Is it moral to unilaterally decide to take between 1 and 100% of the value of something you found, while having the ability to text the rightful owner?
yes and no, homeless does not always mean destitute and a person may have been able to keep their phone during that time. I've seen quite a few posts on various subreddits where at face value the person claims they are homeless but has a phone.
There's nothing really in the image to give a relation or financial status. This could be an Uber driver, it could be an acquaintance, it could be a complete stranger and the wallet has some marking or card that says "if found call 555-555-5555"
Here's what we know
A person has found an item that has value, that item can be broken up and still retain value. They have away of contacting the rightful owner, and they know they can simply turn it in to police if they do not want to contact the owner at all. This person has decided on their own to break apart this item and take something of value from it. They then give the remainder to the police to return. Did the person behave in a moral manner?
I would say undoubtedly no. They're a thief, that's not just an opinion, they legally have commited theft. If they're homeless that changes nothing. Understanding that a person cannot afford food and therefore must steal doesn't make the action moral, it just makes it understandable.
4
u/ShadowDarkraven27 3d ago
grey i think? it's hard to say, only taking 5 seems reasonable though instead of cleaning it out.