Taking good balls from range buckets

[Ernest Jones]

I don't really care that people take golf balls from the range but I am amazed at the level of justification and denial that exists within a community that is supposed to be about being a gentleman and holding ones self accountable to playing by the rules of golf.

My sentiments exactly. Here was my post in this threads offshoot:

It's pretty rare that I drink alcohol while golfing. I have though, both smuggled in beer/whiskey or purchased from the cart girl. I have no real qualms about drinking "outside beverages"  on the course. However, contrary to some of the dingbats posting in the rangeball thread I have no problem admitting that when I do sneak liquor onto the course I am clearly in the wrong.

I also don't really give a rats ass if someone snags a pretty little pearl from the range bucket, just don't try to justify it as being right.

I couldn't really care less if @pumaAttack , @Strandly or whoever else wants steal the odd rangeball. Don't give a rats ass, in the larger context of good and evil, who cares...but be a man about it and shout it proudly from the mountain top, "I AM GONNA STEAL THIS HERE RANGEBALL 'CUZ THAT'S HOW I ROLL!"

All this BS justification is pathetic. Just steal it already would ya? And stop trying to convince everyone that you're actually liberating the ball, or helping the range out or some other horseshit. lol.

[mdl]

I don't really care that people take golf balls from the range but I am amazed at the level of justification and denial that exists within a community that encourages us to act as a gentleman and hold ourselves accountable to playing by the rules of golf.

And I'm a little surprised at the level of righteous indignation that exists in this community around issues that clearly don't justify it.  There's a clear set of norms, where everyone agrees it's okay as long as the ball is 100% clearly not in play, around taking lost golf balls on a golf course.  It seems unsurprising and not clearly right or wrong that many people (including many who themselves work at golf courses) think that these norms extend onto the range of the course.

[newtogolf]

this is surprising.  i believe @BubblesUSMC works at a golf course.

Each golf course owner may have different policies.  The owners I spoke to operate a range only (no associated golf course).

[tefunk]

this is surprising.  i believe @BubblesUSMC works at a golf course.

If one has permission, it's not theft. If one does not have permission, it is theft. How are people continuing to miss the logic?

[Ernest Jones]

If one has permission, it's not theft. If one does not have permission, it is theft.

How are people continuing to miss the logic?

Ta da!

[newtogolf]

And I'm a little surprised at the level of righteous indignation that exists in this community around issues that clearly don't justify it.  There's a clear set of norms, where everyone agrees it's okay as long as the ball is 100% clearly not in play, around taking lost golf balls on a golf course.  It seems unsurprising and not clearly right or wrong that many people (including many who themselves work at golf courses) think that these norms extend onto the range of the course.

I don't know @mdl my parents taught me that taking something that doesn't belong to me and isn't offered to me is wrong.  If you consider that "righteous indignation" we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

[RGoosen]

Ok so I just read Puma's responses and 1) he is wrong and his "precedence" means nothing bc you can find one court's response in the world doing a google search for basically anything you are claiming. Some courts get it wrong or people can easily cherry pick quotes that appear to support their positions but do not if read in its entirely. 2) I don't care if he believes I'm an attorney or not and I'm not going to go through an entire legal analysis quoting cases from 1650 England or some 1810 SCOTUS case because it's not worth my time.

I agree. Courts get it a** backwards all the time. What % of people honestly believes the uncoordinated women in McDonald's drive through deserves millions @ McDonald's expense b/c SHE spills her own coffee on herself???? Or how bought the family that was away on vacation only to find a robber "stuck in their garage" when they arrived home. The thief sues the family he was trying to rob b/c he had no way out. And somehow the robber won!!! So I don't know how the trespassers got off free in Canada. Probably by the same backwards logic as the two cases I mentioned above.

[mdl]

I don't know @mdl my parents taught me that taking something that doesn't belong to me and isn't offered to me is wrong.  If you consider that "righteous indignation" we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

But that's the point.  There's a whole set of norms on the golf course about how it's okay to take balls that don't belong to you and aren't offered to you as long as you're sure they're not in play.  There's some chance that the player is planning on coming back after the round when he can take the time without slowing play to look for some of his lost balls.  But no one thinks that it's wrong to pick up a ball you notice when searching for your own that is 100% obviously a lost ball.

