Death Wish Meets GPS: iPhone Theft Victims Confronting Perps 664
theodp (442580) writes "Thankfully, no one's gone full-Charles-Bronson yet, but the NY Times reports that victims of smartphone theft are using GPS to take the law into their own hands, paying visits to thieves' homes and demanding the return of their stolen phones. "The emergence of this kind of do-it-yourself justice," writes Ian Lovett, "has stirred worries among law enforcement officials that people are putting themselves in danger, taking disproportionate risks for the sake of an easily replaced item." And while hitting "Find My iPhone" can take you to a thief's doorstep, LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith urges resisting the impulse to do so. "It's just a phone," he said. "it's not worth losing your life over. Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.""
frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
Police are scum. From personal experience as a victim of more than one instance of theft.
They're doing what they're supposed to (Score:5, Informative)
Re:They're doing what they're supposed to (Score:4, Insightful)
"To Protect Our Asses by Shooting Yours First"
Re:They're doing what they're supposed to (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately that sign on their car door "To serve and protect", they serve and protect the state. Getting back your iPhone does little to serve and protect the state.
I don't like making generalized statements, however, and shame on me if the description doesn't fit, I'm about to do so. And I don't mean to even criticize the Police in general, because among their ranks are everyday heros and legitimate true, ready to lay down their lives, heros. But to make an observation that I'm sure others have noticed, that even though police
have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have
it seems at times the choices that the individual police officers we hear about are neither motivated by duty to protect the public nor the state, but themselves first and foremost. Speaking as a coward, fear of injury/death and self-preservation are instincts that are not easily overcome, but members of various US Special Forces and Military, firefighters and deep water and swift water rescue teams, perhaps out of bravado (but so what?), seem to have little trouble doing so. What is it about police duty that makes them less heroically suicidal than those that choose these other careers, when one should expect the vocation to attract the very brave and incorruptable, and those as close to real "superheros" as we can get, like the other vocations I mentioned?
For those civilians that carry weapons for self-defense, no one should have to remind you that the origin of your right to do so was originally one of selflessness, i.e. to protect your defenseless neighbors at risk to your own life or property, either from raiding parties, foreign enemies, crime, or the government. I also would like to emphatically applaud the unarmed bystanders that bravely risked their lives to save a Memphis Police officer today. [kentucky.com] That is amazing to me... because I just know I would have been running away from obvious danger, and not towards it, as fast as my feet could carry me. And I would not be proud of myself for surviving.
FWIW, material items are definately not worth even risking injury over, let alone risking life. But another life, or multiple lives is worth that risk, and we know this because we have a word for people like that and you probably noticed me using it a lot, and I do because I am facinated by... our heros.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location.
As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Most cities are far more interested in making sure the professional sport league has the latest and greatest stadium so they won't move to a city that would. So, blame the city councils that deny adequate funding to city services, not the people who have to decide between catching the perps from a drive-by shooting versus some guy who lost his cellphone.
Re: frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
bonus (Score:5, Informative)
Except that the guy who "only stole an iPhone" probably did a lot more. When cops do investigat such things, they also tend to find further crime such as:
* troves of stolen goods
* stolen/duplicated credit cards
* drugs
* links to other criminals and/or organized crime
Re:bonus (Score:5, Informative)
If that were the case then wouldn't it be a *good* thing? It should be really easy to get a warrant to search the current location of a stolen cell phone, so they just got some more serious offenders handed to them on a silver platter.
Re: (Score:3)
If you have a good tracking app, the results from that should be enough to get a warrant. Unless they have an expensive lawyer, it's unlikely to get thrown out too. They can usually get such warrants in under an hour as well.
Re: (Score:3)
How did you get that location? Did you break any laws to get it? How does the cop know? Is there a chain of custody for that information? Are they indemnified if they act on your info, which turns out to be wrong because your iPhone's GPS went on the fritz?
You have to accept that we dont live in a simple world. It's "simple" to go down and get your phone, its a lot more complicated to get a judge to agree that the info you have is worth A) his time and B) a warrant.
Re: frosty piss (Score:5, Interesting)
My wife had her purse stolen last year by a student. We sat down in her principal's office, located it, and the police officer recognized the address immediately. 20 minutes later. The perp was telling the office where the rest of the contents of the purse had been dumped. In this case, the alternative was to go back to jail, which the kids did anyways. Parole violation.
