6 ms·

First of all, no. Stop using this reasoning. Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. "Greater Police Presence" (that's one hell of a euphemism) onl

First of all, no. Stop using this reasoning. Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. "Greater Police Presence" (that's one hell of a euphemism) only ever prevents crimes of opportunity. i.e. The Drunk Guy throwing a beer bottle at a window. Police do not prevent crime, they apprehend people that they then accuse of doing the crime. When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. You do not see these massive Kia/Hyundai thefts in countries that mandated immobilizers in all new vehicles. So it is a failure of policy, not policing. Adding some sources. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/role-police-crime-prevention-integrating-crime-prevention-0 https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/role-pol... https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/07/over-past-60-years-more-spending-police-hasnt-necessarily-meant-less-crime/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/06/07/over-past... https://prismreports.org/2022/02/23/police-dont-stop-crime-but-you-wouldnt-know-it-from-the-news/ https://prismreports.org/2022/02/23/police-dont-stop-crime-b...

eurleif 3y ago
You're ignoring incapacitation. If someone is behind bars for stealing car #1, they can't steal car #2.
the_doctah 3y ago
The application of Broken Windows Theory[1] and Terry Stops[2] are the only things that have ever worked in New York. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop
- Terr_ 3y ago
  WTF? No, those things never worked! (Not even when you ignore the costs in bias/ unconstitutionality.) Major crime stats were already dropping beforehand, and that trend continued with no correlation to the policy... not even a blip when stop-and-frisk was abruptly stopped for legal reasons. Just because a politician says something when bragging about their job-record doesn't make it true. ___ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/22/donald-trump-claims-new-yorks-stop-and-frisk-policy-reduced-crime-the-data-disagree/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/22/donal... https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/stop-and-frisk-works-only-if-its-legal-version/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/stop-and-fris...
  - the_doctah 3y ago
    Wow, is that why crime went back up when they stopped? Crime was "already dropping" because of Bill Bratton. It's actually curious that anyone would believe it, "never worked". What, you think Terry Stops made crime go up?
    - Terr_ 3y ago
      > crime went back up when they stopped Citation needed. What statistic, in what time frame, relative to what baseline/context?
recursive 3y ago
> When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. Perhaps less people will be actively looking to steal $THING if they know that that they might be apprehended and accused of doing the crime.
tigen 3y ago
> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen That sounds like lax policing to me. (Which itself derives from policy.)
Scea91 3y ago
So basically your claim is that noone evaluates possible consequences when deciding whether or not to commit a crime? It seems totally reasonable to me to expect that the higher the chance of negative consequences the less people commit the crime. Basically, police should lower the expected value.
- UI_at_80x24 3y ago
  In US States that have the death penalty, have murders stopped? And more to the point, are they significantly lower % per capita? Policy change that requires the manufacturer to install a part (that is a $~200 option in the USA) would have practically eliminated the car as being a "target" object. Getting caught is always secondary in consideration to reward. If somebody is desperate enough, then it doesn't matter how risky it is. Car theft isn't new. There being a punishment for stealing cars isn't new. What makes the Kia/Hyundia situation so significant is how EASY it is to do. Make it more hard to steal, and make that a mandatory policy. The thieves will find other ways to steal cars, but it might stop the easy theft. More cops won't do that.
  - brvsft 3y ago
    Large corporations are more likely to comply with a policy, so I think that would factor in to when and where policy is more effective than police, no? What I don't understand about your point is that policy already makes stealing cars, murder, etc. illegal. What do you see as the difference between a policy that forces a car manufacturer to implement some technology that hinders theft vs. a policy that makes theft illegal? I agree with you that the technology is probably beneficial on the whole and more effective than having police running around attempting to stop every car theft, but you're making this into a debate about policy vs. police, and I'm failing to make sense of how you distinguish one policy (regulating car manufacturing) from another (stealing cars is illegal).
    - UI_at_80x24 3y ago
      My point is simple making it more difficult to steal by default is preferred to "hope we can catch them after the fact". Another [very flawed] analogy; Let's say that all guns were banned. All guns disappear. Now 'easy' crimes involving guns disappear. If nobody has a gun, then somebody couldn't get shot. If we move the burden further upstream and closer to the source then everybody downstream benefits. Make the manufacturer build "good locks" so that bic pens don't work.
lesuorac 3y ago
Eh, I mean in this situation it's pretty cut and dry that Kia & Hyundai is doing something different as opposed to the police. I doubt close to 1/3 of all the vehicles in Milwaukee are KH but they make up 2/3 of the thefts. If the police are a contributing factor you'd expect it to increase evenly across brands. But "Greater Police Presence" can deter crime depending on what police do. The presence of police cars on highways does slow down drivers. If you want a ton of traffic, I mean cars following the speed limit, then a "Greater Police Presence" archives that (until drivers recognize that cops won't pull them over until they're going +20). I really doubt organized crime will steal powertools from home depot while a cop is in the same asile. Of course they may just go to the lowes down the street. GPP has both a scalability issue but also an enforcement issue; you can commit many crimes in the presence of a cop and they will do nothing.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "If the police are a contributing factor you'd expect it to increase evenly across brands." They can still be a contributing factor without being the differentiating factor.
mc32 3y ago
I remember a time when police used to stop people who they thought did not "fit" into a particular area of town. This both affected thieves (and non-thieves) from poorer areas driving in affluent areas and it also affected people driving up-market cars into poorer areas (usually looking to score drugs or a pick up a prostitute or sometimes just visiting relatives/friends). This is not done as much any more. I recall getting pulled over over the years and being asked by police "where are you going?". Obviously one does not have to answer, but it gave them the opportunity to smell for weed or alcohol use and also see what was in the car (possibly prohibited or hot goods in the car)
