3 ms·

That's why I was suggesting it be a fully US Postal Inspection sting. But yeah, they'd have little reason to start one, other than trying to scare porch pirates

by ajford 6y ago

That's why I was suggesting it be a fully US Postal Inspection sting. But yeah, they'd have little reason to start one, other than trying to scare porch pirates into giving up. And yeah, with the current state of USPS right now, the likelihood of them doing something like that is practically zero. But I can still dream!

gumby 6y ago
This is what they were created for. I think they were more diligent when the USPS was the primary telecommunication medium, even after telegraph and later phone developed. Now, though letters matter less, parcels are increasingly important, especially given the pandemic. So you'd think they'd be interested in parcel theft.
- ajford 6y ago
  Agreed. For me, the switch to group mailboxes in urban/suburban areas reduced package theft, since my last few group mailboxes have had parcel lockers, so I attributed that to the lack of USPS concern regarding package theft. I've only had one item delivered to the door by USPs in the last 6 years or so. That's my major concern with the attempt to privatize the postal service. Right now, parcels through USPS are protected federally, but I don't think that extends to private couriers like UPS/FedEx/Amazon. These private couriers are also unable to use your mailbox/parcel lockers (which does make sense since these individuals aren't vetted like postal employees are). Removing protections from parcels by privatizing all mail is rather chilling, as I strongly doubt we'll get similar legal protections.
curryst 6y ago
> But yeah, they'd have little reason to start one, other than trying to scare porch pirates into giving up. I hate laws intended to try to scare other people into compliance. They seem to almost universally fail, and in the process destroy people's lives. What kind of a penalty are we going to leverage to scare porch pirates? What's the highest penalty you feel is reasonable for a single instance of theft? I think the reality is going to be a revolving door in and out of jail for short sentences. Of course, better yet would be to reduce the incentive people have to steal these.

by ajford 6y ago

gumby 6y ago

This is what they were created for. I think they were more diligent when the USPS was the primary telecommunication medium, even after telegraph and later phone developed. Now, though letters matter less, parcels are increasingly important, especially given the pandemic. So you'd think they'd be interested in parcel theft.

ajford 6y ago
Agreed. For me, the switch to group mailboxes in urban/suburban areas reduced package theft, since my last few group mailboxes have had parcel lockers, so I attributed that to the lack of USPS concern regarding package theft. I've only had one item delivered to the door by USPs in the last 6 years or so. That's my major concern with the attempt to privatize the postal service. Right now, parcels through USPS are protected federally, but I don't think that extends to private couriers like UPS/FedEx/Amazon. These private couriers are also unable to use your mailbox/parcel lockers (which does make sense since these individuals aren't vetted like postal employees are). Removing protections from parcels by privatizing all mail is rather chilling, as I strongly doubt we'll get similar legal protections.

curryst 6y ago

> But yeah, they'd have little reason to start one, other than trying to scare porch pirates into giving up. I hate laws intended to try to scare other people into compliance. They seem to almost universally fail, and in the process destroy people's lives. What kind of a penalty are we going to leverage to scare porch pirates? What's the highest penalty you feel is reasonable for a single instance of theft? I think the reality is going to be a revolving door in and out of jail for short sentences. Of course, better yet would be to reduce the incentive people have to steal these.