But the office let slip that the department already knew how to locate iPhones even without the owner's knowledge. Perhaps we could hold the trial on chain of evidence right after the drug case where the police tracked everyone by their phones. Though in hindsight the police do make a habit of having it both ways.
Re: frosty piss (Score:5, Interesting)
Police in the US often have very, very local funding sources: Asset seizures and fines go into the police budget. That creates a strong incentive to prosecute crimes that are cheap to catch and lucrative in income - with speeding being at the very top of that. Low- and mid-level drugs crime is also popular because it often leads to vehicle and property seizures.
Re:Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it really comes down to risk and reward. Not funding. Cops are widely believed (there are some naysayers) to get promotions and plumb assignments based on ticket revenue. Recovering stolen items involves getting a warrant - they can't just go to the house - and then risking being shot at or accused of racism. What's the up-side?
Better law enforcement would come from using the same tools those capitalists you revile used to get the riches you covet... merit rewards rather than union protection.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
it really comes down to funding. Cops have limited resources, especially after 30 years of budget cuts in the name of "Reduced Bureaucracy" and tax cuts for the rich.
I'm sorry, WHAT? You are full of shit.
Police departments are well funded, the question is: What do they spend that money on?
A new "MRAP"? Oh yeah, every cop shop needs one of those... And I've noticed many cops are now driving high-end "muscle cars" - because you know a $60K Dodge Charger with a "police package" is so much more effective in city response than the old Crown Vics or whatever the "off the shelf" cop car is these days.
Yeah, the police are hurting of cash...
Except maybe in Seattle where there are significant numbers of "average cops" making well into the 6-figures with overtime and other cash cows.
I'm not saying cops should not be well equipped and compensated according to skill and danger, though many studies show that being a police officer is not particularly dangerous - maybe because they rarely get out of their cars anymore - but get real: Since "9/11", US police departments have become bloated bastions of over-paid steroid freaks with power issues.
Re:Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
Cops cars have never been cheap. The suspension and chassis are stiffer, the wheels tend to be bigger (though steel, to reduce cost) to house larger brakes, the transmissions and differentials are often special. Various options exist for bullet-proof Kevlar armored doors. There are often extra, dedicated oil and transmission coolers. The batteries are huge, and there can be more than one of them, and the alternators are bigger. The seats are wider, not because cops are fat (remember, most other Americans are fat), but because they carry a ridiculous amount of hardware on their belts. These are all safety and durability improvements for the type of driving these cars are expected to be doing on a regular basis, with the vehicles themselves sometimes working 3 shifts per day.
And then there's a lot of work and expense that goes into modifying them for police duty even once they're delivered: By default, the interior is spartan, at best (what cup holder?). Communicaitons, lights, computer(s) need added, and added stoutly. Cages, locking shotgun holders need added. Push bars. Graphics and/or paint need changed to match the rest of the fleet Et cetera.
These are not luxury automobiles -- you can easily find a cheap Kia on the lot at Enterprise that is more pleasant, with more creature comforts than any average cop car for normal driving.
That said, there are three "off the shelf" cop cars since demise of the Crown Vic: Dodge Charger, and Ford Police Interceptor.
None of these are implicitly "muscle cars." They're all available with a normally-aspirated V6 that is identical (or at least very nearly so) to the same engines you'll find in the same civilian cars at the dealership, though more-powerful engines are certainly available.
So, what does such a purpose-built car cost? From this article [motortrend.com], base prices (including, in these cases, upgraded engines) looks like the following:
2012 Chevrolet Caprice PPV, 6.0L/355-hp/384-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8: $31,745
2012 Dodge Charger Pursuit, 5.7L/370-hp/395-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8, $30,965
2013 Ford Police Interceptor Sedan, 3.5L/365-hp/350-lb-ft twin-turbo DOHC 24-valve V-6, $29,155
and for comparison with the venerable Crown Vic:
2008 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor, 4.6L/239-hp/276-lb-ft SOHC 16-valve V-8, $28,470
I, for one, think my money is being better-spent on any of the three standard-issue cop car chassis, than it ever was on a Crown Vic. Price is roughly in-keeping with a last-gen, inflation-adjusted Crown Vic, and even though the new cars are actually a bit heavier, every single performance feature (including gas mileage) is improved.
This is not opulence, but simply progress.