thegrim33 3y ago
"Greater Police Presence [..] only ever prevents crimes [..]" "Police do not prevent crime" So which is it? In one sentence you say police prevent crimes of opportunity, then in the very next sentence you say police do not prevent crime.
- filoleg 3y ago
  You are misreading it. “Greater Police Presence [..] only ever prevents crimes [..]” - Kia/Hyundai take, claiming that increased police presence leads to higher rates of crime prevention. “Police do not prevent crime” - police, in its current state, is not that effective at preventing crime (as opposed to a situation where police presence was increased). I don’t have a strong opinion on this at all, and for all i know Kia/Hyundai take might be incorrect. But there is no inconsistency in what they are claiming. TLDR: first statement - their cause-and-effect claim, second statement - “the current police crime prevention rates are bad [which is why police presence should be increased according to our earlier claim about increased police presence increasing crime prevention rates]”.
Telemakhos 3y ago
Canada was one of the countries to mandate immobilizers, in 2007, and car theft has not stopped: thieves found ways around the immobilizers. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anti-theft-immobilizers-in-cars-are-now-obsolete-what-can-replace-them-1.6236514 https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anti-theft-immobilizers-in-cars-a... https://globalnews.ca/news/9392427/vehicle-theft-canada-security-measures/ https://globalnews.ca/news/9392427/vehicle-theft-canada-secu... > For example in Toronto last year, there were 9,439 reports of auto theft — a jump of nearly 45 per cent from the previous year. Toronto Police Service records show that auto theft has increased annually every year since 2018. Once Kia and like manufacturers put immobilizers in their American cars, thieves will target the most expensive car rather than these brands, but that will not stop car theft.
- UI_at_80x24 3y ago
  Good to know, thanks for the links.
- PaulHoule 3y ago
  I can say I've hot wired 1970s boats-of-cars (usually had permission, one of these cars didn't even have keys) and it is a lot of fun but I've never messed with a car that had a locking steering column or immobilizer.
adasdasdas 3y ago
>Police do not prevent crime, they apprehend people that they then accuse of doing the crime. Do you think there would be more or less crime if there were no police officers Also what is this 1984 double speak "apprehend people that they then accuse", are you talking about suspects lmao?
za3faran 3y ago
Counter point: there are safe countries that do not have these car thefts regardless of the immobilizer policy. E.g. UAE.
akira2501 3y ago
> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. Right.. but the goal of the police work is to find the criminal and put them in jail for a while. This is meant to be a social deterrent, wherein, the punishment for the crime makes committing the crime not worthwhile. > When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. Exactly.. which is why we use jail. You also seem to be suggesting that the lack of anti theft wouldn't matter to the overall rate, it just makes these particular cars more likely to be targeted. There are obvious and measurable problems with this idea. > So it is a failure of policy, not policing. Well.. if you don't have enough police to actually find and put criminals in jail, you can call that a policy problem, but the policy failure is simply not having enough police.
- enoch_r 3y ago
  Not to mention incapacitation! It's really hard to steal cars from prison! A very small percentage of people commit a shockingly high proportion of crime. In NYC, a third of shoplifting cases were committed by 327 people who were arrested over 6,000 times. That's just the times they were caught and arrested. I can't find nationally representative data, but in Colorado, a news station looked at 10 randomly selected criminal cases for vehicle theft in 2021-2022. Every single one of the suspects had been accused of stealing cars more than once. Collectively they faced auto theft charges in 43 cases.
- gremlinsinc 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - akira2501 3y ago
    > Technically police were started as a way to crack down on unions We've had Sheriff's since before the constitution was in existence. > Honestly I'd feel safer with Terminator style AI police (with proper guardrails), Really? Are you genuinely measuring risk here and comparing the number of bad or problematic arrests with the number of good ones? Is the mechanism you're using here correctly attributing counts to both cases? > If you want a real deterrent figure out why they are committing crimes i.e lack of quality education, food, feeling of safety while growing up, mental health, and address those issues. "Good people" commit crimes too. To the extent that the only known common threads among criminals are: Means, Motive and Opportunity. To view crime primarily as the result of misunderstood "Aladdin's" merely trying to bread on the table is not borne out by any apprehendable facts. > Imagine if every kid in America from poor neighborhood had the opportunity to go to fancy private boarding schools with rowing teams, etc.. So, we're just going to pretend white collar crime doesn't exist or is somehow less damaging overall to society? What kind of school did Bernie Maddoff go to? > I'm hoping we can automate every damn job just so even middle class and upper middle class will need ubi of some sort to keep capitalism going. I doubt social slavery is the way out of this.
Lammy 3y ago
I do not want a car that’s capable of deciding I’m not allowed to drive it.
- recursive 3y ago
  That's cool and everything, but I do not want a car that's not capable of deciding that someone else is not allowed to drive it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- zardo 3y ago
  I just don't want a key that I can't get wet that costs hundreds of dollars to replace.
philwelch 3y ago
> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. They can also take proactive measures, like leaving bait cars and arresting the people who steal those. There was a very amusing television series made out of the footage from this. > When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. The goal is to remove these people from the general population. I don’t actually think deterrence works; these people just need to be identified, caught, and incarcerated until they outgrow their antisocial behavior.
local_crmdgeon 3y ago
This is a very certain statement from someone who's policies have totally fucking ruined SF.
junofan 3y ago
Police can use bait cars to crack down on crime rings, which I would count as work done by police before a car is stolen.
enoch_r 3y ago
This is quite right. Similarly, speeding cameras are incapable of stopping speeding until _AFTER_ the speeding has occurred. Speeding cameras do not prevent crime, they cite people who are accused of speeding. That's why when a speed camera is installed, it makes no difference whatsoever and everyone goes exactly the same speed they would have gone before. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/
chrismcb 3y ago
But police are a deterrent. If a thief is more likely to be apprehended they will be less likely to steal.

