Slashdot Mirror


Wireless, GPS-Loaded 'Bait Car' Traps Thieves

captainClassLoader writes: "The Washington Post is reporting that a late-model car, loaded with wireless surveillance gear, a remote kill switch and GPS, is being left (unlocked, presumably) on the streets of the Washington, D.C. metro area as 'bait' for car thieves. This article reports that they've just made their first bust with the vehicle."

750 comments

  1. I wonder.... by the_radix · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who pays the parking tickets on these?

    GPS: "Help! I'm being towed!"

    --
    This .sig is either false or a paradox.
    1. Re:I wonder.... by rirugrat · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      ...if these cars also have the 50,000 volt car-jacker traps like the one in RoboCop!!!

      Chris

    2. Re:I wonder.... by marauder404 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Many cars, including some current Mercedes Benzes, detect the car being towed, notifies MB Customer Service, which in turn calls you. Leave your cell phone number with them in advance, and they'll reach you by cell phone, telling you that your car is either being stolen or towed.

    3. Re:I wonder.... by LordKariya · · Score: 1

      Gonzalez, 40, was charged with possessing burglary tools and driving on a suspended license.

      I guess if you're driving a stolen car, having your paperwork in order isn't the first thing on your mind. Funny, though.

      --
      I alternate between posting +5 and -1 Comments. Karma: +53 -47 = 6
    4. Re:I wonder.... by terkozer · · Score: 1

      Now couple that with this $655 option, and kiss those car thieves good bye. The option available in South Africa since 98 is a car flame thrower (GTA style) that casts a man high fireball on both sides of the car!. It is yet to be deemed illegal in South Africa.
      Check out the movietoo (in Quicktime). That's some funny shit.

    5. Re:I wonder.... by CaptainStormfield · · Score: 5, Funny

      How useful is this feature? Is it really that helpful to know that your car is being stolen -- after someone has already managed (presumably) to drive away with it? Imagine the conversation with the Mercedes customer service operator:

      Mercedes: Hello sir, I am calling to let you know that a few minutes ago, your car was stolen. It is possible that it was towed, but given the neighborhood where you parked it . . .

      Me: Crap. You mean that someone is breaking into my car?

      Mercedes: No. Our system doesn't trigger an alert until your car is actually in motion. Someone has already broken into your car. Now they are driving away with it.

      Me: Crap.

      Mercedes: Have a nice day. In the event that you don't recover your car, you might consider our all new 2002 Mercedes models.

      --
      "The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
    6. Re:I wonder.... by agallagh42 · · Score: 2

      The mercedes system has a GPS locator as well. Would be pretty useless without it. It's tied into the navigation system.

      --
      Carpe Cerevisi - Seize the Beer
    7. Re:I wonder.... by Tower · · Score: 1

      Or something more like this.

      --
      "It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
    8. Re:I wonder.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've already had this in San Francisco for a year. The cars are highly modified Honda Civics and GM model cars.

    9. Re:I wonder.... by Binky+The+Oracle · · Score: 5, Informative

      All Mercedes models with the Tele Aid system (Similar to On*Star) installed have GPS hardware. You have to subscribe to have it activated, though. Once subscribed, you can call Mercedes and ask them to locate your car for you at any time for any reason (where's my wife?). As long as the car is on and visible to GPS, they can give you an approximate location. Location requests remain active for up to 14 days if they don't locate the car immediately. Location isn't really what Tele Aid is for, though.

      Instead, Mercedes also promotes the LoJack Locator system. LoJack apparently has a better signal strength and doesn't rely on GPS, but rather on cellular triangulation. Many police departments have cars equipped with LoJack tracking systems as well. There's no subscription fee, just the purchase of the unit itself (around $600) which is covered for the life of the car. The only drawback is that you have to be in a covered area for it to work, so if the thief is smart and can get to the desert before you call the cops, you might be out of luck.

      According to LoJack's website, approximately 25% of their recoveries result in an arrest. You also typically get a pretty good break on insurance, so the costs are somewhat offset.

      The Mercedes Tele Aid system is designed primarily for driver convenience (Where am I? Where's my car? Can you tell me how to get to the nearest dealer/restaurant/gas station) while LoJack's sole purpose is post-theft vehicle recovery.

      I suspect that the DC bait car is using something similar to LoJack - I believe there's an FCC band dedicated to law enforcement recovery type things.

      Wow... I sounded like a commercial there, didn't I? I will say that LoJack does provide peace of mind and I was much more willing to spend $600 on it than $240/year for Tele Aid. It takes a darn good product for me to provide a recommendation - but if you've got a high-end or high-theft-risk car, LoJack is definitely worth the money.

      --

      Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.

    10. Re:I wonder.... by gorillasoft · · Score: 2

      How useful is this feature? Is it really that helpful to know that your car is being stolen -- after someone has already managed (presumably) to drive away with it?

      Yes, because if you contact the police right away, and tell them your vehicle's description and license plate number along with its last location, they can have all the police in the area looking for it.

      That assumes that the service calls you and you call the police within about 10-15 minutes or less of the vehicle being stolen. Any longer than that and it will become less useful but would still be a good idea - and much better than waiting until the next time you happen to be back to your car, which could be hours or days later.

    11. Re:I wonder.... by modecx · · Score: 1

      Wow. It's a real treat to see something that amusing (something far too uncommon, I say). I think it would be really great, but they need top be able to turn one side or the next on/off, it would really suck to be a innocent bystander and get your eyebrows singed. Other than that, I say go for it.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    12. Re:I wonder.... by sg3000 · · Score: 2

      > Our system doesn't trigger an alert until your car is actually in motion.

      Pretty funny.

      Actually, it has two triggers. One will alert MB if the car alarm goes off because the door was opened without turning off the alarm. It also has the ability to tell if the car's incline shifts dramatically. That means that if you try to tow the car (or even just lift up the car to steal the wheels), the alarm will go off, too, and then contact Mercedes, so they can call you.

      I think MB will only release the coordinates of the vehicle to a police department, so I don't think you can use the system to check up on a spouse or whatever. But you'd still have to be a moron to try to steal one of those cars.

      MB's TeleAid system is pretty cool because they can also do some basic diagnostics remotely as well. Mine was doing some weird beeping noise, so I called them to ask what the deal was, and the guy said, "Oh, let me clear that for you." and it was gone.

      Since the thing tracks how many miles it has to go before needing an oil change, I expect future models will check their mileage, and then automatically call the closest dealership (determined by GPS) to schedule an appointment. Reminds me of Professor Frink's autodialer, with the built in wheels: "Well, let's get you back to Frinky. Hope your wheels still work."

      --
      Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
    13. Re:I wonder.... by Xerithane · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also a great feature of new Mercedes is the axle locking. I had an SLK320 (Read my journal to find out what happened, if you feel so inclined) that had this feature. It basically made it have to get lifted up to be towed or moved, which was just a cool feature for the sheer "Yeah try to tow my car" value.

      LoJack is a decent system, but you get no added benefit over the standard GPS locator except it's hidden in one of 27 I think) spots. Tele-Aid is awesome though, and you should have gotten the first year free. If not, go bitch at your dealer.

      The funny thing about it, nobody steals Mercedes. Those that do, LoJack isn't going to do shit or they stole it just to trash it and it doesn't matter.

      There are very very very good reasons as to why civics and camry's are so widely stolen. They are easy to chop, high resale on parts because everyone has one of the cars just about. Mercedes/Ferrari/BMW/etc are not high-theft-risk cars. They say you should get LoJack so they get money, go read the reports.. you'll never see Mercedes on the top 10.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    14. Re:I wonder.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Gonzalez, 40, was charged with possessing burglary tools and driving on a suspended license.

      Do they also charge rapists for posession of a dick?

    15. Re:I wonder.... by CaptainStormfield · · Score: 1

      Now that would be useful, assuming that MB is good about promptly notifying you that the alarm is going off or that the incline of the car changed.

      --
      "The dinosaurs died because they didn't have a space program." - Niven
    16. Re:I wonder.... by jrp2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      LoJack apparently has a better signal strength and doesn't rely on GPS, but rather on cellular triangulation. Many police departments have cars equipped with LoJack tracking systems as well. There's no subscription fee, just the purchase of the unit itself (around $600) which is covered for the life of the car. The only drawback is ....

      Actually, Lojack blows. I bought that line of crap and purchased Lojack. My car was stolen in broad daylight from a bank parking lot. I was only in for 15 minutes, so I know I caught it in a reasonable timeframe. I called Lojack, they said just report it to the Chicago Police and the system will be activated. Not true. It got activated 4 hours later when the record was transferred from the Chicago computer system to the Illinois computer system. By then, the car was stripped and the Lojack disabled.

      What I also learned in the process is the way Lojack works. When it gets activated it starts emitting a signal. When it gets near a lojack equipped cop car, the cop gets a signal then triangulates in on it. If they do not come near a cop car with the right gear, they are free and clear. If they steal it out of your garage at 11pm and you don't discover it until 7am, you are also SOL.

      If any of you are thinking of this kind of thing, look for something that is more proactive like periodically (every half hour or so) sending in your location to a computer. Or, even better, sending in the location every minute when an alarm (possibly a silent alarm) has been triggered as this kind of minimizes privacy issues. This kind of thing would allow you to track after the fact where it is (or at least where it last sent a signal from).

      Hopefully with GPRS (and/or "3G") packet oriented services this will be cheap to do, and even pretty easy to DIY as you could have it just send the data back to your computer.

      Bottom line, Lojack failed me, the process is full of holes well beyond the obvious ones. Also note, their "guarantee" is not for life, only the "service" is. When I tried to collect, they said I was out of warranty and the fact it was not triggered in time was the fault of the Chicago Police, not theirs. It is a typical good idea, poor execution.

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    17. Re:I wonder.... by mixbsd · · Score: 1

      It's more of an anti-car-jacking device than preventing the theft of an unattended vehicle. With violent car-jacking on the increase in England, it's a welcome invention.

    18. Re:I wonder.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "I had an SLK320 (Read my journal to find out what happened, if you feel so inclined) that had this feature. It basically made it have to get lifted up to be towed or moved, which was just a cool feature for the sheer "Yeah try to tow my car" value."

