Although there are exceptions to a perfect political order, one which would eliminate the conditions in which theft would be neccessary to alleviate the thief’s experience of lower/middle class poverty, drug-addiction, and other catalysts which push him to steal, the efforts to achieve such a political state are not excused because of these exceptions. The argument- “there will always be theft, so the elimination of private property is not expedient,” is nonsense.
It is not the individual thief who is at fault here, it is the authority of the state in its failure to eliminate the conditions which cause theft in general, while at the same time pretending that because exceptions will always exist, efforts to change those conditions are futile.
If you do not support the efforts to establish the neccessary communal state required to abolish the activity of theft, by eliminating private property, you become irrelevent. Your complaint- “hey…that bastard stole my stuff!”- is no more warranted than the thief’s claim that his theft is justified, since both your ownership of the items stolen, and the thief’s lack of material equality to the one from which he stole, are synonomous in the face of the politics which originate those conditions.
My advice to you, at this point, as I am sure you will take no such action in what is neccessary to change the circumstances which generate the social problems which lead to theft, is to become a thief yourself. By doing so you can do your part in instigating and revealing to the state its own dilemma, you will ‘fight fire with fire.’ It is by no means the ideal way to change such circumstances, but the only alternative is to remain part of the problem, and use the very same civil system to compensate you that is creating the dilemma in the first place.
This is what I call a secondary means toward reform- it is essentially the only effort, outside of a organized and sudden seizure of power which would be neccessary to gain total control of the political conditions pertaining therein, that can assist in the disintegration of the problem at hand- private ownership.
I laugh to myself when I see everyone’s reply “kill the bastard,” “find that mothafocka and wup his ass,” etc., etc., while at the same time, had the roles been reversed, each one of you would become thieves yourself.
I do feel, however, that you are excused of the title ‘hipocrit’ because of your ignorance. Yet at the same time, that is no excuse. You are, I’m affraid, an expendible cog at this point.
Which came first, the thief or the lock?
Think about it.
Personally, I have had my possessions stolen several times throughout my life, and I have also stolen things myself. At this very moment I am engaged in a war with the contractor who has refused to pay me the money owed, and has also stolen my tools. I cannot take legal action because the system, as I have explained thoroughly elsewhere, has failed in upholding justice. So, I handle it myself by terrorizing the contractor. At this point my case has developed and I now have two charges pressed against me- ‘communicating a death threat’ and ‘harrasment.’ There are warrants out for my arrest as we speak. In addition to the contractors initial mistake, he has now commited another which will cost him dearly. I have informed the police department that if I am found, and the warrants served, the contractor will suffer threefold, and that the justice system will be responsible for it. The police know that they cannot incarcerate me forever, and that when I get out of jail, if I am indeed captured, I will resume my efforts against the contractor. The system, if I may say, is now in a catch 22 of its own making. 
[/size]
