and happy new year.
That's all.
24 December 2010
20 December 2010
I don't remember
A friend of ours is a mechanic and he usually tunes our car. He's had it for the past week, coz a few things have needed doing on it and finally brought it back last night. He gave us the bill but, as it's Xmas, we didn't have quite enough money for him.
He told us that, don't worry about it, pay me the rest when you can. But I'll remind you because I know you'll forget.
But, we never forget to pay him.
Except now, we've been wracking our brains, trying to think whether we've missed something. And neither of us can come up with anything.
So, did he say this to piss us off, or because we owe him some money but he expects us to remember, rather than him telling us how much we owe?
He told us that, don't worry about it, pay me the rest when you can. But I'll remind you because I know you'll forget.
But, we never forget to pay him.
Except now, we've been wracking our brains, trying to think whether we've missed something. And neither of us can come up with anything.
So, did he say this to piss us off, or because we owe him some money but he expects us to remember, rather than him telling us how much we owe?
12 December 2010
krismas list. bah humbug.
Every year, my mother-in-law asks for a "wishlist" for Christmas gifts.
First thing on my list every year: don't want to make a wishlist.
This woman has been my mother-in-law for over ten years. I would prefer that if she wants to buy me a gift, she, oh, I don't know... puts a little of her own thought into it. I'm not 8 years old, waiting for Santa. I'm in my 30s. I have a job. If I want something, I will buy it or save up for it. I don't need people to buy me things.
Here is what I want. Mixed in with some things that I need:
A stockpot. I need to make large batches of chilis and stews and soups and freeze them. We spend too much money on food. I need to get practical.
Tupperware, or containers that can be put in the freezer.
Shoes and boots from John Fleuvog.
New exercise clothes.
Groceries.
A full time job with benefits instead of the part-time job with no benefits I currently have.
A full time job with benefits for my husband, instead of the no job he currently has.
Student loan payments.
Donations to Amnesty International, the Red Cross, local foodbanks, and local homeless shelters.
Postage stamps. If the woman paid any attention at all, she would know that I send a lot of mail.
Stationery.
A nice pen or maybe a few nice pens.
A deal between family members that we will not buy Christmas gifts for anyone older than 18, unless we really want to. Is it possible to have a Christmas without that sick feeling of obligation?
First thing on my list every year: don't want to make a wishlist.
This woman has been my mother-in-law for over ten years. I would prefer that if she wants to buy me a gift, she, oh, I don't know... puts a little of her own thought into it. I'm not 8 years old, waiting for Santa. I'm in my 30s. I have a job. If I want something, I will buy it or save up for it. I don't need people to buy me things.
Here is what I want. Mixed in with some things that I need:
A stockpot. I need to make large batches of chilis and stews and soups and freeze them. We spend too much money on food. I need to get practical.
Tupperware, or containers that can be put in the freezer.
Shoes and boots from John Fleuvog.
New exercise clothes.
Groceries.
A full time job with benefits instead of the part-time job with no benefits I currently have.
A full time job with benefits for my husband, instead of the no job he currently has.
Student loan payments.
Donations to Amnesty International, the Red Cross, local foodbanks, and local homeless shelters.
Postage stamps. If the woman paid any attention at all, she would know that I send a lot of mail.
Stationery.
A nice pen or maybe a few nice pens.
A deal between family members that we will not buy Christmas gifts for anyone older than 18, unless we really want to. Is it possible to have a Christmas without that sick feeling of obligation?
1 December 2010
December 2010
And so, it's the beginning of Summer - my least favourite time of the year. I can't take the heat; I often think I should have been born in Sweden or Russia. I love the cold weather but I think that it's mainly because it's much easier to warm up than to cool down.
However, now that I've said that, I do like the fact that it's the first day of summer. It isn't hot, it isn't cold, it's just right. It's a Goldilocks day. Sure, it'll get hot but, right now, summer's all right by me.
Besides, it's December and December also means Christmas. And Christmas in Australia means lots of lights, lots of fake snow and lots of shopping. It also means that people are a little happier than they were last week but, that won't last.
For now though, I say bring it on.
However, now that I've said that, I do like the fact that it's the first day of summer. It isn't hot, it isn't cold, it's just right. It's a Goldilocks day. Sure, it'll get hot but, right now, summer's all right by me.
Besides, it's December and December also means Christmas. And Christmas in Australia means lots of lights, lots of fake snow and lots of shopping. It also means that people are a little happier than they were last week but, that won't last.
For now though, I say bring it on.
17 November 2010
Just like Marcel
I've just entered the Brunswick Gallery's Small Works exhibition; essentially on the proviso that all works will be accepted. So, just like Marcel, I'm entering a readymade sculpture. It's a piece of house cladding and I've called it 'Readymade after Marcel.' It won't win anything, nor will it be sold but it will HAVE to be accepted for exhibition, because the conditions of entry say so.
This should be quite amusing.
This should be quite amusing.
10 November 2010
4 November 2010
You know what I hate? People who use the excuse "I've been really busy lately," when the actually mean that they've been too lazy to do anything.
You know what I hate more? The people who use this excuse who are, in some small way, trying to run a business. Let's say it's a record label, or a publishing company, or an arts hub; anything where you can buy something, pay for it using PayPal and then wait until you get your goods.
I do this a lot. I'm kind of a searcher of underground subjects; be they art, music, books or culture. If it's on Myspace or a website somewhere and something is offered for sale, I'm there buying it. So, I spend quite freely and use services like Myspace and Paypal a lot. And, most of the people who run these things are pretty good. I get my stuff in a reasonable amount of time and in good condition.
But not always. Sometimes you have to wait. And wait. And fucking wait. And when you enquire where your stuff is (that you've already shelled out money for!) it's always the same lazy, lame fucking excuse: "I"ve been really busy man and haven't had time to go to the post office..."
I actually get these replies. Tell you what, if you're too busy to go to the post office to provide me with something that happens to be part of your INCOME, then don't bother fucking selling anything. Better yet, if you're advertising something and accepting payment for it but don't have it in stock, THEN DON'T FUCKING ADVERTISE IT FOR SALE.
It isn't that hard is it? And, let's face it, the main reason I hate that excuse is the old quote: if you want something done in a hurry, give it to a busy person. And it's true. Someone actually busy, always manages to find time to do everything.
It's only truly lazy who still use the I'm really busy excuse. Here's a clue for you pal: we're ALL fucking busy.
You know what I hate more? The people who use this excuse who are, in some small way, trying to run a business. Let's say it's a record label, or a publishing company, or an arts hub; anything where you can buy something, pay for it using PayPal and then wait until you get your goods.
I do this a lot. I'm kind of a searcher of underground subjects; be they art, music, books or culture. If it's on Myspace or a website somewhere and something is offered for sale, I'm there buying it. So, I spend quite freely and use services like Myspace and Paypal a lot. And, most of the people who run these things are pretty good. I get my stuff in a reasonable amount of time and in good condition.
But not always. Sometimes you have to wait. And wait. And fucking wait. And when you enquire where your stuff is (that you've already shelled out money for!) it's always the same lazy, lame fucking excuse: "I"ve been really busy man and haven't had time to go to the post office..."
I actually get these replies. Tell you what, if you're too busy to go to the post office to provide me with something that happens to be part of your INCOME, then don't bother fucking selling anything. Better yet, if you're advertising something and accepting payment for it but don't have it in stock, THEN DON'T FUCKING ADVERTISE IT FOR SALE.
It isn't that hard is it? And, let's face it, the main reason I hate that excuse is the old quote: if you want something done in a hurry, give it to a busy person. And it's true. Someone actually busy, always manages to find time to do everything.
It's only truly lazy who still use the I'm really busy excuse. Here's a clue for you pal: we're ALL fucking busy.
3 November 2010
Ok Then
I've changed things back a little because I want everyone to be able to use this blog, not just a few smarties who want to make it harder to get into.
Let's see what happens from here. Remember, this blog is literally for EVERYONE, not just Mail Artists. Everyone can enjoy posting on here.