Re:Funding (Score:4, Insightful)
Fascinating, but you are focusing on the wrong element and even there your vision is myopic.
The real issue is not choice of over-priced police cruisers - used mostly for hot-dogging to non-events. I can no longer count the times I've seen 3 or 4 cops weaving in and out of traffic at high speed to arrive at a situation involving a drunk street guy or a hooker.
A few years back, I was waiting for a MAX train in in Portland at around 0030 after work, and had wondered up to the second or third floor of a parking garage to look over the street and smoke a butt. I watched a Portland cop drive up onto the sidewalk just to be able to chuck a Burger King bag into a trash can.
I give the cop points for disposing of trash in a proper receptacle.
And these MRAPs - yes, every Cop Shop seems to need one. You know, you might need to lay siege to a crack house... God forbid cops do like they had done for years and just fucking BREAK DOWN THE DOOR.
Oh yes, Police Work is a tough job... Here's what Forbe's has to say about it, let's have a look:
1. Logging workers
2. Fishers and related fishing workers
3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
4. Roofers
5. Structural iron and steel workers
6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
10. Construction laborers
Cops? Not on the list.
It's not hard to understand that when you never get out of your car, and when you do it's to write a $200 ticket, well, life is good.
Re:Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice try, but I won't be trolled into a discussion of the merits and demerits of police behavior as that varies wildly between locales and jurisdictions and is an unresolvable debate, at best.
I simply submit that ~30k is not overpriced for a specially-designed service vehicle, especially in comparison to the singular previous option.
If you wish to debate that single insular point, then I'm up for it.
Re: (Score:3)
2012 Dodge Charger Pursuit, 5.7L/370-hp/395-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8, $30,965
Meanwhile, in an alternate dimension (Norway):
Civilian 2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L/80-hp $29,116.
Re: (Score:3)
Remember when you voted down that 1% sales tax increase? Guess where that money was earmarked for?
Here's the magic of percentages. If they were getting by fine on x% before, and inflation goes up, then they STILL get x% which is what they got before already magically adjusted for inflation. You don't have to keep increasing the percentage year after year. If anything, the marginal increase in cost of doing business should allow us to DECREASE the percentage of sales tax we need to collect year after year in order to fund the governments operation.
Re: Funding (Score:3)
And of course ignore the wisdom of cutting police, fire fighters, and teachers first. Save the critical services like PR, for instance.
Re:Funding (Score:5, Interesting)
That would be the case if population and size of patrol areas wasn't increasing. Almost all cities are growing, increased population, increased density and increased size. Inflation only counts on increases in costs, not growth.
The reason cops are interested in theft is it's not as lucrative as drug crime. Most departments spend almost all their police time on drug crime because in the 80's the government relaxed seizure laws and allowed the local cops to keep any drug money and assets seized. Most police departments benefit directly from this and will spend almost all their time locating and seizing money and assets, even going as far as taking poor people's car's for buying a joint (a rather memorable cops episode).
Until we end the war on drugs and roll back all the seizure laws cops aren't going to be interested in petty crime. Before the war on drugs you could actually get the cops to investigate car theft and muggings, now they don't even care.
Re: (Score:3)
That "are" should be "are not". Changes the entire meaning.
Re: (Score:3)
That would be the case if population and size of patrol areas wasn't increasing. Almost all cities are growing, increased population, increased density and increased size. Inflation only counts on increases in costs, not growth.
Yeah, it should be cheaper to police such a situation. If density is increasing you are still policing the same area, there are just more people in it. The increased population bring greater sales tax and property tax revenues. Maybe cities in the middle of nowhere are increasing in size but most existing cities don't have anywhere to expand to, they are already surrounded by other cities.
Re: Funding (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, it's priorities, not funding.
A priority is shaking down law abiding citizens for money. A priority is terrorizing citizens in the middle of the night with an armed raid of a dozen officers to find a joint. A priority is terrorizing your children and shooting your dog on such a raid.
A priority is padding pay checks with overtime pay. A *big* priority is confiscating cameras from citizens recording what the cops do, and then arresting them on some bogus charge. A priority is protecting cops by abusing citizens, using wholly disproportionate and unnecessary force. A priority is putting the populace in their place whenever they seem a little uppity.
Re: frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
Because there is more manpower hired to do road patrol than to do arrests of violent criminals who have been identified and are holding GPS evidence of their crime.
