4 ms·
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 s
by 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.
- junofan 3y agoI see your point, although you also need to consider the millions of vehicles already on the road. But let’s say we snap our fingers and equip every car with an immobilizer. Do people stop committing property crime? Or do they look elsewhere? Do I also need metal bars on my windows? Steel doors? Should I avoid carrying valuables on the street? Do I need to buy a Cybertruck with reinforced windows in case somebody holds me up with a sledgehammer at a traffic light? Should I just avoid traveling without a security detail? At some point, deterrents seem more effective against individual actors in creating the society I want to live in.