that factors in location, transportation, and nutrient value. After they finish their individual analyses they compare notes with other members of their criminal cohort and split up territory based off of who is hungry and who is saving up for a Lamborghini Urus.