Let's see what happens from here. Remember, this blog is literally for EVERYONE, not just Mail Artists. Everyone can enjoy posting on here.
1 November 2010
Hmmm
It seems that whoever changed this template also made it trickier to sign in to this blog to write things. Well, I've manged to do it, let's see who else figures this out.
30 October 2010
27 October 2010
Throw him a line why don't you?
Has the time come for the end of the apostrophe?
I'm a grammar Nazi. I'm a proud grammar Nazi. It's something that's quite easy to be in this day and age. You only have to search any site that allows comments from people to realise how easy it is to be a grammar Nazi. Increasingly though, I'm being made to feel that, being a grammar Nazi, is a bad, bad thing.
I'm all for English evolving. The last thing I want to do is stand in the way of words. The last thing I really want to do even, is stand in the way of grammar. I mean, just check out how I've worded the last sentence. Better men than me have put forth the case that jumping on people's grammar is a poor substitute for self expression. And I think they're right. But I just can't let go of some things that make writing what it is.
One of these, is the apostrophe. It's the little ' you use, so you don't have to write do not. Or it is. Or you are. It makes writing simpler. It makes writing fun. But it's increasingly being devalued.
How many times have we read someone making a statement that starts 'your wrong you know?' Or 'dont worry about it,' or even, 'I just cant do it.' You know what they're trying to say. You can read it and interpret it but, is that really the point? Doesn't reading that make your eyes and brain hurt? I read some articles and it's like I'm trying to read a foreign language.
But is this just something that's my problem? Because I'm over 40, I've gone through the school system when it was still important to teach kids how to spell and construct a sentence. These days, it's obviously not so much. And, I'm not talking about text slang - that's a completely different topic that I'm actually fine with. Let's just keep it to phones ok? I'm talking about actual writing of the language so that's it's readable and clearly understood. How do people learn English these days? And I'm not just talking about kids, I'm talking about those who use English as a foreign language. Are they taught about apostrophe's? Are they taught how to construct a sentence?
I don't want things set in stone. English is the most mutable language in the world; the last thing I want is for that to change. But don't try to stop me being a grammar Nazi either. I think some things are worth preserving. And I think proper use of the apostrophe is one.
I'm a grammar Nazi. I'm a proud grammar Nazi. It's something that's quite easy to be in this day and age. You only have to search any site that allows comments from people to realise how easy it is to be a grammar Nazi. Increasingly though, I'm being made to feel that, being a grammar Nazi, is a bad, bad thing.
I'm all for English evolving. The last thing I want to do is stand in the way of words. The last thing I really want to do even, is stand in the way of grammar. I mean, just check out how I've worded the last sentence. Better men than me have put forth the case that jumping on people's grammar is a poor substitute for self expression. And I think they're right. But I just can't let go of some things that make writing what it is.
One of these, is the apostrophe. It's the little ' you use, so you don't have to write do not. Or it is. Or you are. It makes writing simpler. It makes writing fun. But it's increasingly being devalued.
How many times have we read someone making a statement that starts 'your wrong you know?' Or 'dont worry about it,' or even, 'I just cant do it.' You know what they're trying to say. You can read it and interpret it but, is that really the point? Doesn't reading that make your eyes and brain hurt? I read some articles and it's like I'm trying to read a foreign language.
But is this just something that's my problem? Because I'm over 40, I've gone through the school system when it was still important to teach kids how to spell and construct a sentence. These days, it's obviously not so much. And, I'm not talking about text slang - that's a completely different topic that I'm actually fine with. Let's just keep it to phones ok? I'm talking about actual writing of the language so that's it's readable and clearly understood. How do people learn English these days? And I'm not just talking about kids, I'm talking about those who use English as a foreign language. Are they taught about apostrophe's? Are they taught how to construct a sentence?
I don't want things set in stone. English is the most mutable language in the world; the last thing I want is for that to change. But don't try to stop me being a grammar Nazi either. I think some things are worth preserving. And I think proper use of the apostrophe is one.
21 October 2010
17 October 2010
New Blog to Steal
When you are stealing this blog, don't forget to enter a note as well in the other blog at:
http://stealthisblogagain.blogspot.com/
When you are at it, just make this the largest stolen blog!
http://stealthisblogagain.blogspot.com/
When you are at it, just make this the largest stolen blog!
Mail-Art changes all the time
When I read statements that Mail-Art after the 90-ies didn't change I always get comfused. Didn't a new communication form enter the playing field of the Mail-Artists and weren't they acting towards the influences of e-mails and websites.
Nowadays these are all integrated as I notice on things like the IUOMA ning site. Mail-Art changes all the time until there is no communication between people anymore. That won't happen.
Nowadays these are all integrated as I notice on things like the IUOMA ning site. Mail-Art changes all the time until there is no communication between people anymore. That won't happen.
9 October 2010
Shocking quote!!
I just read a shocking statement on Mail Art on page 71!...
"The Golden Age of correspondence art is behind our backs. The wave of unbridled creativity brought about by the first intensive exploration of the different postal formats and constitutive elements (postage stamps, rubber stamps, postcards, envelopes) has reached a peak in the late Seventies and early Eighties, then mail art mostly repeated itself with diminishing freshness. If you want to find new imaginative postcards today, you should look in the field of graphic design (e.g. the anthology Postcard) rather than in mail art publications. Trough habit and repetition, the original mail art concepts and ideas have been spread too thin, and there is a noticable lack of new ideas, recruits and ambitious schemes in the field. What can you do with a bunch of trading cards, apart from collecting them in an album?."
Shocking! What to do when you have missed the 70's-80's Peak because you where listening to music instead of mail arting, or simply because you might have walked around as a toddler those days... Do the younger and the inbetween-generations repeat the old guard or does the old guard repeat themselves, not seeing the new developments?
Shocking! Prefering graphic design (commerce!) above the good old - be it repetitive or not - cheap paper cut stamp stick draw paint trash postal objects...
Shocking! A Mail Artist who does not know what to do with a bunch of ATC's???
Build huge card houses! Wallpaper your neighbour's house with those! Cut them into faux postage! Send one forward to ME!
(and what's wrong with collecting small sized cards in an album?.. I wish people would send ME such small sized postal objects instead of those larger-than-A4 envelopes, with which we cannot build card houses and which do not fit in my ring binder albums...)
Conclusion: I LOVE the writer of this statement (I mean it!) and I would be delighted to receive just an ordinary mail art snail mail card from him!
P.S.1. Before scolding on the text above, you should read the whole article. It is worth reading!
And then you understand my huge admiration for the article's author! And then you will agree! ("p (how the #&% do I create a smiley on this blog??)
Cross-over rules!
P.S.2. There was life after Sonic Youth (that is: Nirvana, irl).
There was life after U2's Boy (October), there was life after the Cure's Three Imaginary Boys (A Forest / Seventeen Seconds - reviled by the early Cure fans).
Sonic Youth survived Nirvana.
U2's still alive.
I love music.
And Mail Art.
I don't want to collect ATC's.
I never listened to the Joshua Tree neither to Rattle and Hum.
The last record I bought from one of the formentioned was Daydream Nation.
Zen Arcade is older than Daydream Nation and sounds newer (er, faster)!
Now it's your turn to steal a new blog from this blog.
"The Golden Age of correspondence art is behind our backs. The wave of unbridled creativity brought about by the first intensive exploration of the different postal formats and constitutive elements (postage stamps, rubber stamps, postcards, envelopes) has reached a peak in the late Seventies and early Eighties, then mail art mostly repeated itself with diminishing freshness. If you want to find new imaginative postcards today, you should look in the field of graphic design (e.g. the anthology Postcard) rather than in mail art publications. Trough habit and repetition, the original mail art concepts and ideas have been spread too thin, and there is a noticable lack of new ideas, recruits and ambitious schemes in the field. What can you do with a bunch of trading cards, apart from collecting them in an album?."
Shocking! What to do when you have missed the 70's-80's Peak because you where listening to music instead of mail arting, or simply because you might have walked around as a toddler those days... Do the younger and the inbetween-generations repeat the old guard or does the old guard repeat themselves, not seeing the new developments?