We need to stop refering to it as the theft of a phone, and describe it with the more accurate turm of violent robbery. As armed robbery when it warrants.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to mention, they will need a warrant force entry and seize the phone. Combined with the fact that they will probably only be able charge the perp with possession stolen property, it the whole exercise a rather expensive proposition.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
So I can tell the police that my phone is in your house, and that gives them the right to break in at 6am and point guns at you?
I mean, it's my phone and I did give them permission.
I'd rather they had to get a search warrant.
Re: frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: frosty piss (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
"US police are woefully underfunded"
Yea? Like schools are underfunded? Do you have any idea how much of my money the state confiscates every year? Not to mention all the traffic fines and confiscated crime booty (cash, cars, guns.. who knows what all else).
These people have money coming out of their ears, and no doubt could do their job with a lot less.
Not to mention the police union that secures high pay and fabulous retirement packages. How about all the cops earning time and a half by sitting their fat donut eating asses on the side of a road wherever you see construction in many states, again thank the uniuons.
They are underfunded? Bull fucking shit asshole. I am underfunded, bacause the statist steals entirely too much of MY MONEY.
Idiot.
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't you stop worrying about the state taking all your money and start asking why your wages have been in decline for 30 ever-lovin' years. Why don't you ask why it is your worse off than your parents? Why don't you ask why income inequality is at levels not seen since the 1920s?
Why? Because it's super easy to look at your withholding and see that. Heck, you can also lump your health insurance and any Uniform allowance into that too (most Americans do) and blame the gov't. What you can't see ( unless you go looking for it ) is where all the wealth in this country is really going. You can't see who's really robbing you blind...
Re: (Score:3)
Two things:
Police are not paid from Federal taxes. State and local taxes pay for the police.
Back in the 50's to 70's, the middle class, at least, tended to pay MORE in federal taxes than now. And the wealthy had more than enough tax loopholes so that they tended to pay LESS than they do now.
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
In the United States, Police (and schools for that matter) have huge budgets, but too little of that money makes it to the front lines. Administrators soak most of it up, and any further funding increases go straight to the top. Only the bare minimum flows to the bottom where it's needed most. This is the problem with the "more money for police" and "more money for education" crowd.
Administrators? Try pensions (Score:3)
If you really want to freak out, take a look at how much money municipalities pay for police pensions. It's not the administrators that are munching the budget, it's the retirees.
Re:Administrators? Try pensions (Score:4, Insightful)
If the police were doing their purported job, then those pensions would have been well earned. And should have been expensed while the officers were serving (except in the case of medical retirements, which justifiably need funding after the retirement).
That I don't feel they are doing their job doesn't mean that I think that the retirements should be eliminated, it means that I think the officers in question should be fired for cause. It frequently means that I also think they should be prosecuted for various crimes in addition to either misfeasance or malfeasance. (Which various crimes obviously depends on what the officer did.)
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Informative)
I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location.
As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Most cities are far more interested in making sure the professional sport league has the latest and greatest stadium so they won't move to a city that would. So, blame the city councils that deny adequate funding to city services, not the people who have to decide between catching the perps from a drive-by shooting versus some guy who lost his cellphone.
Police forces have become infected by unionism combined with lawyerism. The unionism has ramped uo wages by 5-6% (with inflation included at 3%) for the past 40 years. Now in Toronto most police collect over $100,000 wages and benefits, some as much as $150,000.
The lawyerism has also increased the documentary load on officers as well as the evidentiary load to the point that the number of cases handled per officer has declined at about 3-4% per year.
Too few police, paid too much, too little time = "Case Triage" - a strong need to cull the caseload by tossing cases. They also must try to look as if they are working hard, so they go after a lof ow "low hanging fruit", parking tickets, stop signs, red lights and the like that are low risk compared to facing armed crack dealers - that might hurt...
Re: (Score:3)
Because they're too lazy to retrieve your phone from a known thief? Because law-abiding citizens are terrified when they're around? How about the never-ending stream of stories detailing horrific violence, cover-ups, and other abuse?
We should be outraged that any public money goes to fund that street-gang. How are you okay with paying those thugs 100k a year?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location...As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded.
Even if that's true, is very short sighted. If you report your phone stolen, then they have to devote resources to filling out that report. If they start busting phone thieves it's extra work upfront, but there will be fewer future reports to fill out both because you bust the thief who is going to keep stealing, and because you discourage others. Oh yeah, and then there's the fact that it's their job to enforce the law.
