Better than those weirdos who go on a hike and feel they can take a pee WITHOUT ducking behind a rock.
I would turn the cash in. Along with his wristwatch, any jewelry, and his gold fillings.
I guess I think of taking things from dead people not so much as theft, but as looting.
I think it has to do with the perceived harm to the victim. It feels not-as-wrong to steal from someone who has plenty more than to steal from someone who might not be able to eat without that money.
But isn’t that the same as saying “Stealing is wrong. Unless I can rationalize it.” ?
No, it’s saying either, “Stealing isn’t always wrong” or “Stealing is wrong, but sometimes it’s wronger than others.” Or possibly, “Stealing is always wrong, and I’m doing it anyway.”
Giving a reason for something (or a rationalization) doesn’t mean I don’t think it’s wrong or it’s not stealing. I’m just being honest enough to admit I’d probably do it anyway.
If I may jump in:
I think part of it is also a difference between stealing something that someone has clear possession and control of, and finding someone’s property that they have no reasonable expectation to ever seen again.
I’ve lost wallets a couple of times. And from my point of view, the money and keepsakes in the wallet were all lost to me from the moment I discovered their absence. I didn’t count the money in the wallet as still being an asset, any longer. If my wallet was returned to me with the cash in it, I’d have been thrilled. (Shocked beyond all measure, but thrilled.) But I wouldn’t feel anything but gratitude towards someone who did find and return my wallet. Even if they did take the cash from it.
I expect you could still reduce that to “stealing is wrong, except if I can rationalize it.” But it’s still a rationalization that seems to have some justification, as well.
YMMV, of course
Good point. In which case it could be “I don’t consider this stealing.”
Right now, since I’m broke, I would be very very tempted.
Although, the rich guys family may give me a reward.
I wonder how much the license would have fetched on eBay?
Bolding mine. This is the part I’m hanging up on. And you weren’t the one that was saying it (I’m looking at you, Sitnam!Your post had the suggestion that you wouldn’t mind stealing the money because the Fossett family can afford the loss. If I am misunderstanding I apologize. However, your post wasn’t the only one like that). And I’m with you - I’d probably take the money either way.
I just wanted to add this to the list of questions you were saying this thread raised.
I wish I’d be around to talk about this because it’s quite interesting to me. However, I am going to work soon to steal from the rich and give to the poor (me) in the form of tip-whoring! 
You idea intrigues me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
I didn’t see this before I posted. I’ll reiterate this to say - very good point. So it’s not what types of stealing you are willing to excuse, but what you are willing to call stealing?
But that does bring it back to my question - how is it not stealing if you are taking it and giving yourself the moral exception - they could afford to lose it?
Except that, since he’s long since been declared legally dead, said cards surely don’t work.
I would turn in $1000 of it with the ID and pocket the rest, because no one would think that someone turning in $1000 had stolen any.
I would turn everything in, including the money. I’m not going to try to rationalize my way into stealing a thousand bucks no matter what the circumstances are.
Either your morals mean something, or they don’t. If taking $5 from a homeless woman is stealing, then so is taking $1000 from a millionaire. If you’re weighing your chances of getting caught against the benefit of having the money, then congratulations, you’re the kind of person that legal punishments were created for. A truly moral person wouldn’t need the threat.
Maybe the hiker guy actually found $10,000 and kept $9,000 of it? That thought occurred to me, anyway, when I read that the amount he found was actually $1,005 or something. His thought process: “I’ll leave $1,000 of it. Wait, that’s a suspiciously round number, let’s add $5.”
Me, I’m like Yarster - I would not ordinarily keep the money, but there must be a price at which my ethics go out of the window. Conveniently, however, well before that price is reached I would be worrying that it is drug money or something, with scary guys looking for it. So either way, I wouldn’t keep it.
I’d love to say I’d turn in the cash, and I’d probably turn most of it in, but I’d probably take a hundred or so for my troubles and turn in the rest.
…just trying to be honest.