Shocking! Prefering graphic design (commerce!) above the good old - be it repetitive or not - cheap paper cut stamp stick draw paint trash postal objects...
Shocking! A Mail Artist who does not know what to do with a bunch of ATC's???
Build huge card houses! Wallpaper your neighbour's house with those! Cut them into faux postage! Send one forward to ME!
(and what's wrong with collecting small sized cards in an album?.. I wish people would send ME such small sized postal objects instead of those larger-than-A4 envelopes, with which we cannot build card houses and which do not fit in my ring binder albums...)
Conclusion: I LOVE the writer of this statement (I mean it!) and I would be delighted to receive just an ordinary mail art snail mail card from him!
P.S.1. Before scolding on the text above, you should read the whole article. It is worth reading!
And then you understand my huge admiration for the article's author! And then you will agree! ("p (how the #&% do I create a smiley on this blog??)
Cross-over rules!
P.S.2. There was life after Sonic Youth (that is: Nirvana, irl).
There was life after U2's Boy (October), there was life after the Cure's Three Imaginary Boys (A Forest / Seventeen Seconds - reviled by the early Cure fans).
Sonic Youth survived Nirvana.
U2's still alive.
I love music.
And Mail Art.
I don't want to collect ATC's.
I never listened to the Joshua Tree neither to Rattle and Hum.
The last record I bought from one of the formentioned was Daydream Nation.
Zen Arcade is older than Daydream Nation and sounds newer (er, faster)!
Now it's your turn to steal a new blog from this blog.
Changes in Mail Art
Everyone involved in mail art should read the article 'Ch-ch-ch-ch-change (and Face the Strange) in Mail Art', by Vittore Baroni, starting on page 68 of the Mail Art 1988-2008 Overview book! Also should do the ones with their heads full of nostalgia who forget to look forward. And the people who always want the newest gadgets and forget to look backward.
(And no, I am not Vittore Baroni and No, I did not write or edit the book and do Not work for Lulu). (Yes I'm a young-old person, something 'between generations' or something like that... somehow in crisis??)
(And no, I am not Vittore Baroni and No, I did not write or edit the book and do Not work for Lulu). (Yes I'm a young-old person, something 'between generations' or something like that... somehow in crisis??)
7 October 2010
Shock and awe
I was reading an article the other day, reminiscing about the '90's and I thought, 'are we there already?'
It seems as though looking back has become our new way of looking forward. Except these days, we're not looking that far back are we? I guess it's all to do with the new Pop Culture paradigm that we're all so fond of. It's the easiest mark to judge against. Your knowledge of Pop Culture is your cool factor.
It always has been though. Who you like in bands, books, films, TV etc; that's who you are as a person in the eyes of others. Sure, it may not be fair but we all do it. Even if we say on the outside that we don't, on the inside? Yeah, we all know we do it.
This article was referencing Nirvana - of course - and comparing them to the last great Youth explosion. As with most writers talking about this sort of thing (and it's something the writer admitted himself) everyone uses the 'it'll never happen again' thing as more a reference to themselves. It'll never happen again FOR THEM. Something I totally agree with. But then he went on to say that, he truly didn't think something like Nirvana could happen again because, with the Internet, nothing is really hidden anymore. Even if you purposely don't have a website, or Myspace page, or Facebook, you can still be filmed by someone with a camera and go up on YouTube. You might not be seen instantly but, the fact that you're there, makes keeping a secret of a good thing that much harder.
But I don't necessarily think of this as a bad thing. I think it will be subverted somehow; things like this always are. There will be another Nirvana again and it will happen in my lifetime. I don't know how but I know it will happen.
One thing I do know though - it won't be me.
It seems as though looking back has become our new way of looking forward. Except these days, we're not looking that far back are we? I guess it's all to do with the new Pop Culture paradigm that we're all so fond of. It's the easiest mark to judge against. Your knowledge of Pop Culture is your cool factor.
It always has been though. Who you like in bands, books, films, TV etc; that's who you are as a person in the eyes of others. Sure, it may not be fair but we all do it. Even if we say on the outside that we don't, on the inside? Yeah, we all know we do it.
This article was referencing Nirvana - of course - and comparing them to the last great Youth explosion. As with most writers talking about this sort of thing (and it's something the writer admitted himself) everyone uses the 'it'll never happen again' thing as more a reference to themselves. It'll never happen again FOR THEM. Something I totally agree with. But then he went on to say that, he truly didn't think something like Nirvana could happen again because, with the Internet, nothing is really hidden anymore. Even if you purposely don't have a website, or Myspace page, or Facebook, you can still be filmed by someone with a camera and go up on YouTube. You might not be seen instantly but, the fact that you're there, makes keeping a secret of a good thing that much harder.
But I don't necessarily think of this as a bad thing. I think it will be subverted somehow; things like this always are. There will be another Nirvana again and it will happen in my lifetime. I don't know how but I know it will happen.
One thing I do know though - it won't be me.
28 September 2010
Yeah
I keep finding myself having lots of things to say, until it comes time to actually open this blog and write something. Maybe it's the pressure, I don't know but everything I think about, that I think is interesting enough to write about all goes out the window.
And what you're left with is this.
Must try harder.
And what you're left with is this.
Must try harder.
21 September 2010
Steal This Bookmark
I created this bookmark a couple of months ago. To steal it for yourself, simply print it, cut it out, fold in half and secure with double sided tape. Enjoy! :) TC
To STEAL or NOT TO STEAL, that is THE question...
First I thought this would be a joke, then came to the blog to find out you guys weren't kidding! So, I've made my own little design edits and here it goes...for now. Let's see how long before someone comes along and messes up my brilliance. Here's a little something "stolen" from the web. To steal, or not to steal, that is the question...
 | |||||||||
| Oops, Barbie lost her head while skinny dipping! |
20 September 2010
Drowning In Drivel
18 September 2010
yellow like the sun, silver like the moon.
My friend looked at this and said that it symbolized the
beauty in this world going "down the drain,"
beauty in this world going "down the drain,"
but I think fish are just as beautiful as roses, even lifeless.
17 September 2010
It's the climate I tells ya
It's Spring but it still feels like Winter. What's going on world? You'd better get it together, coz I'm having problems knowing what to wear at any given time.
13 September 2010
10 September 2010
9 September 2010
6 September 2010
Processing fake credit cards
With the amount of blogs around, and people to write them, is it even any point trying to become a writer anymore? Not that I think that's bad, I'm just not sure that putting effort into writing a book is a worthwhile pursuit anymore. You can write what you want now, people can choose to read it or not and it costs nothing. Sure, you won't make any money but at least you can have your say. Isn't that why we're writers?
3 September 2010
Recipe for this blog's readers
Collect 1 kg. of 
acorns. Cross them in the bottom. Cook them for a long while. Peel them.
Make acorn-flour. Use this to bake a bread.
Acorn-bread is healthy and tasty. It should be eaten by everybody on a daily basis.
acorns. Cross them in the bottom. Cook them for a long while. Peel them.Make acorn-flour. Use this to bake a bread.
Acorn-bread is healthy and tasty. It should be eaten by everybody on a daily basis.
1 September 2010
Upside down seasons.
Today is the first day of Spring. At the moment, outside my window, it is raining. It is also cold. Not quite the Spring Rain that the Go-Betweens talked about then. I do, however, have the beginnings of hayfever. Hopefully this rain might clear it up. But, until then, my nose is sore. Just thought you'd like to know. Today is the first day of Spring. Soon, the racing carnival will begin. Soon, it will be summer and, therefore, Christmas. Shops are already stocking their Christmas booty. It's depressing. Today is the first day of Spring.
30 August 2010
Making light of death.
Abbie Hoffman was an American protestor/student activist, who wrote a bestselling book called, 'Steal this book.' It detailed (at the time) all the ways you could basically live for free in America. It included things such as free air travel, free food, free accomodation, how to make bombs and guns and how to protest effectively. It became a bestseller on the New York Review of Books list and, like it's title says, was stolen more than bought. It was stolen so much, that libraries refused to stock it. Abbie Hoffman died at the age of 52.