      Around here they just throw a trolly-type device under the wheels that aren't lifted up. That way your wheels are not turning when being towed, and it doesn't matter if they're locked.

      "There are very very very good reasons as to why civics and camry's are so widely stolen. They are easy to chop, high resale on parts because everyone has one of the cars just about. Mercedes/Ferrari/BMW/etc are not high-theft-risk cars. They say you should get LoJack so they get money, go read the reports.. you'll never see Mercedes on the top 10."

      Well of course Mercedes is not on the top 10, look at the percentage of Mercedes on the road compared to cars like the Camry. The Camrys probably outnumber the Mercedes 50:1 (unless you live in some hoitty-toitty neighbourhood).

      This really burns me up when going to pay for insurance. I ask why the rate is so high and they give me this "Well, it's a high theft risk" line of crap. No shit, Sherlock, this model probably accounts for 60% of the cars on the road. Statistically speaking, it's got a higher chance of being stolen! That doesn't mean MY car has a higher chance of being stolen though.

    19. Re:I wonder.... by elemental23 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where am I? Where's my car? Can you tell me how to get to the nearest dealer ...

      It sounds like a dealer is about the last thing you need. You've probably spent too much money at one already, if you can't find your car or yourself.

      "Hi, I'm in south central LA. Can you direct me to the nearest crack house?"

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
    20. Re:I wonder.... by jkusters · · Score: 1

      There is another similar product out there called WingCast. I understand it will be available for Ford and Nissan cars soon. If you go to this page and view the first movie, there is a bit where the guy has driven to a restaurant to meet with a client. While dining, the *car* calls him on his cellular phone. He answers and you see the valet driving his car somewhere other than to the parking lot. I love the look on the valet's face when the owner's voice demands to know where the car is going...

      JOhn.

    21. Re:I wonder.... by ptbarnett · · Score: 2, Informative
      I get enough of a break on my car insurance to pay for a good part of a LoJack installation, but I typically keep them longer than most people.

      But, quick response time isn't always required. My insurance agent told me that LoJack has changed the way that professional car thieves work. They will now steal a car and park it in a public place for 24-48 hours. If it is still there after that time, they presume that there is no LoJack that will lead the police back to their chop shop.

      So, It's not perfect, but I decided it was worth a the small additional cost (amortized over the lifetime of my car).

    22. Re:I wonder.... by Binky+The+Oracle · · Score: 2

      Well of course Mercedes is not on the top 10, look at the percentage of Mercedes on the road compared to cars like the Camry. The Camrys probably outnumber the Mercedes 50:1 (unless you live in some hoitty-toitty neighbourhood).

      They're also a lot harder to steal using typical means (slim jim, break the steering column, hotwire, etc.). They have more comprehensive theft deterrents than, say, a Ford Aspire. They can still be stolen, of course, but they're not as convenient to steal, and as you point out, are in somewhat lower demand for parts, etc.

      This really burns me up when going to pay for insurance. I ask why the rate is so high and they give me this "Well, it's a high theft risk" line of crap. No shit, Sherlock, this model probably accounts for 60% of the cars on the road. Statistically speaking, it's got a higher chance of being stolen! That doesn't mean MY car has a higher chance of being stolen though.

      I don't understand your point here. If you drive a car that's more popular with thieves (for whatever reason) then you have a greater chance of having it stolen. If insurance companies have to pay more money on Camry claims, then they're going to charge more for Camry premiums. The reason they pay more on Camry claims is irrelevent.

      You'll also pay more insurance on cars that are out of production (high cost for replacement parts), that have typically high collision repair costs (lots of plastic parts that have to be replaced because they can't be repaired), or that are garaged in high-theft areas (Los Angeles vs. Boise). If it costs the insurance company more money, they'll pass the costs on to you.

      Doesn't your argument rely on thieves showing no preference for one model over another? (I'm not trying to be a smartass, I just don't understand your reasoning.)

      --

      Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.

    23. Re:I wonder.... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Since the thing tracks how many miles it has to go before needing an oil change, I expect future models will check their mileage, and then automatically call the closest dealership (determined by GPS) to schedule an appointment.

      Oh that'd be just peachy.... everyone knows how economical and speedy dealerships are when it comes to service. "yeah, your car needs an oil change.. ya need to bring it by tuesday morning about oh... 7:00AM. It should be done sometime wednesday morning. your cost'll be around 79 dollars."

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    24. Re:I wonder.... by Binky+The+Oracle · · Score: 2

      LoJack is a decent system, but you get no added benefit over the standard GPS locator except it's hidden in one of 27 I think) spots. Tele-Aid is awesome though, and you should have gotten the first year free. If not, go bitch at your dealer.

      The main added benefit I see is that LoJack doesn't rely on GPS, but on cellular. All a thief has to do to defeat GPS tracking is remove line of sight (a parking garage for example). Cellular triangulation is a bit harder to shield against.

      TeleAid wins, however, on coverage area. LoJack has limited coverage outside of major metropolitan areas, whereas TeleAid just needs to see the satellites. A combination of the two is the best bet.

      BTW, I read your journal entry a few weeks ago. Hope you got everything cleared up! That was a crappy chain of events. And LoJack claims 30 spots in their literature, but that's just splitting hairs. ;-)

      Also nice to know that you liked TeleAid. My wife hasn't decided if she wants it or not... nice to hear a viewpoint from someone other than the dealer. =-) Also, we just bought a 2000 model, so the first free year is already gone. We may subscribe, though. Thanks for the info!

      --

      Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.

    25. Re:I wonder.... by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

      GPS and CDPD. It's used to track trucks. Do
      a web search and any number of CDPD modems, costing around $600, some with integrated GPS, will show up. Send a command TO the modem, and activate the relay attached to the ignition. Piece of cake.

      Ham radio operators do the same thing on 144.39 MHz., using something called APRS. Lo-Jack is obsolete, or will be shortly.

    26. Re:I wonder.... by Cryptnotic · · Score: 3, Informative
      Cars aren't stolen randomly.


      Popular "mass market" cars are often stolen because the parts are easy to get rid of. There are millions of people with cars that can use the parts. There are also lots of unscrupulous people who will buy an engine or a transmission or wheels or seats from a stolen car, not caring that they are supporting auto thievery.


      A rare car which is stolen would be of little use, since the only places that service those cars are specialty shops and dealers. Neither those businesses nor their customers would be inclined to get involved in illegal activity such as receiving stolen parts.


      The only exception to this would be cars which are stolen "to order". Perhaps a mob boss wants a new Bentley, but doesn't want to go to a dealer and buy it. He could hire someone to steal it for him and then pay him in dirty unlaundered money. He would of course need his own mechanic who can repair the car for him, since he would be unable to take a stolen car to a dealer for service. So this scenario isn't very likely.


      Cars aren't stolen randomly, they are stolen for a profit. The only cases of random car theft would be for joyrides, and because of the risk involved for no financial gain, most criminals wouldn't be inclined to do it.


      Cryptnotic

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    27. Re:I wonder.... by Binky+The+Oracle · · Score: 2

      Ah. So I fell prey to marketing hype. Where were all you guys when I was getting suckered? =-)

      Seriously, though, the insurance break I get will pay for the LoJack in just over 3 years, so unless we lose the car due to unforseen circumstances (collision, theft) (better not be theft), it's still a worthwhile purchase.

      Good to know the potential downsides of LoJack as well, though.

      --

      Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.

    28. Re:I wonder.... by neitzsche · · Score: 1

      "Cars aren't stolen randomly, they are stolen for a profit. The only cases of random car theft would be for joyrides, and because of the risk involved for no financial gain, most criminals wouldn't be inclined to do it."

      You've never lived in the Bronx.

      --
      "God is dead." - Frederik Nietzsche
    29. Re:I wonder.... by Grab · · Score: 2

      I suggest you move to Britain, and most specifically South Wales. The hills in South Wales are littered with burned-out cars that have been joy-ridden until they ran out of petrol and then pushed off a cliff. And everywhere else in Britain, there's plenty of smashed-up/burned-out cars around from joyriding.

      Maybe American kids are naturally more law-abiding...

      Grab.

    30. Re:I wonder.... by bjb · · Score: 1
      Ahh yes, but you forgot to mention the coolest feature of the Tele Aid system for the Mercedes Benz - the cool "launch the missiles" button!


      For those who haven't seen one of these yet, there is basically a little clear plastic trap door on the ceiling control cluster that has a red button behind it. You press the plastic door (with that oh-so-satisfying-Mercedes-quality click/spring action), which causes it to pop open, revealing the red button. Press the button and it lights up red and calls for help. When you first get the car and need to activate the service, it is always lit red. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that it just reminds me so much of the cold war era movies where they'd have buttons like this for launching the missles.


      On*Star just has that silly little blue button. Booorrrrinnnngg ;-)


      Oh well.. I'm done now.. thanks

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    31. Re:I wonder.... by jrp2 · · Score: 2

      They will now steal a car and park it in a public place for 24-48 hours. If it is still there after that time,

      That is good to hear. I guess we are all getting some advantage then, even if we don't have Lojack. Also good the insurance discount helps pay for it. I guess that is an indication it must work sometimes as the insurance companies would not give a discount for something that is completely useless.

      I still hold that it is the worst of several good options, and with newer packet technologies coming out, combined with GPS, there are much better and cheaper options on the way. Let's just hope none of us need to find out!

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    32. Re:I wonder.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also a great feature of new Mercedes is the axle locking. I had an SLK320 (Read my journal to find out what happened, if you feel so inclined) that had this feature. It basically made it have to get lifted up to be towed or moved, which was just a cool feature for the sheer "Yeah try to tow my car" value.

      You, obviously, are clueless and in need of familiarization with an electric winch of the variety typically found on a tow truck. Can you say 10,000 pounds of force, minimum legal requirement, for a class A rollback truck, along with 50 feet of 3/8" steel cable similarly rated? Sure, I knew you could.
      Well, Skippy, that's enough to pull your precious 320 straight up a cliff (or dangle it off the side of a bridge) locked axles be damned. Anthing less than anchor bolts screwed into the concrete is going to be little more than an annoyance to the truck operator and you'll be left staring at four skid marks leading to the spot where the tow truck used to be parked.