eurleif 3y ago

You're ignoring incapacitation. If someone is behind bars for stealing car #1, they can't steal car #2.

the_doctah 3y ago

The application of Broken Windows Theory[1] and Terry Stops[2] are the only things that have ever worked in New York. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

Terr_ 3y ago
WTF? No, those things never worked! (Not even when you ignore the costs in bias/ unconstitutionality.) Major crime stats were already dropping beforehand, and that trend continued with no correlation to the policy... not even a blip when stop-and-frisk was abruptly stopped for legal reasons. Just because a politician says something when bragging about their job-record doesn't make it true. ___ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/22/donald-trump-claims-new-yorks-stop-and-frisk-policy-reduced-crime-the-data-disagree/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/22/donal... https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/stop-and-frisk-works-only-if-its-legal-version/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/09/stop-and-fris...
- the_doctah 3y ago
  Wow, is that why crime went back up when they stopped? Crime was "already dropping" because of Bill Bratton. It's actually curious that anyone would believe it, "never worked". What, you think Terry Stops made crime go up?
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    > crime went back up when they stopped Citation needed. What statistic, in what time frame, relative to what baseline/context?

recursive 3y ago

> When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. Perhaps less people will be actively looking to steal $THING if they know that that they might be apprehended and accused of doing the crime.

tigen 3y ago

> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen That sounds like lax policing to me. (Which itself derives from policy.)

Scea91 3y ago

So basically your claim is that noone evaluates possible consequences when deciding whether or not to commit a crime? It seems totally reasonable to me to expect that the higher the chance of negative consequences the less people commit the crime. Basically, police should lower the expected value.