27 August 2010
Some Changes
Well, some changes were needed, so I made them. We'll see what way this goes. We should keep the TEXTS READaBLE.
On the tag I have added a few names. Maybe searchengines will pick that up and will bring some responses....
On the tag I have added a few names. Maybe searchengines will pick that up and will bring some responses....
Thoughts on spam and spumante
I've never been a great one for alcohol. I mean, I like to drink it and I don't mind getting drunk, but it isn't the main thing that crosses my mind when I go out. I CAN go out and have a good time without drinking and I CAN go out and have a good time with drinking, but not getting drunk. What I can't understand is the people who still go out, with the express and ONLY purpose of getting drunk.
Why?
Seriously, why?
What's the point in doing something like that? Why go out? Why not just buy a slab and drink it at home? Is it the fact that this sort of thing is often frowned upon that it's not done? Is it the so called, bonding with your fellow man? Why do you care, you're only there to get drunk anyway? And why should they care? They don't want a stupid drunk fucking up their night.
But every weekend - hell - every night it happens somewhere. People going out just to get drunk, then stumbling home and doing it all again the next night.
Just admit you're a fucking alcoholic and get it over with. At least you'll finally be honest. Embrace it man! What have you got to lose?
Why?
Seriously, why?
What's the point in doing something like that? Why go out? Why not just buy a slab and drink it at home? Is it the fact that this sort of thing is often frowned upon that it's not done? Is it the so called, bonding with your fellow man? Why do you care, you're only there to get drunk anyway? And why should they care? They don't want a stupid drunk fucking up their night.
But every weekend - hell - every night it happens somewhere. People going out just to get drunk, then stumbling home and doing it all again the next night.
Just admit you're a fucking alcoholic and get it over with. At least you'll finally be honest. Embrace it man! What have you got to lose?
26 August 2010
Man up
It's not until it's pointed out, that you realise just how big the gulf is between the amateur and the professional. Between those who have talent and those - like me - who have none. I always wish I'd been told earlier in my life that I had no talent; that way, I wouldn't have wasted the previous twenty eight years on a failed dream.
But, like most people with no talent, it's taken me until now to realise that I indeed, have no talent. If I had been told (and, truth be told, I had) that I had no talent when I was 21, I wouldn't have believed you anyway. I would've thought you didn't know what you were talking about and of course I had talent.
Sadly though, I now know the truth. Which has made my life a hell of a lot easier, I must say. And that's not being self deprecating or anything. I truly don't have any talent. But, I do have this. So, I suppose that's something.
But, like most people with no talent, it's taken me until now to realise that I indeed, have no talent. If I had been told (and, truth be told, I had) that I had no talent when I was 21, I wouldn't have believed you anyway. I would've thought you didn't know what you were talking about and of course I had talent.
Sadly though, I now know the truth. Which has made my life a hell of a lot easier, I must say. And that's not being self deprecating or anything. I truly don't have any talent. But, I do have this. So, I suppose that's something.
Mededeler was here too!!! Breaking news!!! Millionth giraffe reached!!!
The deadline was December 31st 2010. Though July 17th it already was noticed that people were drawing too fast.
Yesterday August 24th, late at night, the 1000,000th giraffe has been reached.
See which giraffe made it possible on this blog.
We all like to congratulate Ola, and refer all ex-giraffe painters and drawers to other mail art projects.
Yesterday August 24th, late at night, the 1000,000th giraffe has been reached.
See which giraffe made it possible on this blog.
We all like to congratulate Ola, and refer all ex-giraffe painters and drawers to other mail art projects.
Just like Abbie says, we will steal you.
As if and when. Fortune's folly. Does anyone here realize Jane Austen refers to the Queen's claque[u]rs in "Pride and Prejudice"? Well, maybe she doesn't, but the movie that plays on the Pride and Prejudice book "Lost in Austen" uses the phrase.
Blog Claque[u]rs all!! Let us applaud ourselves. What is the sound of one blog blogging? shhhhhhhhhh! hush!!! Listen... is that your computer's fan or is it the silent song of your blog blogging??
I remain in your creative debt.
Valerie MacEwan
Blog Claque[u]rs all!! Let us applaud ourselves. What is the sound of one blog blogging? shhhhhhhhhh! hush!!! Listen... is that your computer's fan or is it the silent song of your blog blogging??
I remain in your creative debt.
Valerie MacEwan
25 August 2010
Stealing - Theft
Theft
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
"Stealing" redirects here. For other uses, see Steal (disambiguation).
"Thief" redirects here. For other uses, see Thief (disambiguation).
For other uses, see Theft (disambiguation).
A young waif steals a pair of boots.In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent. The word is also used as an informal shorthand term for some crimes against property, such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, shoplifting, fraud and sometimes criminal conversion. In some jurisdictions, theft is considered to be synonymous with larceny; in others, theft has replaced larceny.
Someone who carries out an act of or makes a career of theft is known as a thief, and the act of theft is known as stealing, thieving, or sometimes filching.
Contents [hide]
1 Elements
2 By region
2.1 Theft in English law
2.2 Victoria, Australia
2.2.1 Actus reus
2.2.2 Mens rea
2.3 United States
2.4 Canada
2.5 West Indies
2.6 Romania
3 Notes
4 References
5 See also
Elements
Criminal law
Part of the common law series
Element (criminal law)
Actus reus · Mens rea
Causation · Concurrence
Scope of criminal liability
Complicity · Corporate · Vicarious
Inchoate offenses
Attempt · Conspiracy · Solicitation
Offence against the person
Assault · Battery
False imprisonment · Kidnapping
Mayhem · Sexual assault
Homicide crimes
Murder · Felony murder
Manslaughter
Negligent homicide
Vehicular homicide
Crimes against property
Arson · Blackmail · Burglary
Embezzlement · Extortion
False pretenses · Larceny
Receiving stolen property
Robbery · Theft
Crimes against justice
Compounding · Misprision
Obstruction · Perjury
Malfeasance in office
Perverting the course of justice
Defenses to liability
Defense of self
Defence of property
Consent · Diminished responsibility
Duress · Entrapment
Ignorantia juris non excusat
Infancy · Insanity
Intoxication defense
Justification · Mistake (of law)
Necessity · Provocation
Other common law areas
Contracts · Evidence · Property
Torts · Wills, trusts and estates
Portals
Criminal justice · Law
v • d • e
Bicycles can occasionally be stolen, even when locked up, by removing the wheel or cutting the lock that holds them.The actus reus of theft is usually defined as an unauthorised taking, keeping or using of another's property which must be accompanied by a mens rea of dishonesty and/or the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.
For example, if X goes to a restaurant and, by mistake, takes Y's scarf instead of her own, she has physically deprived Y of the use of the property (which is the actus reus) but the mistake prevents X from forming the mens rea (i.e. because she believes that she is the owner, she is not dishonest and does not intend to deprive the "owner" of it) so no crime has been committed at this point. But if she realises the mistake when she gets home and could return the scarf to Y, she will steal the scarf if she dishonestly keeps it. Note that there may be civil liability for the torts of trespass to chattels or conversion in either eventuality.
By region
Theft in English law
In English law, theft was codified into a statutory offence in the Theft Act 1968 which defines it as:
"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". (Section 1)
The five elements of the offence are defined sequentially in the Act:
Section 2 dishonesty;
Section 3 "appropriation" which occurs when the defendant wrongfully asserts the rights of ownership over the property. This can be by physical taking, but it will also include many different situations (i.e. a failure to return or omission) in which a person may have lawfully come into possession of the property and then keeps or uses the property in an unauthorised way;
Section 4 "property" includes all personalty, i.e. land itself cannot be stolen but anything severed from the land (with the exception of wild flowers) can be stolen, as can intangible property such as a chose in action; however it seems that the term does not extend to all intangible property, as information (Oxford v. Moss) and trade secrets (R v. Absolom, The Times, 14 September 1983) have been held not to fall within the Section 4 definition of property.