When I had my phone stolen, I did all the legwork (it was quite a bit more involved t
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Funny)
Tell them there are copyrighted mp3's on the phone. Voila! The SWAT team will be sent in to get your phone.
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Interesting)
long story short, cops these days dont give a flying fuck about helping us with crime, all they care about is keeping the money rolling in
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
we have a for-profit private prison INDUSTRY in the US.
anyone who thinks this is a good idea, raise your hand.
Re: (Score:3)
A publicly owned and run prison service would be continually seeking to reduce cost, which would mean pressure to reduce crime, reduce recidivism and find more effective means of addressing criminal behaviour than locking somebody up for decades.
A privately owned prison wants more people in prison so lobbies for more laws, stronger punishments and doesn't have any incentive to prevent recidivism.
So you're paying for two very different things. One is justice, the other is the intentional destruction of socie
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Insightful)
He promptly gave me my laptop back, and he "thanked" me by also giving me someone else's xbox and playstation, big screen tv and car stereosystem.
FTFY
Re: (Score:3)
On the other hand, part of the point of the justice system is to force a person to pay a penalty so that they will think twice about doing it again. By "stealing" from the other guy, it's quite possible that person may have had an epiphany, such that he might have been less likely to do it in the future. The high recidivism rates among perps who commit petty larceny means that the current system isn't working well.
Let police officers take care of it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Let police officers take care of it. (Score:5, Insightful)
If its at a place of business, Ill trace it there and have a nice chat with a boss about his employee being a thief
If i see its in the middle of compton in a known gang area, i probably will not go there to get it
Re: (Score:3)
and well, the guy holding it when you check it might not even be the one who stole it...
Stolen property is still stolen property, even after being sold to an unsuspecting (or not -- yeah, that iPhone you bought for $20 was legit. Uh-huh.) person.
Knowingly buying stolen property is a crime, and even if you don't know it, it's still stolen property and is still the legal property of the proper owner and is subject to being taken from you and returned to the rightful owner with no legal recourse on your part unless you can somehow get it from the person who sold it to you.
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other other hand...
So you've got a thing that says your iPhone is at a particular location.
What is that thing? Can its data be trusted? Does it truly show your iPhone, or somebody else's, or something else entirely? Is that actually the address, or is it the other address right next door? Be thankful if it's not an apartment building, 'cos then floors get involved - good luck getting a warrant for all of them. Oh, didn't mention warrants yet, did I? Yeah, that's right, even if your 'find my iphone' is just pointing to a location in the middle of nowhere and there's only one person there, cops can't just demand that they empty out all their pockets; I'm sure most people here would tell the cop to either please vacate themselves or take you in if they feel they have enough cause to do so, when the lead is that "somebody's computer says". And all that at the lowly sum of $ka-ching/hour.
On the other other other hand, you file the report, you file the insurance claim, you walk into an Apple Store, get a new device (those scratches and dents you put into it the other one? gone! it's magic!), get most of your data back off the cloud, and be off and running. You 'win', the thief wins, the cops win, the insurance company wins, and Apple wins.
Somebody amend wit more hands...
Note that I'm not saying that cops couldn't do more, and shouldn't do more - hell, if it was as easy for them as it is for the general public to just walk up to someplace and go "you've got this person's iPhone, you best be handing it back now or there'll be trouble", I'd say they should follow up on every stolen phone, tablet, bicycle, etc. Unfortunately it's not - which also leads me to agreeing that it's fine if they warn people about potential consequences, but they can't exactly complain that people are taking matters into their own hands.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other other other hand, you file the report, you file the insurance claim, you walk into an Apple Store, get a new device, get most of your data back off the cloud, and be off and running.
In what twisted universe is that "winning"? I get how the thief wins, how apple wins, how the cops win, I even get how the insurance companies win (higher premiums, yet another price to be paid by the victim), I just don't see the winning of the victim.
Are you deluded?
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
No you don't, because your insurance deductible is higher than the cost of the phone. That $500 loss is real and uncompensated.
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Interesting)
And all that at the lowly sum of $ka-ching/hour.
I don't really buy the whole cost of enforcement argument.
Enforcing the law almost always costs more than the actual crimes do when looked at in isolation. However, enforcing the law is still important, because it can prevent crime.