UI_at_80x24 3y ago
In US States that have the death penalty, have murders stopped? And more to the point, are they significantly lower % per capita? Policy change that requires the manufacturer to install a part (that is a $~200 option in the USA) would have practically eliminated the car as being a "target" object. Getting caught is always secondary in consideration to reward. If somebody is desperate enough, then it doesn't matter how risky it is. Car theft isn't new. There being a punishment for stealing cars isn't new. What makes the Kia/Hyundia situation so significant is how EASY it is to do. Make it more hard to steal, and make that a mandatory policy. The thieves will find other ways to steal cars, but it might stop the easy theft. More cops won't do that.
- brvsft 3y ago
  Large corporations are more likely to comply with a policy, so I think that would factor in to when and where policy is more effective than police, no? What I don't understand about your point is that policy already makes stealing cars, murder, etc. illegal. What do you see as the difference between a policy that forces a car manufacturer to implement some technology that hinders theft vs. a policy that makes theft illegal? I agree with you that the technology is probably beneficial on the whole and more effective than having police running around attempting to stop every car theft, but you're making this into a debate about policy vs. police, and I'm failing to make sense of how you distinguish one policy (regulating car manufacturing) from another (stealing cars is illegal).
  - UI_at_80x24 3y ago
    My point is simple making it more difficult to steal by default is preferred to "hope we can catch them after the fact". Another [very flawed] analogy; Let's say that all guns were banned. All guns disappear. Now 'easy' crimes involving guns disappear. If nobody has a gun, then somebody couldn't get shot. If we move the burden further upstream and closer to the source then everybody downstream benefits. Make the manufacturer build "good locks" so that bic pens don't work.

lesuorac 3y ago

Eh, I mean in this situation it's pretty cut and dry that Kia & Hyundai is doing something different as opposed to the police. I doubt close to 1/3 of all the vehicles in Milwaukee are KH but they make up 2/3 of the thefts. If the police are a contributing factor you'd expect it to increase evenly across brands. But "Greater Police Presence" can deter crime depending on what police do. The presence of police cars on highways does slow down drivers. If you want a ton of traffic, I mean cars following the speed limit, then a "Greater Police Presence" archives that (until drivers recognize that cops won't pull them over until they're going +20). I really doubt organized crime will steal powertools from home depot while a cop is in the same asile. Of course they may just go to the lowes down the street. GPP has both a scalability issue but also an enforcement issue; you can commit many crimes in the presence of a cop and they will do nothing.

giantg2 3y ago
"If the police are a contributing factor you'd expect it to increase evenly across brands." They can still be a contributing factor without being the differentiating factor.

mc32 3y ago

I remember a time when police used to stop people who they thought did not "fit" into a particular area of town. This both affected thieves (and non-thieves) from poorer areas driving in affluent areas and it also affected people driving up-market cars into poorer areas (usually looking to score drugs or a pick up a prostitute or sometimes just visiting relatives/friends). This is not done as much any more. I recall getting pulled over over the years and being asked by police "where are you going?". Obviously one does not have to answer, but it gave them the opportunity to smell for weed or alcohol use and also see what was in the car (possibly prohibited or hot goods in the car)

thegrim33 3y ago

"Greater Police Presence [..] only ever prevents crimes [..]" "Police do not prevent crime" So which is it? In one sentence you say police prevent crimes of opportunity, then in the very next sentence you say police do not prevent crime.

filoleg 3y ago
You are misreading it. “Greater Police Presence [..] only ever prevents crimes [..]” - Kia/Hyundai take, claiming that increased police presence leads to higher rates of crime prevention. “Police do not prevent crime” - police, in its current state, is not that effective at preventing crime (as opposed to a situation where police presence was increased). I don’t have a strong opinion on this at all, and for all i know Kia/Hyundai take might be incorrect. But there is no inconsistency in what they are claiming. TLDR: first statement - their cause-and-effect claim, second statement - “the current police crime prevention rates are bad [which is why police presence should be increased according to our earlier claim about increased police presence increasing crime prevention rates]”.

Telemakhos 3y ago

Canada was one of the countries to mandate immobilizers, in 2007, and car theft has not stopped: thieves found ways around the immobilizers. https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anti-theft-immobilizers-in-cars-are-now-obsolete-what-can-replace-them-1.6236514 https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/anti-theft-immobilizers-in-cars-a... https://globalnews.ca/news/9392427/vehicle-theft-canada-security-measures/ https://globalnews.ca/news/9392427/vehicle-theft-canada-secu... > For example in Toronto last year, there were 9,439 reports of auto theft — a jump of nearly 45 per cent from the previous year. Toronto Police Service records show that auto theft has increased annually every year since 2018. Once Kia and like manufacturers put immobilizers in their American cars, thieves will target the most expensive car rather than these brands, but that will not stop car theft.