Section 5 "belonging to another" requires a distinction to be made between ownership, possession and control:
ownership is where a person is not legally accountable to anyone else for the use of the property:
possession is where a person is only because it had been physically removed but there were two issues to be decided:
did the car "belong to another"? The garage had a lien i.e. a "proprietary right or interest" in the car as security for the unpaid bill and this gave the garage a better right than the owner to possess the car at the relevant time.
what was the relevance of Turner's belief that he could not steal his own property? The defence of mistake of law) only applies if the defendant honestly believes that he has a right in law to act in the given way. Generalised and non-specific beliefs about what the law might permit are not a defence.
Section 6 "with the intent to permanently deprive the other of it" is sufficiently flexible to include situations where the property is later returned. For example, suppose that B, a keen football fan, has bought a ticket for the next home match. T takes the ticket, watches the match and then returns the ticket to B. In this instance, all that T returns is a piece of paper. Its value as a licence to enter the stadium on a particular day has been permanently lost. Hence, T steals the ticket. Similarly, if T takes a valuable antique but later repents and returns the goods, T has committed the actus reus with the mens rea. The fact that T's conscience forces a change of mind is relevant only for sentencing.
The maximum sentence in the Crown Court is seven years (section 7).
If the act of stealing is already complete before another comes into possession of the goods, this may be handling. For alternative charges involving deceptions, see the deception offences and the Theft Act 1978 which may overlap with s1 Theft. For the theft of motor vehicles with or without violence, see robbery, blackmail and TWOC.
Victoria, Australia
Theft is defined at s.72 of the Crimes Act 1958. The actus reus and mens rea are defined as follows:
Actus reus
Appropriation - defined at s.73(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 as the assumption of any of the owners rights. It does not have be all the owner's rights, as long as at least one right has been assumed(Stein v Henshall). If the owner gave their consent to the appropriation there cannot be an appropriation(Baruday v R). However, if this consent is obtained by deception, this consent is vitiated.
Property - defined at s.71(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 as being both tangible property, including money and intangible property. Information has been held not be property(Oxford v Moss).
Belonging to another - s.73(5) that property belongs to another if that person has ownership, possession, or a proprietary interest in the property. Property can belong to more than one person. s.73(9) & s.73(10) deal with situations where the accused receives property under an obligation or by mistake.
Mens rea
Intention to permanently deprive - defined at s.73(12) as treating property as it belongs to the accused, rather than the owner.
Dishonestly - s.73(2) creates a negative definition of the term 'dishonestly'. The section deems only three circumstances when the accused is deemed to have been acting honestly. These are a belief in a legal claim of right (s.73(2)(a)), a belief that the owner would have consented (s.73(2)(b)), or a belief the owner could not be found(s.73(2)(c))
United States
In the U.S., plenary regulation of theft exists only at the state level, in the sense that most thefts by default will be prosecuted by the state in which the theft occurred. The federal government has criminalized certain narrow categories of theft which directly affect federal agencies or interstate commerce.
Although many U.S. states have retained larceny as the primary offence,[1] some have now adopted theft provisions.
For example, California's Theft Act of 1927 consolidated a variety of common law crimes into theft. The state now distinguishes between two types of theft, grand theft and petty theft.[2] Grand theft generally consists of the theft of something of value over $400 (it can be money, labor or property),[3] while petty theft is the default category for all other thefts.[4] Grand theft is punishable by up to a year in jail or prison, and may be charged (depending upon the circumstances) as a misdemeanor or felony.[5] while petty theft is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine or six months in jail.[6] As for the older crimes of embezzlement, larceny, and stealing, any preexisting references to them now mean theft instead.[7]
In many states, grand theft of a vehicle is charged as "grand theft auto" (see motor vehicle theft for more information).
Repeated offenders who continue to steal may become subject to life imprisonment in certain states. [8]
Canada
Vehicle with broken window.Theft is dealt with by Part 9 of the Criminal Code of Canada which is the part that covers property crime. Section 322 in Part 9 creates a general definition of theft, while other sections such as section 326 (which deals with the theft of gas, electricity and telecommunication services) define special kinds of theft. According to the general definition in section 322 a person steals a thing if he or she takes or converts it fraudulently, without colour of right and with intent to deprive the owner of it, either permanently or temporarily. For the purposes of punishment theft is divided into two separate offences by section 334 depending on the value and nature of the goods stolen. If the thing stolen is worth more than $5000 or is a testamentary instrument the offence is commonly referred to as Theft Over $5000 and is an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment. Where the stolen item is not a testamentary instrument and is not worth more than $5000 it is known as Theft Under $5000 and is a hybrid offence, meaning that it can be treated either as an indictable offence or a less serious summary conviction offence, depending on the choice of the prosecutor. If dealt with as an indictable offence Theft Under $5000 is punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years and, if treated as a summary conviction offence, 6 months imprisonment, a fine of $2000 or both.
West Indies
In the British West Indies, especially Grenada, there have been a spate of large-scale thefts of tons of sand from beaches.[9] Both Grenada and Jamaica are considering increasing fines and jail time for the thefts.[9]
Romania
By the Romanian Penal Code for theft (furt) a person can face a penalty ranging from 1 to 20 years.
Degrees of theft:
A: Theft (1 to 12 years)
When a person steals a thing, or uses a vehicle without permission and no aggravating circumstances applies.
B: Qualified theft (basically 3 to 15 years but there can be special cases when penalty range is from 4 to 18 years and even 10 to 20 years)
Aggravating circumstances - 3 to 15 years: a) by two or more persons together b) by a person who detains a gun or a narcotic substance c) by a masked or disguised person d) against a person who is in impossibility of self defence e) in a public place f) in a public transportation vehicle g) during the night h) during a natural disaster i) by effraction, or by using an original or copyed key j) things belongs to the cultural patrimonium k) stealing official identity papers with intention to make use of them l) stealing official identity badges with intention to make use of them
Aggravating circumstances - 4 to 18 years : a) stealing petrol based products directly from transportation pipes and vehicles or deposits b) stealing components from national electrification, telecommunication, irrigation networks or from any type of navigational system c) stealing a public alertation device d) stealing a public intervention vehicle or device e) when periclitating the safety of public transportation.
Aggravating circumstances - 10 to 20 years : When the consequences are extremely grave and affects some public institutions or the material prejudice is over 200.000 RON (Approximately 80.000 USD).
Notes
1.^ See, e.g., N.Y. Penal law sections 155.00-155.45, found at NY Assembly official web site. Accessed March 17, 2008.
2.^ California Penal Code Section 486. For the entire portion of the Penal Code covering theft, see Sections 484 through 502.9 at Findlaw.
3.^ California Penal Code Section 487.
4.^ California Penal Code Section 488.
5.^ California Penal Code Section 489.
6.^ California Penal Code Section 490.
7.^ California Penal Code Section 490a.
8.^ See Rummel v. Estelle, 445 U.S. 263 (1980) (upholding life sentence for fraudulent use of a credit card to obtain $80 worth of goods or services, passing a forged check in the amount of $28.36, and obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses) and Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003) (upholding sentence of 50 years to life for stealing videotapes on two separate occasions).
9.^ a b AP, "Sand stolen across Caribbean for construction: 'We will lose our beaches' unless crime is taken seriously, one official says", found at MSNBC article. Accessed Octiber 27, 2008.
References
Allen, Michael. Textbook on Criminal Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford. (2005) ISBN 0-19-927918-7.
Criminal Law Revision Committee. 8th Report. Theft and Related Offences. Cmnd. 2977
Griew, Edward. Theft Acts 1968 & 1978, Sweet & Maxwell. ISBN 0-421-19960-1
Ormerod, David. Smith and Hogan Criminal Law, LexisNexis, London. (2005) ISBN 0-406-97730-5
Maniscalco, Fabio, Theft of Art (in Italian), Naples - Massa (2000) ISBN 88-87835-00-4
Smith, J. C. Law of Theft, LexisNexis: London. (1997) ISBN 0-406-89545-7.
