8 ms·

I wonder why stings/bait-items aren't used more often, when an area is facing a rash of specific kinds of crime, like bike theft, parked-car smash-and-grabs, an

by gojomo 8y ago

I wonder why stings/bait-items aren't used more often, when an area is facing a rash of specific kinds of crime, like bike theft, parked-car smash-and-grabs, and package theft. It's often a small number of violators – sometimes professional – who've been emboldened by early successes to scale up. So just a few stings, with adequate follow-through prosecution, could have a highly-leveraged effect on the overall rate.

lamarpye 8y ago
Probably because it is work and the police don't care. In California with Prop 47, it might not even be a crime to steal packages.
- lightedman 8y ago
  " In California with Prop 47, it might not even be a crime to steal packages." Good thing California doesn't make laws and regulations related to packages and mail, the USPS does, so it is still a federal crime to steal packages.
  - zdragnar 8y ago
    Genuine question, does that apply to packages delivered by ups or FedEx?
    - briandear 8y ago
      It does not.
      - lightedman 8y ago
        Tell that to the guys in Riverside, CA doing time for mail theft right now. See, we get these nice e-mail updates from the police regarding our specific neighborhood (because it is a rich one, the Wood Streets.) They busted four people following FedEx and UPS trucks and stealing packages right off the front porch. Federal charges, right there. Mail is mail is mail, period.
- jimbo1qaz 8y ago
  Why is this comment being downvoted?
  - tedunangst 8y ago
    Perhaps a direct quote from prop 47 would clarify how it makes theft not a crime.
    - zdragnar 8y ago
      Theft of goods valued under $950 was reclassified from a felony to a misdemeanor, regardless of what the item in question is (a case in 2017 was a car!). So, still a crime, on par with jaywalking and littering (which, in Cali, is a minimim $100 fine + 8 hours community service). And yet, we're talking about things that could be Christmas gifts, baby food, medicine, people's means of transportation, you name it.
      - mikeash 8y ago
        Is jaywalking really a misdemeanor? That would be incredibly harsh.
        zdragnar 8y ago
        Not in California, same for littering (the reference to Cali was only for the fine + hours of community service). However, it is in Nevada: https://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/misdemeanor-law.html https://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/misdemeanor-law.html and various other jurisdictions.
        mikeash 8y ago
        Interesting, apparently because misdemeanor is the lowest possible category. Most places classify it as an “infraction” which is a step below a misdemeanor. I bet that has caused some unfortunate fuss with people “convicted of a misdemeanor” for a simple speeding ticket trying to explain it in a state where a misdemeanor is something more serious.
- masonic 8y ago
  it might not even be a crime The relevant question becomes, "is a crime that is not prosecuted materially different from a non-crime?"
micah_chatt 8y ago
I know a family friend who works in internal investigations at $PACKAGE_DELIVERY_CORP, and this kind of sting is nothing new. You just don’t hear about it. Disclosure: I work at AWS but know nothing about Amazon delivery
nikanj 8y ago
It's the adequate follow-through prosecution that's the problem. Fines? Can't get blood from a stone. Jailtime? The cost-benefit analysis doesn't support that, prison time is expensive and petty theft doesn't really cause that much damage. I have no solution to offer here.
- fladrif 8y ago
  Community service, pays back the community, hopefully break-even cost in terms of administration and enforcement to labor productivity gained, at least won't be as bad as a prison sentence. At best can be a form of rehabilitation.
  - eloisius 8y ago
    And when you don't do your community service because there's no consequences (because jails are already full and because you can't squeeze water from a stone), what happens?
    - stickfigure 8y ago
      Why isn't caning a reasonable solution? Serious question.
      - gojomo 8y ago
        There's a strong cultural bias against corporal punishment in the US, but it should probably be studied, perhaps as an option a mature defendant can choose in lieu of another fine/imprisonment, but is never forced to take. If the practice actually deterred crime, without leaving any lasting physical or psychological damage – other than an aversion to re-offending – it deserves unemotional consideration.
        mantale 8y ago
        Corporal punishments don't even work on children, what make you think it will work on adults?
analog31 8y ago
So far as I know, my city uses bait bikes.
batiudrami 8y ago
It is creating crime which otherwise may not have existed. Maybe it's a small number of violators (do you have a citaton?) or maybe it's just a few opportunistic kids. I'd really need to see a cost/benefit analysis (not just monetary but social too).
- kodablah 8y ago
  > It is creating crime which otherwise may not have existed There is nuance here. While I am traditionally against entrapment, I don't believe this crosses that line. If the police were surreptitiously encouraging the theft it might be different. > I'd really need to see a cost/benefit analysis It's a bit hard to quantify peace of mind or be able to correlate changes in theft counts due to sample size issues and the myriad of other reasons why theft counts may change.
  - batiudrami 8y ago
    I mean I'm for it if there's suspicion of a single offender. But in that case they could probably monitor the houses that they hit regularly and catch them in the act. This feels more like a broad net to attempt to bump some statistics.
- briandear 8y ago
  They aren’t just stealing dummy packages though. If a worker would steal a dummy package, they would steal a “real” package. And those loses mean we all pay more for stuff. Theft, even petty stuff like shoplifting means everything costs more — and that’s regressive; poor people would be disproportionately affected by increased costs due to theft.
- gojomo 8y ago
  A sting which leaves typical, well-tracked target property in known problem locations isn't really manufacturing extra crime. (For example, it's not like the active entrapment of offering someone money, or verbal encouragement, to commit a criminal act they wouldn't have thought of themselves.) It instead captures existing roving criminal intent – perhaps redirecting it from a less-ready victim. And when the bait is taken, an actual crime occurs – in destruction or taking of another's property. And often, when a bust is made in relation to a single such crime – such as by tracking the stolen item back to the thief's staging areas or accomplices – evidence of other similar crimes is found as well.
TangoTrotFox 8y ago
Police departments have major limitations on manpower and budgets. Setting up sting operations with fake packages, surveillance, and all this stuff is going to be extremely expensive on both accounts. And the ultimate reward is that you just busted a guy who either committed a very minor felony which some states, such as California, are even moving to change to a misdemeanor. And I'd imagine a decent number of the offenders are not exactly financially well to do, meaning they may not even be able to pay the fines to recoup some of the costs involved in busting them. Think about the sort of petty offenses that are more actively pursued. You'll almost always find they tend to be low execution cost with a high probability of receiving payment: traffic violations, prostitution stings, drug related stuff, etc.