If everybody knows that you can rob somebody in broad daylight and nobody will do anything about it, then society will rapidly devolve into crime and vigilantism. On the other hand, if everybody knew that even stealing a piece of candy from a store would result in a near-certainty of arrest, then you'd see almost all crime go away. People commit crimes because they perceive the reward as being greater than the risk.
So, by spending $8k to recover a $500 phone and make the life of the guy who stole it miserable can go a long way to preventing phone theft. Do that thoroughly enough, and suddenly you don't find yourself having to spend all that much money on enforcement because people stop breaking the law.
Of course, for phones there is a simpler and cheaper technological solution and that is IMEI blacklisting. However, the argument still stands for other forms of petty crime. If I were in charge and somebody reported their radio stolen from their car, I'd dust the car for prints, check camera footage, and when I track down the teenager who stole the phone they'd be showing up at a labor camp for 6 hours a day for two years, while attending classes to learn something productive for another 4 hours a day, and then they'd be sent home with a monitoring anklet and an MRE in payment for their labor. Sure, it would cost more than just letting them play loose on the street, but taxpayers would save money on repairs, and maybe society would benefit from more skilled laborers and fewer leaches.
Re: (Score:3)
They dial the number which the phone company verifies is the complainant's number, listen for the ring. There's the exact location and probable cause in one neat package.
They'll probably solve a lot more crimes at the same time. If you want to find thieves, go to where all the stolen goods are.
Re: (Score:3)
You can be "stopped by" all the time. ( Not that I agree that they should be allowed to do that, but such is the law - get the law changed. ) Being stopped by doesn't mean being searched. And searched doesn't necessarily mean searched without consent. etc.
You obviously [pennlawreview.com] don't [thinkprogress.org] know [wsws.org] what [blackyouthproject.com] you're [hiphopandpolitics.com] talking about, friend.
I never said it was legal or constitutional. Police abuse is rampant, and people's rights are being violated. You can blather on about refusing a search if you want, but if you find yourself getting stopped/frisked, good luck with that.
Check this [nydailynews.com] out as well.
Re:frosty piss (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, police have all that stuff. On the other hand, they don't give a shit about your iphone being stolen, and will likely never investigate.
Exactly. This problem is caused by the complete lack of action by police if the problem isn't drug related. The department knows how they get funds and that's by busting drug offenders. They get to keep a percentage of the spoils as well as bonuses per arrest. Drug arrests are very very easy. Busting a guy that stole a phone could take hours. Can't have that.
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Informative)
A friend's iPhone was stolen - Find My iPhone located it... we called the police and they promptly visited the home and had the phone returned to its rightful owner. This was in San Fernando Valley, so perhaps the police are friendlier to such victims than in your area?
Re: (Score:3)
Right, and in fact this scenario happens all the time. There's a ton of people here bashing cops, but in the real world, iPhones do get returned if the cops are able to locate the perp. As far as statiistics go, we don't really know what percentages of iPhone thefts reports go unsolved, and it probably varies widely in certain areas.
Re:frosty piss (Score:5, Funny)
This is why I always keep pirated media and a bittorrent client that I can remotely activate on my phone. If it ever gets stolen, I won't bother the local police, I'll just activate the client and call the FBI.
Re: (Score:3)
In the case of your ex-father in law, the police did the right thing. The money would have been untraceable, and they weren't about to waste time on crime that essentially only victimizes the stupid.
Police often wont take care of it... (Score:2)
Re:Police often wont take care of it... (Score:5, Funny)
Not that confronting the perpetrator is a great idea, but don't expect the full CSI treatment when you report the theft.
Actually, confronting the perp is the best way to get the full CSI treatment. If you're lucky, they might even pull up your dental records to conclusively ID your remains.
Escalation (Score:4, Insightful)
Police often wont take care of it...because as he said, it's just a phone.
Today it's a phone, tomorrow it's a laptop and by next week it's an armed robbery of an electronics store. I can understand that the police do not have the resources to track down every petty criminal but when confronted with clear evidence where the criminal is they have a duty to act. It is not only a fantastic public relations opportunity ("I went to the police and they caught the criminal one hour later") it also looks good for the crime statistics and it helps to reduce future crime since many phone thefts are probably opportunistic criminals who, if not caught, will carry on with their experiment to see how many phones/laptops/etc. they can steal before it crosses the police action threshold.