UI_at_80x24 3y ago
Good to know, thanks for the links.
PaulHoule 3y ago
I can say I've hot wired 1970s boats-of-cars (usually had permission, one of these cars didn't even have keys) and it is a lot of fun but I've never messed with a car that had a locking steering column or immobilizer.

adasdasdas 3y ago

>Police do not prevent crime, they apprehend people that they then accuse of doing the crime. Do you think there would be more or less crime if there were no police officers Also what is this 1984 double speak "apprehend people that they then accuse", are you talking about suspects lmao?

za3faran 3y ago

Counter point: there are safe countries that do not have these car thefts regardless of the immobilizer policy. E.g. UAE.

akira2501 3y ago

> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. Right.. but the goal of the police work is to find the criminal and put them in jail for a while. This is meant to be a social deterrent, wherein, the punishment for the crime makes committing the crime not worthwhile. > When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. Exactly.. which is why we use jail. You also seem to be suggesting that the lack of anti theft wouldn't matter to the overall rate, it just makes these particular cars more likely to be targeted. There are obvious and measurable problems with this idea. > So it is a failure of policy, not policing. Well.. if you don't have enough police to actually find and put criminals in jail, you can call that a policy problem, but the policy failure is simply not having enough police.

enoch_r 3y ago
Not to mention incapacitation! It's really hard to steal cars from prison! A very small percentage of people commit a shockingly high proportion of crime. In NYC, a third of shoplifting cases were committed by 327 people who were arrested over 6,000 times. That's just the times they were caught and arrested. I can't find nationally representative data, but in Colorado, a news station looked at 10 randomly selected criminal cases for vehicle theft in 2021-2022. Every single one of the suspects had been accused of stealing cars more than once. Collectively they faced auto theft charges in 43 cases.
gremlinsinc 3y ago
[flagged]
- akira2501 3y ago
  > Technically police were started as a way to crack down on unions We've had Sheriff's since before the constitution was in existence. > Honestly I'd feel safer with Terminator style AI police (with proper guardrails), Really? Are you genuinely measuring risk here and comparing the number of bad or problematic arrests with the number of good ones? Is the mechanism you're using here correctly attributing counts to both cases? > If you want a real deterrent figure out why they are committing crimes i.e lack of quality education, food, feeling of safety while growing up, mental health, and address those issues. "Good people" commit crimes too. To the extent that the only known common threads among criminals are: Means, Motive and Opportunity. To view crime primarily as the result of misunderstood "Aladdin's" merely trying to bread on the table is not borne out by any apprehendable facts. > Imagine if every kid in America from poor neighborhood had the opportunity to go to fancy private boarding schools with rowing teams, etc.. So, we're just going to pretend white collar crime doesn't exist or is somehow less damaging overall to society? What kind of school did Bernie Maddoff go to? > I'm hoping we can automate every damn job just so even middle class and upper middle class will need ubi of some sort to keep capitalism going. I doubt social slavery is the way out of this.

Lammy 3y ago

I do not want a car that’s capable of deciding I’m not allowed to drive it.

recursive 3y ago
That's cool and everything, but I do not want a car that's not capable of deciding that someone else is not allowed to drive it.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
zardo 3y ago
I just don't want a key that I can't get wet that costs hundreds of dollars to replace.

philwelch 3y ago

> Police only work _AFTER_ the car has been stolen. They can also take proactive measures, like leaving bait cars and arresting the people who steal those. There was a very amusing television series made out of the footage from this. > When you have somebody actively looking to steal $THING, they will find it and steal it. The goal is to remove these people from the general population. I don’t actually think deterrence works; these people just need to be identified, caught, and incarcerated until they outgrow their antisocial behavior.

local_crmdgeon 3y ago

This is a very certain statement from someone who's policies have totally fucking ruined SF.

junofan 3y ago

Police can use bait cars to crack down on crime rings, which I would count as work done by police before a car is stolen.

enoch_r 3y ago

This is quite right. Similarly, speeding cameras are incapable of stopping speeding until _AFTER_ the speeding has occurred. Speeding cameras do not prevent crime, they cite people who are accused of speeding. That's why when a speed camera is installed, it makes no difference whatsoever and everyone goes exactly the same speed they would have gone before. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20927736/

chrismcb 3y ago

But police are a deterrent. If a thief is more likely to be apprehended they will be less likely to steal.