      Think next time, McFly.

    33. Re:I wonder.... by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      Also nice to know that you liked TeleAid. My wife hasn't decided if she wants it or not... nice to hear a viewpoint from someone other than the dealer. =-) Also, we just bought a 2000 model, so the first free year is already gone. We may subscribe, though. Thanks for the info!

      It really is worth the $240/month. It's definitely very cool when you are lost to get the help you need at the push of a button. Also, if you ever get stranded/locked out/etc they can help as well. They can remotely unlock your doors, and a bunch of other nifty things.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
  2. Thats not really new... by ScUmM_BoY · · Score: 2, Informative

    They've had that here (Hamilton, Ontario) for a while... they leave them in movie theater parking lots.

    1. Re:Thats not really new... by wilf · · Score: 1

      they've had a variant in poland for ages too. saw a documentary about it on german television (the car is an adapted version of an expensive-looking Mercedes) over a year ago.

    2. Re:Thats not really new... by garcia · · Score: 2

      they show it on COPS and the like all the time. They stage a fake fight between a man and a woman and the one that drove the bait car gets into the car w/the other person. They then leave the scene and wait for the little hoodlums to steal the thing.

      They drive for about a minute and the engine shuts off, doors, lock and the little bastard sees the lights and hears the police.

      I don't care if they get caught, but I still don't think it is right.

    3. Re:Thats not really new... by jcr · · Score: 2

      I don't care if they get caught, but I still don't think it is right.

      What's your objection?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:Thats not really new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes sense. The article said they got a lot of the technology from a company in Ontario.

    5. Re:Thats not really new... by wljones · · Score: 1

      There is no need to leave the car unlocked. Thieves in Pittsburgh would race locked cars around the block in the early 1950's. Unlocked cars are for amateurs. The pros are slowed very little by locked doors.

    6. Re:Thats not really new... by garcia · · Score: 2

      if they are going to leave a car in the open, fine. That doesn't bother me. It is staging a situation that leads to a theft that I find wrong.

    7. Re:Thats not really new... by Tri0de · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it would be so much better if there was a tank of Zyklon B that released 30 right after the doors locked.

      --
      "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
    8. Re:Thats not really new... by xTMFWahoo · · Score: 1

      They are still committing a crime however they came about it. If I leave my stereo in my front yard and it's stolen- it's still stealing. I laughed by butt off then I heard the story. I do think it's Police finally catching up to the times.
      There are some scary situations that could sprout out of this, such as planting change in a vending machine but that's not even close to GTA.

      --
      "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." Mark Twain.
    9. Re:Thats not really new... by MaxVlast · · Score: 2

      "Thieves in Pittsburgh would race locked cars around the block in the early 1950's."

      Just what does that mean? They'd unlock the car, then race it? They would never unlock it, and ride it like a horse? They'd only take locked cars around the block, whereas they'd take the unlocked ones off to the chop shop? I'm curious. What do you actually mean?

      --
      There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
      Max V.
      NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
    10. Re:Thats not really new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love liberal attitudes. I hope someone hears you and someone arguing and then steals YOUR car, hippie.

    11. Re:Thats not really new... by garcia · · Score: 2

      If they really want the 1999 Saturn w/55000 miles, go ahead, take it. It's insured.

  3. Hrm... by qurob · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Thieves in my area steal the cars with OnStar right off the light...sure, they catch them but usually it's a little too late.

  4. were the by Fishstick · · Score: 2

    keys in the ignition also?

    --

    There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
    Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    1. Re:were the by fobbman · · Score: 2

      They were left in the driver's side visor. That's where everyone leaves their keys.

    2. Re:were the by timothy_m_smith · · Score: 1

      I feel like if the car was left unlocked or with keys in it that it would be a little closer to entrapment.

    3. Re:were the by chinakow · · Score: 1

      I hate to point it out but stealing a car (even with the keys in the ignition and the car running with the door open) is still stealing a car, there is not too much to worry about there.

    4. Re:were the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you really think that you should probably look up entrapment.

    5. Re:were the by dodald · · Score: 1
      leaving your keys oin your car is pretty damn stupid. I live in a extreamly low crime area, we leave our doors unlocked, but leaving the keys in the car is just dumb.

      Can't tell if your joking but, a lot of people do leave there keys on the visor, and its dumb :)

      --
      101010b 2Ah 52o
    6. Re:were the by timothy_m_smith · · Score: 1

      No, I really can't disagree with that. Stealing a car is stealing a car and it should be a crime regardless. None the less, it sounds as if this particular police dept is not leaving the car unlocked w/keys (especially since it says they caught the guy w/o tools). However, I would still take issue if they police department was in fact leaving the car unlocked w/keys since I think it would pose a public safety risk to kids that might get in trouble if they had easy access to a car w/keys.

    7. Re:were the by forii · · Score: 1

      However, I would still take issue if they police department was in fact leaving the car unlocked w/keys since I think it would pose a public safety risk to kids that might get in trouble if they had easy access to a car w/keys.

      And heaven knows, we must always REMEMBER THE CHILDREN!!!!!!

    8. Re:were the by paranoid.android · · Score: 1

      Think that's trusting? Hell, my parents leave their keys in the ignition, just far enough not to trigger bells and whistles that remind you not to leave them there.

      This really happened to us once: no one at home, garage door open, house doors locked, cars unlocked with keys in ignition. Thief breaks into house, ignores easily stealable cars, removes jar of loose change from my room after knocking over a plant or two.

    9. Re:were the by russh347 · · Score: 1
      However, I would still take issue if they police department was in fact leaving the car unlocked w/keys since I think it would pose a public safety risk to kids that might get in trouble if they had easy access to a car w/keys.


      Never mind the fact that the police are watching the car and they have a kill switch. I can't think of a much safer situtation. Most kids I know do have access to car keys, their parent's. If a kid's going to take a car isn't it better that they do so under that watchful eye of the police?
    10. Re:were the by timothy_m_smith · · Score: 1
      Never mind the fact that the police are watching the car and they have a kill switch.

      However, the article says
      When the car called police, a map of Arlington flashed on a computer screen in the Emergency Communications Center, pinpointing the vehicle's location. Because the car was linked to a global positioning device, dispatchers tracked its movements on the computer screen and knew where to send two police cars.

      So, in fact, it is just a car sitting on the street with any human watching it...just being tracked in case it moves.
    11. Re:were the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thief breaks into house, ignores easily stealable cars, removes jar of loose change from my room after knocking over a plant or two.

      Probably some kid. Loose change buys drugs and cigarettes, but the parents might get suspicious when the kid shows up with a new car.

    12. Re:were the by paranoid.android · · Score: 1

      Actually, they caught him. Mid 20s. Apparently burglarized a bunch of area homes, looking for loose change/cash and guns. You're probably right about the drugs, however.

    13. Re:were the by Boronx · · Score: 1

      I't only entrapment if they hire somebody to convince someone they want to arrest to steal the car.

    14. Re:were the by Pxtl · · Score: 2

      Yes, but its pointless. They're after carreer criminals, stolen car rings, organised crime here. Keys in the ignition catches the wrong kind of crook - you get the casual opportunist, the "grand theft shoplifting" type of person. They kid who manages to swipe chips from the computer shop in his pants. Yeah, he's a crook, he's damaging the economy, etc. But he's probably not a menace to society. The organised car-theft ring type of person is much more dangerous.

      If the keys were in the ignition, the most likely effect would be hoodlums taking it for a joyride, planning to leave it in whatever condition wherever they finish (possibly even where they found it - yes this happens). That's a criminal, but its not a car-theft ring. The police will catch people like that eventually for other crimes with much less expensive equipment. The pro is different. The pro works with a chop shop, has contacts, and can be a lead into larger organisations. The pro is the one stealing cars two times a week. The kid will do this rarely.

      That's why the cops don't leave the keys in - small potatoes.

    15. Re:were the by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Entrapment is convincing someone they want to commit a crime, not providing the 'perfect' opportunity to do so.

      Entrapment is the police asking for illegal actions to be committed. While we might refer leaving the keys in the car 'asking for it', it's not really, it's just being really careless, and people who do it are certainly not asking for their car to be stolen.

      In general, the courts have ruled it's okay to for police to be pretend to be victims. Pretending to be a criminal is iffy, there's a fine line between buying drugs and encouraging someone to sell you drugs, but being a 'victim' is pretty much always okay and not entrapment.

      It's always better to have someone commit a fake crime against the police than a real crime against someone else.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    16. Re:were the by AndroidCat · · Score: 2

      Loose change and CDs here. My musical taste is a bit odd, I wonder what happened when he traded them in for cash?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    17. Re:were the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why not leave a $20 bill laying aroung for bait in a public place, set up hidden surveillance, and bust everyone who tries to "steal" it?

    18. Re:were the by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Well, the main reason is that it's not illegal to pick up a 20 dollar bill laying on the ground. You could be turning it into the local lost and found, you could be picking it up because it's litter, you might think you dropped it, you might think you know who dropped it, etc.

      Not to mention theft (theft by conversion, that is) of 20 dollars is a much less serious crime than GTA, I doubt it's more than a misdemeanor, with a 25-50 dollar fine, and those aren't really worth setting up elaborate sting operation for.

      Car thief is much easier to prove, happens much more often, causes a lot more harm, and, in this case, uses less manpower, because of automatic sensors in the car vs. someone standing around watching the money.

      Not to mention it's not as clearly not entrapment. This car was locked, just like all the other cars. There was nothing about the situtation that would create criminals out of nothing, it was not a unique situtation. Whereas a 20 on the sidewalk is not common at all, and an obviously created temptation by the police. Hence, it might be considered entrapment.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  5. sounds like a good use of technology to me by xarfel · · Score: 1

    right on, maybe people will think before taking other people's stuff.

    1. Re:sounds like a good use of technology to me by bananaape · · Score: 0

      Yeah, criminals are jerks.