See also
Look up pilferage in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Anti-theft system
Asset management (corporate theft prevention)
Confidence trick
Counterfeit
Credit card fraud
Dishonesty
Fence (criminal)
Force-initiation
Fraud
Larceny
Money laundering
Organized crime
Pickpocketing
Secret profit
Skimming (casinos)
White-collar crime
Specific forms of theft and other related offences
Art theft
Bank robbery
Bandwidth theft
Carjacking
Computer crime
Copyright infringement
Data theft
Economic Espionage Act of 1996
Embezzlement
Espionage
Extortion
Identity theft
Kidnapping
Laptop theft
Metal theft
Motor vehicle theft
Organized retail crime
Package pilferage
Plagiarism
Piracy
Receipt of stolen property
Street sign theft
Tax evasion
Theft of services
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
"Stealing" redirects here. For other uses, see Steal (disambiguation).
"Thief" redirects here. For other uses, see Thief (disambiguation).
For other uses, see Theft (disambiguation).
A young waif steals a pair of boots.In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent. The word is also used as an informal shorthand term for some crimes against property, such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, shoplifting, fraud and sometimes criminal conversion. In some jurisdictions, theft is considered to be synonymous with larceny; in others, theft has replaced larceny.
Someone who carries out an act of or makes a career of theft is known as a thief, and the act of theft is known as stealing, thieving, or sometimes filching.
Contents [hide]
1 Elements
2 By region
2.1 Theft in English law
2.2 Victoria, Australia
2.2.1 Actus reus
2.2.2 Mens rea
2.3 United States
2.4 Canada
2.5 West Indies
2.6 Romania
3 Notes
4 References
5 See also
Elements
Criminal law
Part of the common law series
Element (criminal law)
Actus reus · Mens rea
Causation · Concurrence
Scope of criminal liability
Complicity · Corporate · Vicarious
Inchoate offenses
Attempt · Conspiracy · Solicitation
Offence against the person
Assault · Battery
False imprisonment · Kidnapping
Mayhem · Sexual assault
Homicide crimes
Murder · Felony murder
Manslaughter
Negligent homicide
Vehicular homicide
Crimes against property
Arson · Blackmail · Burglary
Embezzlement · Extortion
False pretenses · Larceny
Receiving stolen property
Robbery · Theft
Crimes against justice
Compounding · Misprision
Obstruction · Perjury
Malfeasance in office
Perverting the course of justice
Defenses to liability
Defense of self
Defence of property
Consent · Diminished responsibility
Duress · Entrapment
Ignorantia juris non excusat
Infancy · Insanity
Intoxication defense
Justification · Mistake (of law)
Necessity · Provocation
Other common law areas
Contracts · Evidence · Property
Torts · Wills, trusts and estates
Portals
Criminal justice · Law
v • d • e
Bicycles can occasionally be stolen, even when locked up, by removing the wheel or cutting the lock that holds them.The actus reus of theft is usually defined as an unauthorised taking, keeping or using of another's property which must be accompanied by a mens rea of dishonesty and/or the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.
For example, if X goes to a restaurant and, by mistake, takes Y's scarf instead of her own, she has physically deprived Y of the use of the property (which is the actus reus) but the mistake prevents X from forming the mens rea (i.e. because she believes that she is the owner, she is not dishonest and does not intend to deprive the "owner" of it) so no crime has been committed at this point. But if she realises the mistake when she gets home and could return the scarf to Y, she will steal the scarf if she dishonestly keeps it. Note that there may be civil liability for the torts of trespass to chattels or conversion in either eventuality.
By region
Theft in English law
In English law, theft was codified into a statutory offence in the Theft Act 1968 which defines it as:
"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". (Section 1)
The five elements of the offence are defined sequentially in the Act:
Section 2 dishonesty;
Section 3 "appropriation" which occurs when the defendant wrongfully asserts the rights of ownership over the property. This can be by physical taking, but it will also include many different situations (i.e. a failure to return or omission) in which a person may have lawfully come into possession of the property and then keeps or uses the property in an unauthorised way;
Section 4 "property" includes all personalty, i.e. land itself cannot be stolen but anything severed from the land (with the exception of wild flowers) can be stolen, as can intangible property such as a chose in action; however it seems that the term does not extend to all intangible property, as information (Oxford v. Moss) and trade secrets (R v. Absolom, The Times, 14 September 1983) have been held not to fall within the Section 4 definition of property.
Section 5 "belonging to another" requires a distinction to be made between ownership, possession and control:
ownership is where a person is not legally accountable to anyone else for the use of the property:
possession is where a person is only because it had been physically removed but there were two issues to be decided:
did the car "belong to another"? The garage had a lien i.e. a "proprietary right or interest" in the car as security for the unpaid bill and this gave the garage a better right than the owner to possess the car at the relevant time.
what was the relevance of Turner's belief that he could not steal his own property? The defence of mistake of law) only applies if the defendant honestly believes that he has a right in law to act in the given way. Generalised and non-specific beliefs about what the law might permit are not a defence.
Section 6 "with the intent to permanently deprive the other of it" is sufficiently flexible to include situations where the property is later returned. For example, suppose that B, a keen football fan, has bought a ticket for the next home match. T takes the ticket, watches the match and then returns the ticket to B. In this instance, all that T returns is a piece of paper. Its value as a licence to enter the stadium on a particular day has been permanently lost. Hence, T steals the ticket. Similarly, if T takes a valuable antique but later repents and returns the goods, T has committed the actus reus with the mens rea. The fact that T's conscience forces a change of mind is relevant only for sentencing.
The maximum sentence in the Crown Court is seven years (section 7).
If the act of stealing is already complete before another comes into possession of the goods, this may be handling. For alternative charges involving deceptions, see the deception offences and the Theft Act 1978 which may overlap with s1 Theft. For the theft of motor vehicles with or without violence, see robbery, blackmail and TWOC.
Victoria, Australia
Theft is defined at s.72 of the Crimes Act 1958. The actus reus and mens rea are defined as follows:
Actus reus
Appropriation - defined at s.73(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 as the assumption of any of the owners rights. It does not have be all the owner's rights, as long as at least one right has been assumed(Stein v Henshall). If the owner gave their consent to the appropriation there cannot be an appropriation(Baruday v R). However, if this consent is obtained by deception, this consent is vitiated.
Property - defined at s.71(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 as being both tangible property, including money and intangible property. Information has been held not be property(Oxford v Moss).
Belonging to another - s.73(5) that property belongs to another if that person has ownership, possession, or a proprietary interest in the property. Property can belong to more than one person. s.73(9) & s.73(10) deal with situations where the accused receives property under an obligation or by mistake.
Mens rea
Intention to permanently deprive - defined at s.73(12) as treating property as it belongs to the accused, rather than the owner.
Dishonestly - s.73(2) creates a negative definition of the term 'dishonestly'. The section deems only three circumstances when the accused is deemed to have been acting honestly. These are a belief in a legal claim of right (s.73(2)(a)), a belief that the owner would have consented (s.73(2)(b)), or a belief the owner could not be found(s.73(2)(c))
United States
In the U.S., plenary regulation of theft exists only at the state level, in the sense that most thefts by default will be prosecuted by the state in which the theft occurred. The federal government has criminalized certain narrow categories of theft which directly affect federal agencies or interstate commerce.
Although many U.S. states have retained larceny as the primary offence,[1] some have now adopted theft provisions.
For example, California's Theft Act of 1927 consolidated a variety of common law crimes into theft. The state now distinguishes between two types of theft, grand theft and petty theft.[2] Grand theft generally consists of the theft of something of value over $400 (it can be money, labor or property),[3] while petty theft is the default category for all other thefts.[4] Grand theft is punishable by up to a year in jail or prison, and may be charged (depending upon the circumstances) as a misdemeanor or felony.[5] while petty theft is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine or six months in jail.[6] As for the older crimes of embezzlement, larceny, and stealing, any preexisting references to them now mean theft instead.[7]
In many states, grand theft of a vehicle is charged as "grand theft auto" (see motor vehicle theft for more information).