What the police have (Score:5, Insightful)
They forgot to list apathy.
Re: (Score:3)
More than the cost of the phone, is the personal identity smart-phones carry. That could include credit card info, id's, passwords and logins, personal photos, and the list goes on...
Property thefts just don't matter to police, unless you're Apple and lose a prototype at the bar, in which case they'll send a SWAT team to storm the perp's home.
Re:What the police have (Score:5, Informative)
A few years ago, I had a car stolen right out of my gated/locked driveway in NJ (cue the Jersey jokes). It wasn't an expensive car, but still worth about US$10k. When I reported it stolen and informed the police where they could ask for surveillance video that would likely show the crime and culprit, they treated me like a nuisance and never investigated the crime. I know they never investigated because the owner of the surveillance cam was never even contacted, even when I followed up with the cops a couple of times. The insurance company just paid out immediately and the adjuster said the odds of ever seeing the car again when stolen from northern NJ was almost zero.
So I can only chuckle when I'm told that the cops will show even a cursory interest in helping someone recover a phone, even if the EXACT location is known.
Re:What the police have (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember when my car was stolen right out of a mall parking lot quite a while back now. I met the police in the mall security office. They literally laughed in my face about the whole thing while taking the report. They also obviously weren't bothered with checking surveillance video since they were in the security office at the time and didn't even ask mall security about it.
My car was later found abandoned on the side of the road with the battery dead (it turned out I had a failing alternator, which may have saved me the whole car). After it was found, the officer following up was very interested in questioning _me_ about why there was a scale in the trunk (it was a broken one from the bakery I was working in at the time).
Re:But, it is just a phone (Score:4, Insightful)
And if you want to gripe about the cops not being willing to do anything about it, that's a man power issue.
Maybe they can catch real thieves instead of spending their time trying to stop people from doing U-turns on 25th street. Which hasn't caused an accident in a decade at least. It's just an easy way to collect money (since the no u-turn signs are partially obscured by trees).
Another thing: police defend their ability to 'stop and frisk' as a way to stop crime. NY is serious about stopping small crimes because it theoretically reduces big crimes. Well, here is something easy they can do.
If the police aren't going to catch criminals, there's not much reason to have them.
Re:But, it is just a phone (Score:5, Insightful)
And if you want to gripe about the cops not being willing to do anything about it, that's a manpower issue
Not when the cops are unwilling to follow up on easy leads while they are instead literally sitting in their cars all day long waiting for speeders because speeding tickets earn their department revenue (and catching muggers doesn't). There's plenty of manpower. The cops just don't want to risk their lives for "just a phone" because they know these are potentially violent criminals that are taking the phones. It's cowardice and avarice, not lack of manpower.
You mean "let the police blow it off" (Score:5, Insightful)
A friend of mine was recently mugged, on the doorstep of her home. While the police were in her house asking questions she pulled up the current location of her phone on her laptop. The police did not care. Did. Not. Care. For an hour her phone drifted around a park that was a known after-hours teenager hangout, while the officer asked inane questions. She fumed for weeks. Getting mugged was bad enough, but feeling like the police didn't really care, that all they wanted to do was get the report filled out, made her feel truly helpless.
If the police are unwilling to react to these thefts because they are low priority for them, they have to expect that citizens will have to take it into their own hands. People don't like someone else telling them their problems are trivial. People don't like feeling helpless. They need to believe that there is always something they can do.
Re: (Score:3)
In a 'normal' country you first would politely point out to the police men that you will sue them, and if they they don't react on that you actually do sue them. My dictionary tells me that is called 'failure to act', not sure if it is the right term.
Police officers don't like to have a 'failure to act' accusion in their personal records/files. (Well, I have personally very good experiences with the police, the few times I needed them they reacted promptly and extremly professional)
Re: (Score:3)
Under the current public duty doctrine (duty to all, duty to no-one); failure to act is not an actionable offense [policeone.com]
Vigilantism comes from apathy (Score:5, Insightful)
From apathy on the side of the police, that is.
If the police at least tried to get my possessions back, would I bother going myself? Hell no. As the article said, why risk it? That's the police's job, they not only have the training and equipment, they also have the backing of the law.
Vigilantes only emerge when the police drops the ball. Only when there is no other way to get justice, people will take justice into their own hands. That's why a state has to be careful to keep its laws and its law enforcement in sync with what their population considers just. People will only take the law into their own hands if you, as a government, fail.