    2. Re:sounds like a good use of technology to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello, my name is no-sense-of-humor-moderator, nicetameetcha!

  6. How to get more thieves... by whmac33 · · Score: 1

    You could get more thieves if you had a beowolf cluster of those.

  7. Awesome! by Gorimek · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now I'm only waiting for the bicycle version. I lose at least one bike a year in the mean streets and garages of San Francisco.

    1. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in highschool we had a rash of bikes being stolen in and around the school.. so we modified a nice Schwinn 10 speed so that instead of pedaling to turn the rear wheel it just freewheeled. and then left it unlocked in the rack with about 5 of us hiding all around watching...

      Yes we caught the trash that were stealing the bikes.... Let's just say that they were punished by our angry mob right there and delivered bruised and dragged at the police station with their hands tied to their hair with ducttape and a nice videotape of the attempted theft and the resulting first attack by the morons on the volunteer target person to try and stop them...

      (it's illegal to beat the tar out of a thief.. it is legal to beat them senseless if they attack someone.... it's called defense.)

      Man I loved highschool...

    2. Re:Awesome! by CoffeeNowDammit · · Score: 1

      Why am I thinking about remote controls and large, well-charged capacitors right now?

      "Sorry, I thought this was my FRRRZZAAT.."

      --

      ".sig, .sig a .sog, .sig out loud,
    3. Re:Awesome! by frankske · · Score: 1

      Same here in Gent. My sister's bike was stolen 4 times during her first 1.5 years at uni. Mine hasn't been stolen yet, but the lock costed more than the bike: about € 50 for the lock, while decent second-hand bikes are going aroung € 40-80... Last time my sister reported the theft to the police, they told her "then steal one yourself" ... They don't care!

    4. Re:Awesome! by quinto2000 · · Score: 1
      In Amsterdam, every time they dredge the canals, they find hundreds of bicycles.

      In a country like Nederland or Belgie, where there are hundreds of bicycles on the streets at a time, theft is not unexpected. In the US, car thefts are the larger problem for the same reason.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    5. Re:Awesome! by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 2

      When I was living out east (Hartford CT and Boston Mass for the most part) - I had 80$'s of locks from Kryptonite - one was the hardened steel u-lock and the other was a 2 meter long piece of cable maybe by Kryptonite. I've actually parked my bike (an older trek) in some pretty rough neighborhoods - even ones where I live now in Portland - its never been ripped off.

      The trick is - I wrap the cable around both wheels and the frame and secure the cable and the bike to the object (pole or whatever)

    6. Re:Awesome! by jrp2 · · Score: 1

      In Amsterdam, every time they dredge the canals, they find hundreds of bicycles.

      I remember a tourist guidebook (a fairly bohemian one) about Amsterdam had a funny line on this topic. In the "renting a bike" section they listed a bunch of rental shops, then "if you can't afford that, just go up to a bunch of kids on bikes and yell 'Hey, that's my bike', and there is a good chance one will drop their bike and run". ;)

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    7. Re:Awesome! by K-Man · · Score: 2

      The SFPD has run sting operations in the past. They get a bike that's over the petty-theft threshold, lock it somewhere like around Civic Center, and wait for the parolees to show up. Supposedly it took only a few minutes for the first attempt.

      --
      ---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
  8. Good use of technology by Dead+Penis+Bird · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It catches car thieves, but only car thieves. This is one of the few uses of technology that has zero probability of catching "the wrong guy".

    I wonder if this technology would be extended to the private consumer level?

    --

    If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!

    1. Re:Good use of technology by Kierthos · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Just wait until some idiot lawyer gets involved. He'll portray his client as a law-abiding citizen who was "entrapped" by the police into hotwiring the car and trying to make off with it, only to be caught by those nasty police officers.

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    2. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      In France, they developed something like that for the consumer. Basically you pay a certain fee every year and they install a redundant system on your car (there are +20 different places they can put the system on... limits the chances of getting it removed by know-it-all thieves).

      The best part is that they have made a deal with auto insurance companies, so that you don't pay the deductible on auto theft.

      It has been in Paris for a little while already.

      Artaxerxes

    3. Re:Good use of technology by Foggy+Tristan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, it's a low probability, but not 0.

      Scenario: Thief picks up car, likes car. Picks up hitchhiker. Gets out at 7-11. Says wait here. Police bust car and Hitchhiker. Thief sees bust, coolly walks away from 7-11 slurping Bruisin Berry Big Gulp.

      Obvious solution: Ban Bruisin Berry Big Gulps

      --
      Beware typoes.
    4. Re:Good use of technology by Verteiron · · Score: 2, Funny

      "It was NOT my client's fault! He suffers from a well-known disorder called Chronic Automotive Kleptomania."

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    5. Re:Good use of technology by The+trees · · Score: 1

      Features like these are already available to the consumer. The technology, called OnStar, was not-so-long-ago featured in many Cadillac commercials. Here is a list of vehicles in which OnStar is an available feature.

      OnStar's features (including GPS positioning to recover a stolen car) are also described here

      Disclaimer: I am not an employee of OnStar or any vehicle manufacturer.

      --
      $ make work
      make: *** No rule to make target `work'. Stop.
    6. Re:Good use of technology by n9hmg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And long before that (since about 1990), there wasLoJack.

      Even before that, some of my friends who had nicer hot rods than mine had Line-Locks, for which the control was just under the front of the driver's seat. They would set the lock when they left the car in an untrusted place, and if the car was stolen, the first time he hit the brake, it held the pressure.
      It was a simple matter to reach down and push the plunger, but if somebody is smart enough to understand that, he'd have a job and buy his own car.

    7. Re:Good use of technology by fxdirect · · Score: 1

      This type of technology will become more common in automobiles in the future, most likely before 2010. The On-Star system is currently a subscription based service, but the future systems will be passive and not require a fee. As technology gets cheaper, it will be come feasible for auto manufacturer to install devices in cars to transmit information about the car directly to the dealer and manufacturer. This is the OEM and dealer's idea of how to collect more relevant information about their customers and their vehicle usage.

      There are some high-end models which have systems like this. The technology currently costs about $200 per car but should go down to about $75 before 2010. It plugs directly into the OBD-II connector under most vehicle dashboards. This is the same port that some mechanics use to read information about your car. And you thought your vehicle driving habits were private.

      The article I got this information from is a subscription based service that I get from work otherwise I would link to it.

      --
      -Ate a rotten goblin corpse and died.
    8. Re:Good use of technology by edrugtrader · · Score: 1

      it is also entrapment, but that is a totally different discussion.

      the guy could argue that he wouldn't have stole the car, but the cops made it irregularly irresistible not to steal it. and if his lawyer was good enough, they would get away with it.

      --
      MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    9. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the cars have audio/video recording equipment in them, so that would all be seen by the cops and I'm sure the hitchhiker would not be facing auto-theft charges.

    10. Re: Good use of technology by bpfinn · · Score: 2, Informative

      I wonder if this technology would be extended to the private consumer level?

      Um, isn't this called Lojack?

    11. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually you're totally off base. entrapment is when officials actively request someone to break the law, then bust them when they do it. i don't see any active requests here, which means your dumb ass is wrong again. aren't you getting tired of always being wrong buddy?

    12. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that can't really happen because they hit the kill switch after the thief has put the car in drive and gone a couple feet.

    13. Re:Good use of technology by Kuad · · Score: 1

      Leased Cadillacs come with OnStar as a mandatory feature. Probably because Cadillacs have some of the highest welch rates in the industry. So if you don't pay, they lock you out of your car, pinpoint it with GPS and go get it.

      Whether this is good or bad is left as an exercise for the reader.

    14. Re:Good use of technology by NeMon'ess · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you read the article, you would have read:
      "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."

      Take issue with that if you want. Apparently by US law it is not entrapment.

    15. Re:Good use of technology by fewl · · Score: 1

      It's not really 0 probability. I know a friend of a friend who got screwed over by the 3-strikes law here in California. He recently got out of jail for grand theft auto. He was out cruising with his friend when they got pulled over by the police because their car's license plate came up as stolen on the computer. It turns out that his friend stole the car from his other friend (some sort of sick joke, I guess) who had stolen the car from someone else. The original owner had reported the theft a couple days before.

      --
      Your actions on earth echo in eternity.
    16. Re:Good use of technology by bogado · · Score: 2

      Another possible scenario: Person with same brand/color car parks behind bait and leaves keys inside. Thief stoles persons car. Person picks up the bait car thinking it is their car.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    17. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your friend, has a history of car theft, hangs around with people that have other friends that are car theives and is found riding around in a stolen car. Personaly it sounds to me like this is a case where the legal system worked.

    18. Re:Good use of technology by Sigh+Phi · · Score: 1

      Even if the car is unlocked, taking what is not yours is still theft.

      It's not entrapment unless an LEO (or agent) is influencing the crime in some way... suggestion, approval, etc. You know, like posing as a john, or a buyer, or (name your vice)...

    19. Re:Good use of technology by Tower · · Score: 1

      Um... if you have a record, and hang around with people who continue to violate the law, you are just being dumb and asking for trouble... and probably deserve what you get.

      --
      "It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
    20. Re:Good use of technology by The_Unforgiven · · Score: 1

      It's not a crime to have criminal friends.

      --
      http://wsulug.org
    21. Re:Good use of technology by stripes · · Score: 2
      Another possible scenario: Person with same brand/color car parks behind bait and leaves keys inside. Thief stoles persons car. Person picks up the bait car thinking it is their car.

      That has actually happened (except the car was locked and hte key worked). I expect if you had the same make/model car parked in the same general area you stand a really good chance of talking you way out of it though...

    22. Re:Good use of technology by benedict · · Score: 2

      That's pretty likely.

      --
      Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
    23. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you know they are criminals and hence know or are fairly certain that they are committing illegal acts then YES it is.

      You could get charged with a host of crimes like "aiding and abetting" or "accessory after the fact". If you're so ignorant as to not ask your felonious friend where he got the car he's picking you up in then you probably deserve a little jail time to give you some time to get that GED you've always wanted.