Repeated offenders who continue to steal may become subject to life imprisonment in certain states. [8]
Canada
Vehicle with broken window.Theft is dealt with by Part 9 of the Criminal Code of Canada which is the part that covers property crime. Section 322 in Part 9 creates a general definition of theft, while other sections such as section 326 (which deals with the theft of gas, electricity and telecommunication services) define special kinds of theft. According to the general definition in section 322 a person steals a thing if he or she takes or converts it fraudulently, without colour of right and with intent to deprive the owner of it, either permanently or temporarily. For the purposes of punishment theft is divided into two separate offences by section 334 depending on the value and nature of the goods stolen. If the thing stolen is worth more than $5000 or is a testamentary instrument the offence is commonly referred to as Theft Over $5000 and is an indictable offence with a maximum punishment of 10 years imprisonment. Where the stolen item is not a testamentary instrument and is not worth more than $5000 it is known as Theft Under $5000 and is a hybrid offence, meaning that it can be treated either as an indictable offence or a less serious summary conviction offence, depending on the choice of the prosecutor. If dealt with as an indictable offence Theft Under $5000 is punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years and, if treated as a summary conviction offence, 6 months imprisonment, a fine of $2000 or both.
West Indies
In the British West Indies, especially Grenada, there have been a spate of large-scale thefts of tons of sand from beaches.[9] Both Grenada and Jamaica are considering increasing fines and jail time for the thefts.[9]
Romania
By the Romanian Penal Code for theft (furt) a person can face a penalty ranging from 1 to 20 years.
Degrees of theft:
A: Theft (1 to 12 years)
When a person steals a thing, or uses a vehicle without permission and no aggravating circumstances applies.
B: Qualified theft (basically 3 to 15 years but there can be special cases when penalty range is from 4 to 18 years and even 10 to 20 years)
Aggravating circumstances - 3 to 15 years: a) by two or more persons together b) by a person who detains a gun or a narcotic substance c) by a masked or disguised person d) against a person who is in impossibility of self defence e) in a public place f) in a public transportation vehicle g) during the night h) during a natural disaster i) by effraction, or by using an original or copyed key j) things belongs to the cultural patrimonium k) stealing official identity papers with intention to make use of them l) stealing official identity badges with intention to make use of them
Aggravating circumstances - 4 to 18 years : a) stealing petrol based products directly from transportation pipes and vehicles or deposits b) stealing components from national electrification, telecommunication, irrigation networks or from any type of navigational system c) stealing a public alertation device d) stealing a public intervention vehicle or device e) when periclitating the safety of public transportation.
Aggravating circumstances - 10 to 20 years : When the consequences are extremely grave and affects some public institutions or the material prejudice is over 200.000 RON (Approximately 80.000 USD).
Notes
1.^ See, e.g., N.Y. Penal law sections 155.00-155.45, found at NY Assembly official web site. Accessed March 17, 2008.
2.^ California Penal Code Section 486. For the entire portion of the Penal Code covering theft, see Sections 484 through 502.9 at Findlaw.
3.^ California Penal Code Section 487.
4.^ California Penal Code Section 488.
5.^ California Penal Code Section 489.
6.^ California Penal Code Section 490.
7.^ California Penal Code Section 490a.
8.^ See Rummel v. Estelle, 445 U.S. 263 (1980) (upholding life sentence for fraudulent use of a credit card to obtain $80 worth of goods or services, passing a forged check in the amount of $28.36, and obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses) and Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (2003) (upholding sentence of 50 years to life for stealing videotapes on two separate occasions).
9.^ a b AP, "Sand stolen across Caribbean for construction: 'We will lose our beaches' unless crime is taken seriously, one official says", found at MSNBC article. Accessed Octiber 27, 2008.
References
Allen, Michael. Textbook on Criminal Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford. (2005) ISBN 0-19-927918-7.
Criminal Law Revision Committee. 8th Report. Theft and Related Offences. Cmnd. 2977
Griew, Edward. Theft Acts 1968 & 1978, Sweet & Maxwell. ISBN 0-421-19960-1
Ormerod, David. Smith and Hogan Criminal Law, LexisNexis, London. (2005) ISBN 0-406-97730-5
Maniscalco, Fabio, Theft of Art (in Italian), Naples - Massa (2000) ISBN 88-87835-00-4
Smith, J. C. Law of Theft, LexisNexis: London. (1997) ISBN 0-406-89545-7.
See also
Look up pilferage in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Anti-theft system
Asset management (corporate theft prevention)
Confidence trick
Counterfeit
Credit card fraud
Dishonesty
Fence (criminal)
Force-initiation
Fraud
Larceny
Money laundering
Organized crime
Pickpocketing
Secret profit
Skimming (casinos)
White-collar crime
Specific forms of theft and other related offences
Art theft
Bank robbery
Bandwidth theft
Carjacking
Computer crime
Copyright infringement
Data theft
Economic Espionage Act of 1996
Embezzlement
Espionage
Extortion
Identity theft
Kidnapping
Laptop theft
Metal theft
Motor vehicle theft
Organized retail crime
Package pilferage
Plagiarism
Piracy
Receipt of stolen property
Street sign theft
Tax evasion
Theft of services
Advertising this blog
Since I like this concept I advertised the blog on: http://mailartprojects.blogspot.com/ since I consider this a wonderful communication project. We will see if others pick on to this and the number of postings grow. Maybe add a kind of statistics to it. That would work
22 August 2010
Great Idea
Well, I must say it is quite an idea to make a blog like this. As an IUOMA member I've tried to log in and that just works. What I have to say? Well, I actually say a lot on the blogs I have myself and also document all the things I say. Working as an artists using 'communication' as the main medium makes it a very interestingh playfield the last years.
21 August 2010
Blues for the penitentiary
Well here I am, illegally blogging on the weekend.
It's Saturday and I have nothing better to do than write this down. I don't even have anything important, stupid, ridiculous, embarrassing or relevant to say. I could be reading the paper and, in fact, after I've done this, I'm going to make a coffee and sit down and read the paper. But first, I have to write this.
Why? I don't HAVE to write this but I HAVE to write this. Why? What's the point? There is no point, other than it's Saturday and, according to all blog law, no one writes on the weekend.
But, don't writer's write? And, if I have a blog - albeit a blog that allows anyone to use it - doesn't that count me as a writer? Even a writer with atrocious grammar?
So, writer's write; regardless of the day.
So I have written.
So it has come to pass.
I'm a writer.
Booya.
It's Saturday and I have nothing better to do than write this down. I don't even have anything important, stupid, ridiculous, embarrassing or relevant to say. I could be reading the paper and, in fact, after I've done this, I'm going to make a coffee and sit down and read the paper. But first, I have to write this.
Why? I don't HAVE to write this but I HAVE to write this. Why? What's the point? There is no point, other than it's Saturday and, according to all blog law, no one writes on the weekend.
But, don't writer's write? And, if I have a blog - albeit a blog that allows anyone to use it - doesn't that count me as a writer? Even a writer with atrocious grammar?
So, writer's write; regardless of the day.
So I have written.
So it has come to pass.
I'm a writer.
Booya.
20 August 2010
How to cultivate squatter's rights.
You know something? I really hope that every teenager that's on Twitter right now, saves all their Tweets to read back to themselves when they're 40.
I mean, I'm over forty and on Twitter but I'm trying to be a bit careful with what I write. I'm not just blithely putting up stupid platitudes that mean nothing, like: If she doesn't love you, she's not worth it and if you don't love her, you're not worth it. Or: the only thng tht mttrs is bng rl!
Stupid fucking shit that becomes 'Top Tweets' and you just want to kill yourself. I REALLY hope all the Bieber fanatics keep their abysmal tweets and read them back to themselves when they're 20. They'll want to die.
It's not that I'm against all this shit. And it isn't as though I didn't think or say the same sort of dumb, stupid shit when I was 13. It's just that we never had a major international forum to post our crap on. And thank Fucking God for that!
