Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j9pqpqw wrote

−25

Flivver_King t1_j9qq2q5 wrote

Victim blaming.

21

atyppo t1_j9qqvji wrote

It's not victim blaming to use common sense. Apparently the expectation to have a bit of common sense has disappeared though. How extreme does something need to be before it isn't "victim blaming" on your arbitrary scale? Is telling someone to not leave valuables in the back of their car in Downtown SF victim blaming too when their car inevitably gets broken into? What about being white and walking through Mogadishu unaccompanied? Is that extreme enough for your scale? At what point does common sense take precedence over "victim blaming?"

−12

HappyArtichoke7729 t1_j9quqd4 wrote

You are absolutely blaming the victim. If the criminals weren't stealing or if they were locked in a cell, there would be no problem. The victim did not cause this.

14

FrankBeamer_ t1_j9s8u65 wrote

If crime and criminals didn’t exist in the world, there would be no problem, but they do exist, which is why it’s up to us to exercise caution when we can and reduce our risk of getting robbed.

But I guess individual accountability is a dying art in society these days

1

HappyArtichoke7729 t1_j9tqon3 wrote

Individual accountability is dying. Because folks blame the victim instead of the person who caused the problem.

−1

FrankBeamer_ t1_j9u20iu wrote

The criminal is clearly the issue here and needs to be off the streets. Crime is bad and shouldn't exist.

It's also the individual's responsibility to protect themselves and mitigate risk, since this is not a perfect fucking world, and crime exists. That includes being wary of displaying items of wealth in public spaces.

Both can be true. It's not an either/or. And it is not victim blaming to advocate exercising caution. We don't live in a fucking utopia.

0