Blurring It Down

WaPo does its best to nuance the sin out of looting. Link. Excerpt:

But, as we are also learning from the post-Katrina chaos, what we think of as looting may be more complicated than it seems.

Benigno E. Aguirre of the Disaster Research Center at the University of Delaware has been watching and reading about looters in Louisiana. "It may look from the outside as if they are stealing or breaking the law," says Aguirre, "when in fact some of them are trying to survive."

On the other hand, he says, some of the thieves are garden-variety crooks. "There is always a very small number of people that are predisposed to crime, and they see a disaster as an opportunity to act."

There are the disenfranchised who jump at the chance to get even with those who have more stuff than they do. "Disasters can become opportunity for class warfare, and that kind of appropriation of other people's property should be prosecuted," he says,

There are looters, he says, but "people use the concept of looting without making distinctions."

Many may be people taking drastic measures required by drastic times. And some, he says, are the in-an-emergency equivalent of hunters/gatherers, foraging for food, fresh water, medicine, matches, batteries, everyday essentials that are just not available. Not at home, not at shelters.

Yes, it is acceptable to steal if it prevents a greater wrong. A man can steal an apple if he needs it to stay alive and can't otherwise pay for it. But WaPo is disingenuous if they want us to believe that most of the looters are doing it for base survival.