      It's just like drug rehab - they tell you the first thing to do is get out of the environment you're in. If you've had a criminal past it can be like an addiction and the easiest thing to do is remove yourself from the old envirnment and often times that means distancing yourself from friends.

    24. Re:Good use of technology by morzel · · Score: 2
      I wonder if this technology would be extended to the private consumer level?
      It already is... (here in Europe, at least). A lot of new expensive cars can't even be properly insured without some kind of carjacking/homejacking/theft protection device. Only thing it really does is shift the attention from the amateur thieves to the professionals, who know how to deal with these systems (aka: nick the car, and drive it into a container, on a trailer just around the corner --> Faraday cage --> No more phone home)

      --
      Okay... I'll do the stupid things first, then you shy people follow.
      [Zappa]
    25. Re:Good use of technology by stripes · · Score: 2
      the guy could argue that he wouldn't have stole the car, but the cops made it irregularly irresistible not to steal it.

      The guy can also argue that alien mind control lasers were used to make him steel it. That's likely to be about as successful.

      These cars are not exotic cars. They are left with the keys behind the sun visor which sometimes happens with cars not owned by the government. Even if they left the keys on the dash I don't think that would really make much of a legal defense.

      Much better to try to argue that it was a harmless joy ride, the car would have been returned and all. A good lawyer might be able to get a young client off...or maybe off on only a short jail stay (better then a long one, eh?).

      There are lots of things the US legal system does wrong, but as far as I know having too loose a definition of entrapment is not one of them.

    26. Re:Good use of technology by exodus2 · · Score: 1

      In the US there is somting similar called LOJACK. BAsically if you report your call stolen they turn the device on remotely, and it sends a location signal to the Police. They claim about a 95% recovery rate within 24 hours of you reporting your car stolen. It costs about $1000 (thats what the dealer wanted to sell me it for when I bought my Accord)

      --
      .sigs suck, thus nothing here.
    27. Re:Good use of technology by pangloss · · Score: 2
      I wonder if this technology would be extended to the private consumer level?

      That's exactly what i'm wondering. most of the posts seem to be about entrapment--I haven't seen anyone mention how to build one of these yourself. the article mentions it was done with ~$3k worth of equipment in the car and about that much again at the station. Here's the company that they used to outfit the gear.

      What would be the technical hurdles in implementing this yourself? How would you transmit (not receive) your location? Hook up a gps receiver to a laptop with a cellular modem (isn't there a better way?)? And how would you implement a remote kill switch?

    28. Re:Good use of technology by benh57 · · Score: 1

      Here is hardware and links to linux software to interface with the OBD-II connector.

    29. Re:Good use of technology by aozilla · · Score: 2

      Jesus, you should be a lawyer.

      "But your honor, some guy on slashdot said 'Unlocked, presumably'."

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
    30. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it is a crime to possess stolen goods. Not to mention driving without registration (if he had the registration he would see the name was not his friends).

    31. Re:Good use of technology by Fluid+Truth · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I didn't read the article. However, I can talk about entrapment.

      A good example of what is and is not entrapment can be explained by what happens at drug busts. If the officer is acting as the "dealer" and says "You want to buy some heroin?" that's entrapment. But, if the officer says "You want some good shit?" that isn't. "Good shit" isn't necessarily something illegal, so the other person generally fills in the illegal part ("What kind of crack you got?").

      The car is parked legally and someone decides to take it. No one enticed the person to take the car. No one stood around and said "I'll bet you can steal that car and not get caught."

      --
      Apparently, of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
    32. Re:Good use of technology by SirKron · · Score: 1

      I need a smaller version of this technology to see who keeps stealing the damn stapler out of the copy room ...

    33. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do I know you're not a cop posing as a guy selling illegal drugs online? If I were to buy some, that would also be entrapment!

    34. Re:Good use of technology by jrp2 · · Score: 2

      What would be the technical hurdles in implementing this yourself? How would you transmit (not receive) your location? Hook up a gps receiver to a laptop with a cellular modem (isn't there a better way?)?

      It would seem that a cheap car alarm that triggers a small computer with a GPS and GPRS packet modem could send the coordinates every minute after it is triggered to your computer at home/work. That would let you know where it is and has been.

      And how would you implement a remote kill switch?

      As you have been getting packets from your box, you know it's IP address (Mobile IP would be more reliable), so you send it a message (digitally signed or similar for security) that triggers a kill switch and a siren.

      Might be a bit pricey to do yourself, but I think someone could make this for cheap and provide the server service for a small fee (if you don't want to hassle with it). All this could be MUCH cheaper than Onstar route, and more effective than Lojack (Lojack sucks).

      --
      The only athletic sport I ever mastered was backgammon - Douglas William Jerrold
    35. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a violation of your parole or probation to associate with known felons.

    36. Re:Good use of technology by Jonny+290 · · Score: 1

      Fucking moron of the day, I swear.

      That's a cool-ass site.

      --
      Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
    37. Re:Good use of technology by Jonny+290 · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's Lumbergh! He's a sucker for those nice red Swinglines, ya know.

      --
      Hey Taco! Looks like you're using the "infinite monkeys and typewriters" scheme to generate Ask Slashdots again...
    38. Re:Good use of technology by jnl · · Score: 1

      Actually, under the terms of most parole/probation agreements, associating with people whom you know to have criminal records is a violation which can land you back in jail.

    39. Re:Good use of technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just don't get the whole notion of entrapment. It's a simple as right from wrong. You know if what you're about to do is a bad thing. What the hell difference does it make if a cop set it up, God set it up, or fate set it up. Ying, yang, the devil, call it whatever you want, it doesn't matter what happened before a crime is committed, the person needs to be punished after a crime is committed. It's as basic as a second grader telling another kid about the dollar bill hanging out of someones pocket. Right vs. wrong. Only the individual makes the choice. People who I hear whine about entrapment make me think of people who can't control themselves and want to blame others for their actions. a.k.a. the "no responsibility" crowd. Bunch a losers!

    40. Re:Good use of technology by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • It catches car thieves, but only car thieves

      Patience... wait a few hours/days, and you can also catch people who buy cars from car thieves. Let's hear it for GPS.

      Most states now (rightly) confiscate money received for stolen goods, but guess what your comeback is if you pay money for stolen goods? Nothing. Zilch. Nada. Zip.

      Think that one through. I can see a pretty good way to gut the whole stolen car industry right there, while lowering taxes through self funding police forces.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    41. Re:Good use of technology by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Have you ever jaywalked, littered, or been given too much change for a purchase then kept it after you realized what happened? Technically these are all crimes in the USA, maybe they aren't where you live. If you have ever done any of these things then you need to back down on your stance about entrapment. The circumstances that lead someone to commit a crime matter. If an undercover cop points out to someone the car is available to be stolen, that someone is much more likely to try it because the idea is planted.

  9. "Remote Kill Switch"..... by Dr_Marvin_Monroe · · Score: 1

    Sounds like more of a "Candid camera" type gag to me.....let thieves start car and run for 3 seconds, then kill the engine....repeat as necessary.

  10. Bad Boys by gato_mato · · Score: 0

    Seems to me that I have seen this done on the TV show COPS more than once and for a while now...I'd say they are slow on the news today.

  11. Presumably Locked? by rde · · Score: 1

    You presume the car was locked? What kind of wussy criminals do you have in the US, anyway?

    1. Re:Presumably Locked? by suicidal · · Score: 1

      The column is already going to get busted. Why lock the doors inviting more unnecessary damage to be repaired before redeploying it? Everytime my car gets theft attempts, the bill is like $900 bucks just to put the column back together again! Sure I only pay the $250 insurance deductible, but it still hurts.

    2. Re:Presumably Locked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You presume the car was locked? What kind of wussy criminals do you have in the US, anyway?

      The kind that shoot you because they like your shoes.

      If criminals are tougher where you come from then you're welcome to them. Myself, I could do with a few less drive bys and car jackings.

    3. Re:Presumably Locked? by Paul+Jakma · · Score: 2

      rob.... what's the story? that's 2 comments in a row where you've been modded down. you must be losing your touch.

      hint: anything vaguely condescending of the US gets modded down.. i mean how dare you suggest America doesnt have good criminals.

      :)

      --
      I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
  12. Death Wish by First_In_Hell · · Score: 0

    This almost reminds me of the First Death Wish movie where he baited the guys to car jack him only to kick their asses a second later.

    Seriously though, I can't wait hearing from the car thief's legal team trying to get him off because methods like this are "unconstitutional"

    I am sure the scumbag lawyers will have a field day with this one.

    -Mod me up, I need the karma

    1. Re:Death Wish by goldspider · · Score: 0, Troll
      Sounds like entrapment to me, but the police get away with this all the time.

      I'm not sure how common this is in other states, but here in Pennsylvania, it is a standard practice for the police to send a 16-yr old into a Quickie-Mart to try to get the clerk to (illegally) sell them cigarettes.

      Do the police not have enough real crimes to solve that they have to manufacture them? Comon now...

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    2. Re:Death Wish by JCCyC · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's much worse than that in Death Wish. Bronson walks around with a camera hanging from his shoulder, the target (a pickpocketer) runs from behind him, grabs the camera and keeps running in front of him. Then he gets his BIG GUN and shoots the guy DEAD IN THE BACK! How's that for punishment fitting the crime? I was expecting him to shoot his leg. Note, this is not just "shown", this is ADVERTISED AS THE RIGHT AND HEROIC THING TO DO!

      The bait described in the article, on the other hand, is 100% correct and clean. I wish "real" cars had that too.

    3. Re:Death Wish by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      Do the police not have enough real crimes to solve that they have to manufacture them? Comon now...

      Stealing a car is no longer a real crime?

      It stands to reason that someone who tries to steal these "booby-trapped" cars has also stolen other cars in the past. This seems like a good way to stop these people.

    4. Re:Death Wish by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      How is it entrapment? If an undercover cop went up to a guy and said "Man. Look at that car. It would be so easy to steal" then that might be entrapment. But leaving a car parked on the street with tracking hardware is hardly encouraging somebody to commit a crime they may not have committed otherwise.