Okay, Fine (Score:3)
What police officers lack ... (Score:3)
Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.
But obviously civilians have one thing the police officers don't - the WILL to take action.
If the police have been taking these thefts seriously and had sent officers to thief's home instead, then no one would be foolish enough to do it himself.
Yes, it is foolish to confront the thief at his home. What do you think would happen? "Ha ha, you got me, here's your phone."? More likely is the thief would know giving you the phone just proved he stolen your stuff, and now you know where to lead the police to him, thief would be thinking how is he going to silence you?
Maybe after the first few fools got killed, the police will finally take a visit to the locations of stolen phones?
Funny... (Score:3)
If you wanted to have some fun... (Score:4, Informative)
LAPD apathy (Score:5, Informative)
My sister's friend had her phone stolen recently and when she called the LAPD about it, they also refused to do anything about it and pretty much told her that it was not their policy to go chasing after stolen phones. She later attempted to confront the fence that stole her phone and ultimately was unsuccessful in recovering her phone.
"We don't go into the barrio for an iPhone " (Score:4, Interesting)
"and risk the life of an officer." That was the answer from the San Diego police department when my friend's sone lost his iPhone in a major hotel out of the dining room.
My friend is an attorney involved in major San Diego port affairs. Made no diff. "We don't go into that barrio without a SWAT team."
Then... (Score:5, Interesting)
Then why do they have guys with guns guarding banks and jewelry stores?
"Let police officers take care of it." (Score:5, Insightful)
Flip that around on ya (Score:3)
And while hitting "Find My iPhone" can take you to a thief's doorstep, LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith urges resisting the impulse to do so. "It's just a phone," he said.
Citizens urge police to do their fucking jobs so we don't have to do it ourselves.
TRUE STORY: This happened to me and police helped (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Let police officers take care of it? (Score:4, Funny)
Donuts. Tell them the perps stole your donuts.
Except in the US (Score:4, Interesting)
Bzzt! Wrong! (Score:3, Informative)
In the rest of the world a stolen smartphone will get bricked, but carriers are working against that in the US.
The USA has had a stolen phone blacklist for quite some time now. You can check if a phone is blacklisted here [checkesnfree.com]. Carriers will also ban a phone from their own network if the owner defaults on their service contract or handset finance agreement.
Phones are still stolen because:
1. Some phones can have their IMEI altered (illegal, but we're talking about criminals in the first place).
2. They can be sold overseas.
3. They can be sold to fools right here in the USA who don't know there's an IMEI blacklist and that
Re:two problems... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
While the smartphone itself may be trivial to replace, all the information on one may not be, and there is the whole deal of some apps that let you save your password...
Unless you were targeted for some specific espionage (you weren't), the phone thief doesn't care about the data on your phone. If they can unlock it, they might take a quick look through your pictures for naked pics of your wife, but they aren't going to use a compute cluster to try to brute force your passcode -- they are just going to wipe it and resell it.
If you have data on your phone that you can't replace, you were bound to lose it eventually anyway - phones die for lots of reasons unrelated to theft
Re: (Score:3)
I am SO SICK of the police telling citizens they shouldn't conduct their business. Yes it can be unwise, but the constant drumbeat of 'leave it to the cops' pisses me off.
This is one case where it makes sense -- cops not only have physical protection (guns, etc), but they also have legal protection - if your phone tells you that your stolen phone is at 101 Main Street and you go to that address, bang on the door and start threatening the guy that answers to give up the phone before you kick his ass, you may find yourself in jail over the threats when it turns out that the phone was really in the basement apartment at 101A Main St (assuming, of course, that the guy you're dem
Re: (Score:3)
1) That applies to the guy who's door the victim is is banging on as well. And if you try to force yourself into his home - wouldn't he would have the right of self-defense (whether he stole the phone or not)?
2) I would think that if the police went to the home of someone who is innocent and arrested them, they would get in less trouble than if you and a couple of friends showed up at the door of some random guy you thought stole your phone, attacked him and subdued him, and then called the police to come a
Re: (Score:3)
Of course they can get a warrant. A cellphone broadcasting its position together with the owner's statement that it is their phone is enough to establish reasonable suspicion. You statement would be true if it were: They need a warrant to enter a home and they cannot be bothered to get one