by gojomo 8y ago

lamarpye 8y ago

Probably because it is work and the police don't care. In California with Prop 47, it might not even be a crime to steal packages.

lightedman 8y ago
" In California with Prop 47, it might not even be a crime to steal packages." Good thing California doesn't make laws and regulations related to packages and mail, the USPS does, so it is still a federal crime to steal packages.
- zdragnar 8y ago
  Genuine question, does that apply to packages delivered by ups or FedEx?
  - briandear 8y ago
    It does not.
    - lightedman 8y ago
      Tell that to the guys in Riverside, CA doing time for mail theft right now. See, we get these nice e-mail updates from the police regarding our specific neighborhood (because it is a rich one, the Wood Streets.) They busted four people following FedEx and UPS trucks and stealing packages right off the front porch. Federal charges, right there. Mail is mail is mail, period.
jimbo1qaz 8y ago
Why is this comment being downvoted?
- tedunangst 8y ago
  Perhaps a direct quote from prop 47 would clarify how it makes theft not a crime.
  - zdragnar 8y ago
    Theft of goods valued under $950 was reclassified from a felony to a misdemeanor, regardless of what the item in question is (a case in 2017 was a car!). So, still a crime, on par with jaywalking and littering (which, in Cali, is a minimim $100 fine + 8 hours community service). And yet, we're talking about things that could be Christmas gifts, baby food, medicine, people's means of transportation, you name it.
    - mikeash 8y ago
      Is jaywalking really a misdemeanor? That would be incredibly harsh.
      - zdragnar 8y ago
        Not in California, same for littering (the reference to Cali was only for the fine + hours of community service). However, it is in Nevada: https://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/misdemeanor-law.html https://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/misdemeanor-law.html and various other jurisdictions.
        mikeash 8y ago
        Interesting, apparently because misdemeanor is the lowest possible category. Most places classify it as an “infraction” which is a step below a misdemeanor. I bet that has caused some unfortunate fuss with people “convicted of a misdemeanor” for a simple speeding ticket trying to explain it in a state where a misdemeanor is something more serious.
masonic 8y ago
it might not even be a crime The relevant question becomes, "is a crime that is not prosecuted materially different from a non-crime?"