    5. Re:Death Wish by athakur999 · · Score: 2
      I'm not sure how common this is in other states, but here in Pennsylvania, it is a standard practice for the police to send a 16-yr old into a Quickie-Mart to try to get the clerk to (illegally) sell them cigarettes.

      In this case, it's more like the crooked Quickie-Mart mart employee walking up to random 16 year old and trying to sell her some cigarettes and then getting busted.
      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    6. Re:Death Wish by First_In_Hell · · Score: 0

      I was merely bringing up the potential "outs" that the said criminal's legal team would use. And believe me, I don't think any lawyer defending said crimanl would not try to exploit this. You should know by now how bullheaded slashdotters can be by now, that was a pretty ignorant. By the way, do you think this is entrapment?

    7. Re:Death Wish by goldspider · · Score: 0, Troll
      "In this case, it's more like the crooked Quickie-Mart mart employee walking up to random 16 year old and trying to sell her some cigarettes and then getting busted."

      I completely disagree with this. This is about the police trying to trick people into committing a crime they otherwise MAY not.

      Sure, it's likely that these people would just be stealing other cars, but the law doesn't operate on the likelihood of a person to commit a crime.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    8. Re:Death Wish by silicon_synapse · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how common this is in other states, but here in Pennsylvania, it is a standard practice for the police to send a 16-yr old into a Quickie-Mart to try to get the clerk to (illegally) sell them cigarettes.

      I know this is a little off topic, but how is that not contributing to the deinquency of a minor? Do police officers really have the priviledge of ignoring laws that aren't convenient? Is there anything on the books that keeps them from being prosecuted for things like this or for speeding while trying to pace a care?

    9. Re:Death Wish by silicon_synapse · · Score: 1

      The problem would be that such a system would have to distinguish between a car being stolen and being driven off by the owner. The police's system just needs armed, and they walk away. As far as consumer devices go, some areas support lowjack or similar systems.

    10. Re:Death Wish by lanthis · · Score: 1
      "Do the police not have enough real crimes to solve that they have to manufacture them? Comon now..."

      I could see if they left the keys outside of the car with a sign that said "TEST DRIVE ME", and then busted them for stealing it as being a manufactured crime, however this is a car that only the owner should be getting into and driving off in. If you drive off in a car that's not yours that's theft whether it is 'booby trapped' or not.

      That's actually more like a bank robber trying to get the evidence of the video tape thrown out because finances are a private matter and they therefor had a 'reasonable expectation of privacy' and should not have been video taped. Come on.

      They are not enticing someone to steal this car anymore then John Doe is enticing them to steal his own car.

    11. Re:Death Wish by BLKMGK · · Score: 2

      So what exactly was wrong with that? Seriously, the guy was a thief, knew what he was doing was 100% wrong. You really want this guy around? A little chlorine in the gene pool if you ask me!

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    12. Re:Death Wish by AikenDrumGotWired · · Score: 2, Funny

      Uh-huh, yeah. Since when did watching "Clerks" become research for a post?

    13. Re:Death Wish by athakur999 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      This is about the police trying to trick people into committing a crime they otherwise MAY not.
      How did this car encourage that guy to steal it? If you saw an average car parked somewhere, would you try to steal it?
      the law doesn't operate on the likelihood of a person to commit a crime.
      Not, it doesn't. But these cars don't catch people who MIGHT try to steal it. These cars catch people who actually DO try to steal it.
      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    14. Re:Death Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I never saw Clerks, but I've actually seen this happen.

      From what I know of the incident, the store was hit with a pretty hefty fine.

    15. Re:Death Wish by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      this is ADVERTISED AS THE RIGHT AND HEROIC THING TO DO!

      In the movie, as set up, it WAS the right and heroic thing to do. The guilty prey on the innocent, and the innocent, in their efforts to show "compassion" for the guilty, let them keep coming back.
      I remember a case in Indiana, an old man who had been arrested over a hundred times for drunk driving, most of those (the last 80 or so) for driving without a license, most of them involving personal injury. He couldn't be imprisoned because of some guidelines concerning his age. I personally believe that he should have been shot in the street like a rabid dog the next time he was found behind the wheel.
      I think the same way about the three strikes laws for violent and property crimes, even shoplifting. Once someone demonstrates that he will not leave people alone, get him off my planet. We waste law enforcement effort stopping people from destroying themselves (let the addicts poison themselves to death if they insist), and there's not enough left for important tasks.

    16. Re:Death Wish by tsg · · Score: 1

      How about if it was unlocked with the keys on the dashboard? My guess is they try to make it look enticing to the thief they are trying to catch, but at what point does it become entrapment (honest question, IANAL)?

      According to http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm , entrapment is based on where the perpetrator got the idea to commit the crime. Providing an opportunity to commit a crime someone was already willing to commit is not entrapment, but encouraging someone to commit a crime they were not already willing to commit is. At what point does "providing an opportunity" become "encouragement"?

      Yeah, I know, "but he stole the car". But would he have stolen it if it wasn't set up to be stolen? If the car were no more attractive to steal than the cars surrounding it, then yeah, I don't think it's entrapment.

      Just as nobody is completely evil, nobody is completely honest. I'd bet most people could be encouraged to commit a crime if the circumstances were right.

      --
      People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
    17. Re:Death Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is ADVERTISED AS THE RIGHT AND HEROIC THING TO DO!

      In the movie, as set up, it WAS the right and heroic thing to do. The guilty prey on the innocent, and the innocent, in their efforts to show "compassion" for the guilty, let them keep coming back.


      Of course, there are only two possible ways of dealing with criminals: (a) bending over and letting they do whatever they please, and (b) killing them all. All the prisons you see in the news are just optical illusions. They don't exist.</sarcasm>

    18. Re:Death Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Throw some chlorine in the pool yourself: get a vasectomy.

    19. Re:Death Wish by lanthis · · Score: 1
      but how is that not contributing to the deinquency of a minor?

      I think it would be if they actually let them keep the cigerettes (or alcohol in liquor store cases) but since they confiscate the product I think that is what makes the difference. Then again they do let the kids know where they COULD go without being carded that way.

      I also know (from my days working in a convience store years ago) that when they changed the law to where you had to card anyone who looked under 26 they would send in 18-25 year olds and make sure you carded them as well. I know here in Delaware what they also would do is watch the store and if there was anyone the police thought was underage, they would card them in the parking lot and then ask if the store carded them or not.

    20. Re:Death Wish by quinto2000 · · Score: 1
      nice idea, but our justice system is not meant to catch people who "might" steal a car. How long before if someone has a genetic predisposition to theft, we lock them up from birth?

      This is clearly some form of entrapment.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    21. Re:Death Wish by quinto2000 · · Score: 1
      just needs armed

      Are you from pittsburgh?

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    22. Re:Death Wish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the car is Knight Rider,

      Why yes the door is unlocked and I am very unique, I am a talking car! I can go from 0 to 60 in 4.3 seconds and able to jump ravines to escape police in wild car chases. I bet you would like to drive a car like me wouldn't you?

    23. Re:Death Wish by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Hello?

      They didn't 'might' steal a car, they did steal a car.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    24. Re:Death Wish by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      So is a cop arresting someone who offers to sell him drugs on the street entrapment? Doesn't seem mush different to me.

  13. Now I suppose..... by Xistic · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    were going to see a mydrid of posts condeming this as entrapment. No one forces these people to commit these crimes. So what have we to fear?

    1. Re:Now I suppose..... by pubjames · · Score: 2

      were going to see a mydrid of posts condeming this as entrapment. No one forces these people to commit these crimes. So what have we to fear?

      I wonder what it would take to entrap you? We all have our limits. I bet it would be possible to devise a situation in which you would knowingly break the law. Where do you draw the line?

    2. Re:Now I suppose..... by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      Technically, it does not mean the legal requirements of entrapment (which boil down to the cop egging you on, saying, "Go ahead and do it."), but yes, some lawyer will probably try and play that card the first time someone caught with this tech manages to get someone besides a public defender.

      Hell(tm), it will probably happen the first time some "otherwise upstanding citizen" does it.

      Kierthos

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    3. Re:Now I suppose..... by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      . I bet it would be possible to devise a situation in which you would knowingly break the law.

      Devise a situation, I'm curious. (One that doesn't involve my MP3 collection, please - I'll admit to much of that being illegal.)

    4. Re:Now I suppose..... by pubjames · · Score: 2

      Devise a situation, I'm curious.

      Well of course I don't know much about you, but I think many educated people who consider themselves law-abiding would be tempted by a "white-collar fraud" where the rewards are big and the chances of getting caught very small.

    5. Re:Now I suppose..... by suicidal · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined,"

      So lets do a little review:

      1) They are using a car from the most stolen list.

      2) The electronics are OBVIOUSLY not visible.

      3) It is doctored with trash, etc. To make it look normal to the area.

      So Joe Blow is walking through the parking lot, and thinks to himself...DAMN! That looks like one regular car! Now, I'm not one who would ever think of stealing a car.... I mean the keys aren't even left in the ignition, but I just can't help myself. The seeds are planted....can't control self...MUST....STEAL...CAR!

      Yep, must be entrapment.

    6. Re:Now I suppose..... by jgerman · · Score: 2

      I was expecting the same thing. People tend to cry entrapment whenever police come up with a way to catch them doing something illegal. I think the whole entrapment law is kinda fuzzy. If the cops leave something lying around and you steal it, your guilty of theft. Just because it was left by the police instead of a private citizen doesn't make you any less guilty.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    7. Re:Now I suppose..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Die, troll bastard!
      And of course it's entrapment.

    8. Re:Now I suppose..... by scotch · · Score: 1
      How about if Natalie Portman (or insert your favorite hot piece of ass) said she would fuck you until the cows came home, but first you'd have to do a line of coke with her? She would of course be working for the cops, who would come crashing in before you could get the grits down your pants. Would that entrap you?

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    9. Re:Now I suppose..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How 'bout, Joe Blow decided just the day before that he will never steal another car. But walking along, he sees, door open, keys in ignition .. hmm .. tempting .. "what the hell", he says, "one last one ..".