Regardless of what the law says in each state, I find it surprising that so many people think it's so obviously morally wrong to extend this norm onto the range that it engenders somewhat patronizing dismissal.

I will note that I saw that Erik, whom I've met and respect, agrees with you.  This is just to say that I'm not calling names or anything here.  I respect people on your side of the argument.  I'm just surprised at the level of righteousness being used on his and your side.  It seems a much grayer area than some on your side want to admit given the norms around lost balls on the course.

[tefunk]

I agree. Courts get it a** backwards all the time.

And considering it's petty theft, no one is going to waste their resources appealing... Unless they're a multi-millionaire who's willing to fight it just based on principle.

[Ernest Jones]

But that's the point.  There's a whole set of norms on the golf course about how it's okay to take balls that don't belong to you and aren't offered to you as long as you're sure they're not in play.  There's some chance that the player is planning on coming back after the round when he can take the time without slowing play to look for some of his lost balls.  But no one thinks that it's wrong to pick up a ball you notice when searching for your own that is 100% obviously a lost ball.

Regardless of what the law says in each state, I find it surprising that so many people think it's so obviously morally wrong to extend this norm onto the range that it engenders somewhat patronizing dismissal.

I will note that I saw that Erik, whom I've met and respect, agrees with you.  This is just to say that I'm not calling names or anything here.  I respect people on your side of the argument.  I'm just surprised at the level of righteousness being used on his and your side.  It seems a much grayer area than some on your side want to admit given the norms around lost balls on the course.

What do the conventions around lost/found balls on the course have to do with stealing a ball out of the range bucket? I seriously don't get it the connection.

If I find a quarter on the sidewalk it's finders keepers. But if I snatch a quarter out of someone's tip jar it's stealing, regardless of how it got into the tip jar in the first place. Let's say I'm sitting in a restaurant and I see the waitress bend down to pick up a quarter she finds lying on the floor, she then tosses it into the tip jar. Am I now within my rights to go take it out of her tip jar???

[tefunk]

I will note that I saw that Erik, whom I've met and respect, agrees with you.  This is just to say that I'm not calling names or anything here.  I respect people on your side of the argument.  I'm just surprised at the level of righteousness being used on his and your side.  It seems a much grayer area than some on your side want to admit given the norms around lost balls on the course.

But it's not a gray area. By definition, it's theft. There's no way around it. It's petty theft, so it's not a huge deal. Much worse things a person can do. But it is still theft. I'm just surprised as others, that people are trying to find a way to argue it's not theft. If people said "hey, yea technically I guess it is theft. But it's only $1 or $2, so I don't feel too bad about it".... Then OK.

[Lihu]

Or how bought the family that was away on vacation only to find a robber "stuck in their garage" when they arrived home. The thief sues the family he was trying to rob b/c he had no way out. And somehow the robber won!!!

Could be an urban legend that he sued and won. . .

http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.html

Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Penn., was exiting a house he finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up because the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation, so Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. Dickson sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of half a million dollars and change. Fabricated.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-01-30-tort-reform_x.htm

Bad lawyering

Even true stories often prove not to be examples of bad law, but bad lawyering. Take the list of the "wackiest consumer warnings," released this month by the Michigan Lawsuit Abuse Watch to show the need for reform. Included are such things as a warning on a toilet brush that reads, "Do Not Use for Personal Hygiene" or a sign on a scooter that reads, "This product moves when used." These are not fabrications, but none of these warnings make any more legal sense than they do practical sense. No company has to warn consumers not to use a toilet brush on their teeth or hair.

Legal legends can be irresistible, even for the most respected newspapers, magazines and networks.

U.S. News & World Reportowner Mort Zuckerman used the story of the soft drink lady in Pennsylvania in an article denouncing lawsuit abuse. He is not alone. The tale of Amber Carlson and her soda has appeared in countless television and print sources. Zuckerman also cited the case of a woman who knocked her teeth out while sneaking through a nightclub's restroom window to avoid paying a $3.50 cover charge — and then won $12,000 from a jury. It is also false.

Both stories have been attributed to the Stella Awards, an annual listing of loony lawsuits. But the Stella Web site points out that they both are complete fabrications. Yet they continue to appear in print and on the Internet.