micah_chatt 8y ago

I know a family friend who works in internal investigations at $PACKAGE_DELIVERY_CORP, and this kind of sting is nothing new. You just don’t hear about it. Disclosure: I work at AWS but know nothing about Amazon delivery

nikanj 8y ago

It's the adequate follow-through prosecution that's the problem. Fines? Can't get blood from a stone. Jailtime? The cost-benefit analysis doesn't support that, prison time is expensive and petty theft doesn't really cause that much damage. I have no solution to offer here.

fladrif 8y ago
Community service, pays back the community, hopefully break-even cost in terms of administration and enforcement to labor productivity gained, at least won't be as bad as a prison sentence. At best can be a form of rehabilitation.
- eloisius 8y ago
  And when you don't do your community service because there's no consequences (because jails are already full and because you can't squeeze water from a stone), what happens?
  - stickfigure 8y ago
    Why isn't caning a reasonable solution? Serious question.
    - gojomo 8y ago
      There's a strong cultural bias against corporal punishment in the US, but it should probably be studied, perhaps as an option a mature defendant can choose in lieu of another fine/imprisonment, but is never forced to take. If the practice actually deterred crime, without leaving any lasting physical or psychological damage – other than an aversion to re-offending – it deserves unemotional consideration.
      - mantale 8y ago
        Corporal punishments don't even work on children, what make you think it will work on adults?

analog31 8y ago

So far as I know, my city uses bait bikes.

batiudrami 8y ago

It is creating crime which otherwise may not have existed. Maybe it's a small number of violators (do you have a citaton?) or maybe it's just a few opportunistic kids. I'd really need to see a cost/benefit analysis (not just monetary but social too).

kodablah 8y ago
> It is creating crime which otherwise may not have existed There is nuance here. While I am traditionally against entrapment, I don't believe this crosses that line. If the police were surreptitiously encouraging the theft it might be different. > I'd really need to see a cost/benefit analysis It's a bit hard to quantify peace of mind or be able to correlate changes in theft counts due to sample size issues and the myriad of other reasons why theft counts may change.
- batiudrami 8y ago
  I mean I'm for it if there's suspicion of a single offender. But in that case they could probably monitor the houses that they hit regularly and catch them in the act. This feels more like a broad net to attempt to bump some statistics.
briandear 8y ago
They aren’t just stealing dummy packages though. If a worker would steal a dummy package, they would steal a “real” package. And those loses mean we all pay more for stuff. Theft, even petty stuff like shoplifting means everything costs more — and that’s regressive; poor people would be disproportionately affected by increased costs due to theft.
gojomo 8y ago
A sting which leaves typical, well-tracked target property in known problem locations isn't really manufacturing extra crime. (For example, it's not like the active entrapment of offering someone money, or verbal encouragement, to commit a criminal act they wouldn't have thought of themselves.) It instead captures existing roving criminal intent – perhaps redirecting it from a less-ready victim. And when the bait is taken, an actual crime occurs – in destruction or taking of another's property. And often, when a bust is made in relation to a single such crime – such as by tracking the stolen item back to the thief's staging areas or accomplices – evidence of other similar crimes is found as well.

TangoTrotFox 8y ago

Police departments have major limitations on manpower and budgets. Setting up sting operations with fake packages, surveillance, and all this stuff is going to be extremely expensive on both accounts. And the ultimate reward is that you just busted a guy who either committed a very minor felony which some states, such as California, are even moving to change to a misdemeanor. And I'd imagine a decent number of the offenders are not exactly financially well to do, meaning they may not even be able to pay the fines to recoup some of the costs involved in busting them. Think about the sort of petty offenses that are more actively pursued. You'll almost always find they tend to be low execution cost with a high probability of receiving payment: traffic violations, prostitution stings, drug related stuff, etc.