      Ok, so its probably still not entrapment .. still, something just feels a little 'fishy' about it to me. Perhaps because 99% of people I know would at least feel *some* temptation, upon seeing a nice car with door open, keys in ignition, and noone around. Come on, theres a bit of this in all of us, we aren't all Mother Theresa's .. and it is an attempt to "draw out" that behaviour. If the ATM gave you too much money, who *wouldn't* at least consider keeping it? If the cashier at the store gives you a bit too much change and doesn't notice, who doesn't at least consider keeping it? In fact, who here has *never* at least once kept extra change given? As they say, laws exist to keep honest people honest.

      Still, I highly doubt that this system has caught anyone but actual car thieves. It seems unlikely to me that it would turn an "honest" person dishonest.

    10. Re:Now I suppose..... by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 1

      What the hell is a "mydrid"? Some sort of leaf-eating insect?

      - A.P.

      --
      "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    11. Re:Now I suppose..... by payslee · · Score: 2

      Here's an example that happened to me. I was working for a dotcom, and we had a discounted employee stock purchase plan. To participate, we had to sign up through a broker who seemed (to me) incredibly incompetent if not corrupt. But it was use them or don't participate, and since I was only investing a very token amount, I crossed out all the dubious clauses in their contract, and signed up.

      Two or three months later I got an account statement that showed me with a balance of $140,000 of stock in a company that I'd never heard of, plus the tiny amount of stock in my own company. I called the broker and left a message that there was a mistake in my stock statement. They never called me back.

      A week later, the brokerage was bought out by another company, and all the accounts were transferred. Three weeks after that, my company switched to yet another brokerage after we got acquired, and the account was transferred again.

      Throughout all of these changes, all that fully vested stock that I was not entitled to remained in my account. It had a beautiful 52-week graph too, unlike my own company's stock. And I had *tried* to do the right thing.

      It was incredibly tempting. I could buy a house. Quit my job and go back to college. Or just leave it there for five years, ten years, and see if anyone ever noticed. After all, the stock had stayed with me through three brokerages. And the first brokerage were idiots, there was probably no trail.

      In the end, I couldn't do it. I am very risk averse, and the original broker had always struck me as crooked. I had a half-formed worry that they were using my account as part of some complicated scam, hoping I'd go along with it a la Nigerian money-transfer schemes. I finally took to calling them up saying "There's $150,000 of stock in my account that doesn't belong to me! (its value had gone up by then) It must belong to a different customer! Take it out."

      They never even thanked me.

      I resisted, but it physically *hurt* to get my statement every month, and a lot of my friends told me I was being stupid to keep trying to give it back. If it would not have tempted you too, you're not human.

      --
      Doing my part to piss off the religious right.
    12. Re:Now I suppose..... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      A mistake in your favor is, yes, one of the hardest times to do the rigt thing, especially when the 'person' who was hurt is some large, nameless company that doubtless made just as many mistakes in the opposite direction and didn't do the right thing itself.

      But I have to suggest your example, while a great test of morality, ins't that useful a test of legality. I can't see how it would be illegal to withdraw that money.

      There are only three outcomes: Either that stock really existed, but it wasn't actually in your name, in which case they wouldn't give you your money, or the stock didn't really exist, in which case they certainly wouldn't give you your money. The last option is that the stock actually existed, and was actually in your name. In which case someone had, for some strange reason, bought stock for you, using someone else's money. And I have to suggest that, legally, they would be the one at fault, not you. You might end up having to give the money back, but you wouldn't get in legal trouble for it, and it's not really a good example of 'entrapment'.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    13. Re:Now I suppose..... by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      No. I don't use drugs.

    14. Re:Now I suppose..... by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      Wow, yes, that is rough. With that amount of money, though, it would have been really bad if you had kept it and gotten caught. Prison bad.

      At least now you have a good story!

    15. Re:Now I suppose..... by payslee · · Score: 1

      I looked into this at the time, and it is illegal to withdraw or even keep the money. There was a case of a woman in New York whose bank account was one number off from that of a UN relief organization. She got stray money into that account for about ten years before someone noticed.

      She was prosecuted, fined and I think even had to do a little jail time. Her defense was that she thought she had "won" the money from some sort of sweepstakes. The prosecution claimed that a reasonable person would have known the money didn't belong to them, especially since she had not actually entered a sweepstakes.

      In my case, the waters were muddied further by a clause in the brokerage contract. It said that any errors in your account statement that are not challenged by you in writing within 30 days become final, whether they are really wrong or not. This clause was obviously designed for the benefit of the brokerage, and probably not legally enforceable anyway, but by their policy (if not in law) I could have made arguments that the money was mine.

      I think the stock was real, but belonged to another person who perhaps had a similar account number. A reasonably competant organization would have discovered the error and been able to fix it. This organization was not reasonably competant. $140,000 is a huge amount of money to me, but it wouldn't surprise me if the brokerage just ate it and got new stock for the correct account, or if they'd siphoned this stock out of a *really* large grant to an executive type who might not notice the "small" discrepency within the 30-day period, hoping to take it back later. But all the brokerage switching that followed immediately after bollixed the plan. No real way to know.

      --
      Doing my part to piss off the religious right.
    16. Re:Now I suppose..... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Ah.

      Well, like I said, errors made in your favor, whether or not it's illegal to keep the money or not, are one the hardest moral test, because you can get away with it. Even if you get caught, you just made the same mistake they did, or you assumed they did it right. (Not in this case, but in the case of someone giving you change for a 20 when you gave them a 10, etc.)

      And, of course, there comes a point where it's just silly to fix the error. We had a few incompetant people working at a local Taco Bell, and I've been given an extra dime twice at a drive through window. It would have cost me more than ten cents to drive back around though the line and give it back to them. I've been given the wrong food, demanded the right food, got it, and driven off, then realized they billed me for the wrong food, which cost less than what I ordered and received.

      And, of course, no one, no matter how ethical, even attempts to return anything less than a dollar they find laying on the ground or in a change return. It's just not worth it.

      Anyway, in most cases, it's not illegal to not report errors in your favor, at least none less than 100 dollars or so. So it's not really a good example of 'People being lured into breaking the law.'.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  14. Wait a minute... by Lethyos · · Score: 1, Troll

    Doesn't this constitute some form of entrapment? And what if I were to place a valuable item out on the streets with the intention of having it stolen? Is the person who takes it guilty of theft?

    --
    Why bother.
    1. Re:Wait a minute... by cheese_wallet · · Score: 5, Funny

      There is a difference between finding a watch on the street and finding a car on the street.

      "Holy cow, look at all the cars people lost in this parking lot!"

      --Scott

    2. Re:Wait a minute... by chill · · Score: 1

      If it doesn't belong to you, it is theft.

      Now, if they wired it to automatically start the ignition and pop open the driver's door when someone walked by...

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    3. Re:Wait a minute... by EFGearman · · Score: 2

      No. Because you are neither forcing nor coercing them into stealing said object. Just leaving it out does not mean entrapment. It's the same when cops go undercover to buy or sell drugs, catching the sellers or buyers. They are not coercing the future jailbird into buying or selling, just like in this, the cops are not coercing the auto thieves into stealing said 'wired' vehicle.

      EFGearman

      --
      Atomic batteries to power! Turbines to speed!
    4. Re:Wait a minute... by cheese_wallet · · Score: 1

      Entrapment consists of creating the crime. This is just temptation.

      A person still has to decide that it is a good idea to jump in the car and drive off.

    5. Re:Wait a minute... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      not the same, we're talking about a car here, there isn't many places you can put a car (safely) except in streets, parking lots & garages.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    6. Re:Wait a minute... by leucadiadude · · Score: 2

      Doesn't matter a damn what your intention is. Only matters what criminal scum intentions are.

      As long as the car looked and "behaved" exactly like the other cars in the area, the police are off the "entrapment" hook BS. I.e., locked up no keys in ignition, parked normally... etc.

    7. Re:Wait a minute... by nizo · · Score: 2

      How can this possibly be entrapment? You get in the car (that isn't yours) and you drive off with it, and you get caught. It doesn't matter if the engine is running or what, the only exception might be if they wrote a big sign saying "Please steal me" and stuck it on the car (in which case they would only catch the really really stupid criminals).

      As for leaving something out on the sidewalk, I suspect there are laws about abandoned property that would apply (since someone could pick it up with the intent to turn it in/return it). I don't see how someone could get into someone else's car and drive off with the same intentions.....

    8. Re:Wait a minute... by misfit13b · · Score: 1

      The car thief was out looking for a car to steal, he chose the wrong one - he's arrested. That's not entrapment. No one forced him to steal the car.

      As for putting a valuable item on the street - if someone takes it, they stole it, and are now guilty of theft, yes. But, since you didn't force that person to take it, it's not entrapment either. They took the item of their own will. Premeditation doesn't factor in.

    9. Re:Wait a minute... by xarfel · · Score: 1

      I believe the story mentioned the entrapment angle, and I don't believe that applies. Anyway, it's pretty cut and dried, it wasn't his car, and he took it. Where are the blurry lines there? I've had a car's and goods from cars stolen more than once, and the insurance on my Toyota Celica GTS is higher just because there is a threat of theft. I think this is great technology to use.

    10. Re:Wait a minute... by Hitokage_Nishino · · Score: 1

      They aren't leaving out cars with the intention of having them stolen. They are leaving out cars to catch people who DO steal them. Nothing is making them do this except their own criminal intent. There is no entrapment.

    11. Re:Wait a minute... by unformed · · Score: 2

      You don't just pick up a car and walk with it. A car requires a key, so having to hotwire it would be equivalent to breaking and entering. Furthermore, a car has a title which states the owner, whereas a watch doesn't.

      Simply finding something is one thing. Doing work to take something else is completely different.

    12. Re:Wait a minute... by purplebear · · Score: 1

      Well now, it may not actually be entrapment, but the criminal could probably get off with the right jury and lawyer.