Remember kids; what you put out now, WILL come back to bite you on the arse. It's the circle of life Simba.
I mean, I'm over forty and on Twitter but I'm trying to be a bit careful with what I write. I'm not just blithely putting up stupid platitudes that mean nothing, like: If she doesn't love you, she's not worth it and if you don't love her, you're not worth it. Or: the only thng tht mttrs is bng rl!
Stupid fucking shit that becomes 'Top Tweets' and you just want to kill yourself. I REALLY hope all the Bieber fanatics keep their abysmal tweets and read them back to themselves when they're 20. They'll want to die.
It's not that I'm against all this shit. And it isn't as though I didn't think or say the same sort of dumb, stupid shit when I was 13. It's just that we never had a major international forum to post our crap on. And thank Fucking God for that!
Remember kids; what you put out now, WILL come back to bite you on the arse. It's the circle of life Simba.
16 August 2010
Civil war to kill the Nazis
I watched Mad Men for the first time last night. And I'm very sorry to say that I was disappointed.
I'll keep watching it, because my wife loves it. And sure it looks good and the writing is crisp and honest but, men like Don Draper piss me off.
I don't think they're cool. I don't think they're right. I don't think they're men to be idolized. Men like Don Draper are to be pitied and maybe that's the point. Maybe I'm supposed to feel this way. In which case - bravo Mad Men, bravo.
I'll warm to it eventually. How can I not when the acting is so good? When the scripts are spot on? When the whole vibe of the show is so correct? It doesn't mean I'll ever respect the character Don Draper.
But maybe I can admire what John Hamm brings to him.
I'll keep watching it, because my wife loves it. And sure it looks good and the writing is crisp and honest but, men like Don Draper piss me off.
I don't think they're cool. I don't think they're right. I don't think they're men to be idolized. Men like Don Draper are to be pitied and maybe that's the point. Maybe I'm supposed to feel this way. In which case - bravo Mad Men, bravo.
I'll warm to it eventually. How can I not when the acting is so good? When the scripts are spot on? When the whole vibe of the show is so correct? It doesn't mean I'll ever respect the character Don Draper.
But maybe I can admire what John Hamm brings to him.
13 August 2010
Rape porn
I don't have many heroes. I remember Jello Biafra saying once that he always felt a cynical with his answer, whenever he was asked who his heroes were. And I agree. Because most people's heroes are either too bloody obvious, or they haven't really done anything worthwhile to be called a hero. Lady Gaga? Seriously?
But I think it's high time we had a major re-examination of one of my true heroes. Someone that has done many somethings. Someone who has had courage of her convictions. Someone who is regularly (to this day) belittled for not knowing what she's been talking about. Someone who has been proved to be way ahead of her time.
Let's hear it for Sinead O'Connor.
Whenever the name is mentioned, you can bet two things come to mind: Nothing compares 2 u and the infamous Pope incident. Well, she's been proven right on both counts. Prince is still a great songwriter to cover and the Catholic Church and the Pope in general, needed to be told what they already knew. Fight the real power. The power that intimidates, rather than helps. The power that ignores, rather than sees. The power that believes in itself first and everyone else second. Sinead O'Connor knew the truth. And she was prepared - in front of millions - to speak that truth and damn the consequences.
And what consequences. Nary a voice of agreement. Not in the public arena anyway. I remember hearing about this and thinking, 'yeah, good on you. A pop star with real guts for a change.' But all she got was a bollocking. And it affected her. How could it not? But who was the bollocking from? Generally white, old male pop stars, who liked to think they were brave but didn't have half the balls they were born with.
I still remember, to this day, reading an interview with Roger Waters where he talked about it. And I remember his quote, 'you can't go round with your head up your arse, then pull it out every so often and say, I think that's wrong, or I think that's wrong.' And I thought, and still think, Roger Waters shouldn't really be someone to go around saying someone has their head up their arse. For a man as pretentious as Roger Waters to declare someone has their head up their arse, without a trace of irony; you know you must be doing the right thing.
It's time to re-examine the legacy of Sinead O'Connor. She deserves the pedestal more than anyone.
But I think it's high time we had a major re-examination of one of my true heroes. Someone that has done many somethings. Someone who has had courage of her convictions. Someone who is regularly (to this day) belittled for not knowing what she's been talking about. Someone who has been proved to be way ahead of her time.
Let's hear it for Sinead O'Connor.
Whenever the name is mentioned, you can bet two things come to mind: Nothing compares 2 u and the infamous Pope incident. Well, she's been proven right on both counts. Prince is still a great songwriter to cover and the Catholic Church and the Pope in general, needed to be told what they already knew. Fight the real power. The power that intimidates, rather than helps. The power that ignores, rather than sees. The power that believes in itself first and everyone else second. Sinead O'Connor knew the truth. And she was prepared - in front of millions - to speak that truth and damn the consequences.
And what consequences. Nary a voice of agreement. Not in the public arena anyway. I remember hearing about this and thinking, 'yeah, good on you. A pop star with real guts for a change.' But all she got was a bollocking. And it affected her. How could it not? But who was the bollocking from? Generally white, old male pop stars, who liked to think they were brave but didn't have half the balls they were born with.
I still remember, to this day, reading an interview with Roger Waters where he talked about it. And I remember his quote, 'you can't go round with your head up your arse, then pull it out every so often and say, I think that's wrong, or I think that's wrong.' And I thought, and still think, Roger Waters shouldn't really be someone to go around saying someone has their head up their arse. For a man as pretentious as Roger Waters to declare someone has their head up their arse, without a trace of irony; you know you must be doing the right thing.
It's time to re-examine the legacy of Sinead O'Connor. She deserves the pedestal more than anyone.
Importing cocaine for fun and profit
You know what I find offensive? The term 'mouth breather.'
I'm a mouth breather.
Well, not during the day but certainly at night. I broke my nose when I was young and now can't seem to get enough air into the old lungs to fall asleep. So I have to breathe through my mouth. Also, ask any runner if they're a mouth breather when they're running and of course they'll say yes. You can't not be.
Yet 'mouth breather' is used pejoratively so many times. I think to conjure up an inbred hick or something. I'm not an inbred. I might be a hick but, is that so bad?
Stand up and be proud mouth breathers! You've nothing to lose but your smelly breath.
I'm a mouth breather.
Well, not during the day but certainly at night. I broke my nose when I was young and now can't seem to get enough air into the old lungs to fall asleep. So I have to breathe through my mouth. Also, ask any runner if they're a mouth breather when they're running and of course they'll say yes. You can't not be.
Yet 'mouth breather' is used pejoratively so many times. I think to conjure up an inbred hick or something. I'm not an inbred. I might be a hick but, is that so bad?
Stand up and be proud mouth breathers! You've nothing to lose but your smelly breath.
12 August 2010
Build your own pipe bomb
Seriously, if there is a better show on TV than Cougar Town - I don't want to know about it. It never fails to have me and the wife in stiches; so much so that, whenever an ad for Cougar Town comes on, it's our duty to high five each other.
You have to watch it. Even if you're not a Courtney Arquette fan. Or is it still Courtney Cox? I can't remember. Anyway, watch Cougar Town and thank me later.
You have to watch it. Even if you're not a Courtney Arquette fan. Or is it still Courtney Cox? I can't remember. Anyway, watch Cougar Town and thank me later.
11 August 2010
It's pretty self explanatory
really. Steal this blog. Take it over. Publish want you want. Hell, you can even change the template and name if you want. I can't stop you.
Why am I doing this, when you can create your own blog anyway? Good question. Sorry, I don't have an answer. Fame maybe? I just thought, sometimes you have something that you want to post that won't fit on your own blog, or maybe you want to post something anonymously. This is how you can do it.
Let's just see if anything happens.
Why am I doing this, when you can create your own blog anyway? Good question. Sorry, I don't have an answer. Fame maybe? I just thought, sometimes you have something that you want to post that won't fit on your own blog, or maybe you want to post something anonymously. This is how you can do it.
Let's just see if anything happens.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)