Woman caught on camera stealing toy from baby's grave.

Wouldn’t something loose like that have gotten thrown out by the maintenance people at the cemetery if not eaten by a mower?

I don’t know what the law is about things left on grave stones there. I hope that the law is enforced in a reasonable manner.

However, I’m rooting for the woman who took it. Leaving things at grave stones may be emotionally fulfilling for the families, but it is a wasteful and meaningless action. (As is the gravestone itself. My wife wants to be buried, so that’s fine, but I’ve told everyone I’m related to that I’ll be pissed beyond belief if I’m buried next to her. What a total f—ing waste of time, land, resources and mental effort.)

If that woman has a child who gets even 10 minutes of enjoyment out of the rubber duck, then her actions will have made the world a better place.

Because how you emotionally react to the duck being taken should be how the family of the dead child should emotionally react.

Or, the family’s emotions don’t count as anything.

Actually, could you explain your formula for determining how the world is a better place?

The more I read about this and think about it the sadder I become. Not because the toy was stolen, but because someone felt the need to put it there in the first place.

I can’t imagine walking up to my kid’s grave with a present for him/her and placing it there. The thought of doing that chokes me up. “Happy Easter Timmy. We brought you this toy ducky to play with.” Fuck.

I went back and re-read the linked article and you are correct; I missed that on my first perusal. Thanks for pointing out my error; I feel better when my moral outrage matches up with some kind of illegal act.

Some criminals are just opportunistic. They don’t plan out something like “I think I’ll go down to the cemetery and see if there’s anything worth stealing there.” They just follow their normal routine except they commit crimes when they see a low-risk opportunity to do so.

So the woman probably wasn’t thinking “I need a rubber duck. Should I go buy one at Walmart or look around for one I can steal?” What’s most likely is she happened to see the rubber duck on the grave and thought “There’s something I can steal with no risk of getting caught.”

Let’s not continue the OP’s error. It was a large stuffed-animal type duck.

The family left their duck in a symbolic gesture. Emotional fulfillment for them. World is now +1.

Child enjoys the duck. Emotional fulfillment for child. World is now an additional +1.

The only negative in this equation is when 1) family finds out about the “theft” (because let’s be honest, the presence of the duck after they leave has no actual impact on them whatsoever) and 2) family decides that the duck is better used in memory of a dead person than to the benefit of a living person. So: family is selfish, world -1.

Which, in my equation, still leaves the world at +1, thanks to a child enjoying the duck.

And before you go on about the family’s feelings any further, you tell me where that duck was going to end up. As another poster said, it was either going to be thrown in the garbage or chewed up by a lawnmower. If they think about it logically, that family KNOWS the duck doesn’t benefit their child and they KNOW it will be disposed of with no ceremony. I’m sorry that the blinders have been taken off of their little world of denial and selfishness, but anyone who thinks the world needs more denial and selfishness is clearly using different math than I am.

Great. By that logic;

I buy myself a new car that makes me happy, world +1
You steal my car and that makes you happy, world +1
Having my car stolen makes me sad, world -1

End result - world +1!

Yep, that’s about as far as I could get too.

Did she move from St. Louis?

Like taking candy from a baby …except I guess, easier then that.

Proposal for new saying: “Like taking toys from a dead baby”.

This. Goodness.

I would guess the woman is mentally ill in some way.

Not necessarily. Police sometimes enforce non-existent laws. That’s what judges are for.

Vandalizing grave-sites is illegal. I’d be pretty surprised if removing things from them without permission of the owners didn’t fall under that heading.

And in anycase, property left at a gravesite pretty clearly isn’t “abandoned”.

I’m morally certain that the person who took the toy duck has some kind of bad wiring in her head or another. She may or may not be inhuman scum, but if that’s her crime it is also her punishment.

By this logic, funerals are pointless and do no one any real good and they are for people who are in denial and selfish.

Little Nemo The article stated this had happened multiple times before. Perhaps this lady just happened to be unlucky in that she was being opportunistic with something left at a site that just happened to have had enough things stolen previously that it was under surveillance, but I doubt it.

http://mobile.10tv.com/wbns10tv/db_338599/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=Vfo6WmKA

She turned herself in and may be charged with petty theft.

Only to the extent that you planned to leave the car, unused, sitting on the street where you would never see it again.

Oh I see, now you get to decide how I use my property and if you don’t agree you’re entitled to take it.
That’s a much better argument.