Other examples of fabricated "true cases of lawsuit abuse":

• Kathleen Robertson of Austin received $780,000 from a jury after she tripped over her own son in a furniture store.

• Carl Truman, a 19-year-old in Los Angeles, was awarded more than $74,000 when his hand was run over by a neighbor. The neighbor did not see Truman, who was in the process of stealing his hubcaps.

• Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pa., was given a $500,000 award after he was inadvertently trapped in the garage of a house that he was burglarizing.

• A Mr. Grazinski won more than $1,750,000 and a new Winnebago after he put his new motor home on cruise control at 70 mph and then went into the back to fix himself some coffee — only to crash on the highway.

[turtleback]

And I'm a little surprised at the level of righteous indignation that exists in this community around issues that clearly don't justify it.  There's a clear set of norms, where everyone agrees it's okay as long as the ball is 100% clearly not in play, around taking lost golf balls on a golf course.  It seems unsurprising and not clearly right or wrong that many people (including many who themselves work at golf courses) think that these norms extend onto the range of the course.

Not everyone.  I never pick up balls on the course.  At any given moment you are free to check my bag and all you will find are the TopFlite gamers I bought (plus a couple of souvenir balls I bought at the 2008 US Open).

Besides, there is a huge difference between a ball on the course that appears to have been abandoned and one in a range bucket, so I think there is every basis for treating the 2 situations differently, though I personally do not.

What I really fail to understand is why people who can afford to play the game enough to even practice at a range feel the need to take property that isn't theirs.  What is the great attraction that some not only do it but seem prepared to defend to the death their virtue in doing so (not necessarily you, @mdl)?  It just seems like a completely half-assed approach to getting golf balls.

Would people take the same position over a lost club?  Or a club left by someone at a range?  My guess is that they wouldn't with the value of the club being the difference.  How small must the value of something be in order to make it stealable?

[newtogolf]

But that's the point.  There's a whole set of norms on the golf course about how it's okay to take balls that don't belong to you and aren't offered to you as long as you're sure they're not in play.  There's some chance that the player is planning on coming back after the round when he can take the time without slowing play to look for some of his lost balls.  But no one thinks that it's wrong to pick up a ball you notice when searching for your own that is 100% obviously a lost ball.

Regardless of what the law says in each state, I find it surprising that so many people think it's so obviously morally wrong to extend this norm onto the range that it engenders somewhat patronizing dismissal.

I will note that I saw that Erik, whom I've met and respect, agrees with you.  This is just to say that I'm not calling names or anything here.  I respect people on your side of the argument.  I'm just surprised at the level of righteousness being used on his and your side.  It seems a much grayer area than some on your side want to admit given the norms around lost balls on the course.

I don't pick up golf balls on the course either, not because I'm a morally superior person but because I have no idea if the ball is still in play and I purchase plenty of golf balls for myself and don't care to pick up random balls on the course.

I'm not trying to make a straw man argument here or insinuate that you would do this, but there are many who would pocket a club or head cover they found left behind using much of the same rationalizations that we're seeing used here to justify taking golf balls.

I just got back from the range where I watched a young guy (18-21) run out to one side of the golf range that was empty and fill a bucket with balls.  He walked back to his stall and acted like he did nothing wrong.  In his mind he probably thinks he saved the range time by not having to pick up the balls.

[Strandly]

And I'm a little surprised at the level of righteous indignation that exists in this community around issues that clearly don't justify it.

Welcome to Internet 101, you must be new here.

[imsys0042]

And I'm a little surprised at the level of righteous indignation that exists in this community around issues that clearly don't justify it.

Steer clear of the rules forum....  :)

[RGoosen]

Steer clear of the rules forum....  :)

Amen!!!

[RGoosen]

Could be an urban legend that he sued and won. . . [URL=http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.html]http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.html[/URL] [URL=http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-01-30-tort-reform_x.htm]http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2005-01-30-tort-reform_x.htm[/URL]

Thanks for the link. I heard that 10-20 yrs ago and never heard anything else about it. The uncoordinated lady that spilled coffee on herself still cheated McDonald's out of millions. I'm sure she and her lawyer donated all the settlement to charity knowing they didn't deserve a penny. Back of topic: Let's discuss "Balls"