      There was a story where I live a few years back about a guy that stole a car, ran from police, wrecked the car, severely injurring himself. The family of the thief sued the owner of the car for damages and loss of income due to the car had not had an oil change in 15,000 miles which caused the engine to lock up under such pressure causing the wreck. That family won.

      I'm sure the arguement here would be along the lines of some enticement on the PD's part.

    13. Re:Wait a minute... by Trekologer · · Score: 2

      Entrapment would be if a cop (not in uniform, of course) saw you walking by and said "Hey, you know you want to help me steal this car." or something else that coerced you into commiting the crime.

      Bascially (keep in mind that IANAL) entrapment defences say that the accused would not have commited the crime if the pollice officer did not urge him to do so. This is definately not extrapment. The car is sitting there, just as other cars are. If someone steals it, they're going to get caught.

      This is going to be a great technology to protect your car fron theft and deter would-be criminals from doing so.

    14. Re:Wait a minute... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Thats not really true, they can claim that they thought someone lost it and they were trying to return the item. It really depends upon the intent, which is easy to prove in car theft, and very difficult to prove when someone picks something off the street.

    15. Re:Wait a minute... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

      "Stop stealing my watch!"

      "What are you talking about? I found it right here just *lying* on your arm! It's mine!"

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    16. Re:Wait a minute... by Llyr · · Score: 1
      Simply finding something is one thing. Doing work to take something else is completely different.

      Surely such work should be rewarded. After all, if you find this car that someone left on the street, just lying there, and you go to all the trouble of hotwiring it so you can take it somewhere and keep it safe, surely this effort to ensure its safety should be rewarded.... if the owner ever catches up with it.

      It's not your fault you can't break into the glove compartment to get some owner identification, right?

  15. Catching thieves? by JZ_Tonka · · Score: 1
    Maybe they're just hoping these cars get stolen so they can cash in on the insurance.

    Happens all the time here in Philadelphia.

    1. Re:Catching thieves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be silly - Everybody knows most Philly drivers don't have insurance (or a license, registration, inspection, etc.). Why do you think they are starting LiveStop?

  16. entrapment by sirtimbly · · Score: 1

    I am not a lawyer or even a person familiar with the law in any way, but isnt there something about entrapment in there. I personally agree with this idea, it's great, but my legal spidey sense is tingling on this one.

    --
    Sir Timbly of Cannatuna, offical Knight of the Heptagonal Table
    1. Re:entrapment by Dead+Penis+Bird · · Score: 1

      What entrapment?

      No one but me and anyone I invite belongs in my car. Anyone breaking in is obviously doing something wrong.

      No entrapment here, just a good deterrent.

      --

      If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!

    2. Re:Entrapment by JordanH · · Score: 1
      • and enrapment won't be an issue.

      If the police recite poetry while arresting you, could you plead that it was enrapment?

    3. Re:Entrapment by Rocky · · Score: 1

      Only if it was Vogon poetry...

      --
      "I'm an old-fashioned type of guy. I worship the Sun and Moon as gods. And fear them."
    4. Re:Entrapment by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Why? Is there a particular car that you would like to steal? They actually do state that they use the most popular cars to steal (Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, etc.)

    5. Re:Entrapment by jgerman · · Score: 2

      I don't give a shit if he intended to commit the act or not. He saw an oppurtunity to commit a crime and took it. Fuck that if it's entrapment, someone that unstable deserves to be punished.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    6. Re:Entrapment by garren_bagley · · Score: 1

      The only time I've ever been in Los Angeles was during a three hour layover on my way to Reno from DFW. My wife and I walked outside to see what the weather was like and we saw a man get into a Jaguar. He looked at me kind of strange as he was getting in but he eventually got in and drove off.

      About a minute later a young man came and and started yelling that they had towed his car. We told him it had been stolen since we now realized what happened. Then we went and caught our flight.

      So, I've been in L.A for a lifetime total of three hours and never left the airport and I've seen a car being stolen.

      I know this has nothing to do with my earlier post but I thought it was interesting. Moderator, correct me if I'm wrong. :)

    7. Re:Entrapment by arbarbonif · · Score: 1

      That would make it cruel and unusual punishment, not entrapment. Well, except on Vogon... It's usual there.

    8. Re:entrapment by d2ksla · · Score: 1

      So if you forget to lock your car you could be arrested for entrapment when someone steals it???

  17. Isn't this illegal? by pubjames · · Score: 1, Troll


    It certainly is in the UK. It's called entrapment I believe.

    The problem with entrapment is, where do you draw the line? Is it ok the leave the door unlocked? Is it ok to leave the keys in the ignition? Is it ok to have the engine running and $10,000 in used banknotes scattered around inside the car?

    I'm sure everyone of us could be encouraged to do something illegal if the setup was correct.

    1. Re:Isn't this illegal? by Phoex · · Score: 2, Informative

      Entrapment is where police are getting someone to commit a crime where they would not normally commit one. In this case, they just leave a car in a parking lot (locked or unlocked) and wait for someone to come by and steal it. Since they are not making th vehicle more enticing to thieves or not so regular passersby(by leaving the car on or something) it's not entrapment

      --
      00110100 00110010
    2. Re:Isn't this illegal? by athakur999 · · Score: 2

      I don't think it's entrapment. Entrapment is encouraging a crime to happen. These cops aren't encouraging anything.

      To the average law abiding person, it's just a car, nothing special. It's an average Accord/Camry/whatever, something you see a thousand times a day. Even if the doors were unlocked, so what? It's not like there's a neon light flashing above the car saying "I'm unlocked", you have to take a close look into the car to see. Most people don't look into every car they walk by.

      This is a far cry from a undercover cop walking up to your car and offering to give you drugs or a blowjob for some money. In that case, the police are actively encouraging you to do a crime.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    3. Re:Isn't this illegal? by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      It's not entrapment, and that's not even a really good analogy, and that's coming from a guy who breaks at the very least 3-4 laws a day....

      Jaysyn

      p.s. if you leave the doors unlocked & the keys in the ignition, the person stealing your car cannot be charged with GTA, this happened to me when I was 17 or so. I stopped at a friends house and turned my car off but left the keys inside, and when I came back my car was gone. The cops found the guy who stole it but they couldn't charge him with GTA because I had left the keys in the car.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    4. Re:Isn't this illegal? by flikx · · Score: 2

      Even if the police leave the bait car running unattended, it is still not entrapment. Most car thefts occur when the owner leaves the car running unattended in front of 7-11, or warming up out on the street; worse yet, many owners leave the keys in their cars.

      In fact, leaving the car running 'unattended' may be an even better tactic, since it requires less expensive equipment, plus the police can bust several people an hour in the bad neighborhoods.

      --
      One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
    5. Re:Isn't this illegal? by SecurityGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm sure everyone of us could be encouraged to do something illegal if the setup was correct.


      Hardly true. To my thinking it doesn't matter if the door was unlocked. When was the last time you went over to some random car and tested the door to see if it was unlocked. I can say I've *never* done that to a car I or someone I was with didn't own. To my way of thinking, you could leave a ferrari, doors open, windows down, keys in the ignition, cash 3 inches deep on the floor and the Hope diamond sitting on the passenger seat and you're *still* a thief if you steal it and it's *still* not entrapment if you do. No one's encouraging you to steal that several million dollar pile of someone else's property. You would have been quite willing to do it on your own. Now if a police officer offered to pay you to steal the car for him, or suggested you should for your own benefit, that's entrapment. If its entirely of your own volition, enjoy the cell.
    6. Re:Isn't this illegal? by Road · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you went over to some random car and tested the door to see if it was unlocked. I can say I've *never* done that to a car I or someone I was with didn't own

      I did that once at a movie theatre, some guy left his lights on in a 1970ish jeep. Thought it was the neighbourly to shut them off, so he could drive home. Bust me Cojack.

    7. Re:Isn't this illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but if you leave your keys in your ignition, your car running, while you run into the quickie-mart, and some jackoff slides in and takes your car for a joyride, is this then still theft?

      Why does having the cops do the same thing waiting for someone to take it (what if you get in, turn it off and lock the keys in the car and walk away, are the cops smart enough to have a second set with them, or is the person busted as soon as they get into the car?)

    8. Re:Isn't this illegal? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Yeah, that's exactly why the police are waiting for the guy to start driving off, then triggering the kill switch.

      Of course, it's probably illegal to break into a car, period, even if you honestly are just trying to turn the lights off, but it wouldn't be GTA. Moving a car that you have no permission to move is always GTA, AFAIK.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    9. Re:Isn't this illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know the old thing about rape victims not "asking for it" by dressing provactively? Well, your example is probably the car theft equivalent of a girl lifting her skirt, doing a strip-tease and then rubbing her crotch all over the rapist's face,

    10. Re:Isn't this illegal? by SecurityGuy · · Score: 2
      It might well be analagous. Nevertheless, if you go to a strip club, get a lap dance just like you describe (which would be illegal, IIRC, I don't think contact is allowed in the jurisdiction in which I'm sitting), then rape the performer you stand a good chance of being convicted and getting your just deserts from your cellmate, Bubba which might consist of the last, but probably no skirt or strip-tease.


      The point here is acting like civilized, responsible people. Lots of people, including me, would see a nice car or something valuable inside and think, "Wow, I wish that were mine!" Society works much better if we suborn the greed to a common agreement to respect each other's property no matter how strong the greed initiated compulsion may be. I should also admit to a strong ethical bias here. I believe theft is just "wrong", as is rape, so I'm not going to do it regardless of the source of the desire to do so, pile of cash or strip-tease notwithstanding.

  18. Just hook up a stungun... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to the 12v car battery. Build it into the car seat. Of course, you'd put warning stickers on the windows. Save the court costs and stop recidivism.

  19. Fishing for dumbass... by MonkeyBot · · Score: 1

    So instead of investigating existing car robberies, they use our tax money to buy a car that is meant to be stolen. Great.
    I mean, yes, they find a guy who is stealing cars and take him off of the streets, but he or she will be back on the streets within a few years (if it is their first offense), probably doing the same thing. And yes, there is a CHANCE that they may find some kind of organized crime going on, but there is publicity for this car being left in the open to be stolen, so anyone in the area stealing cars that can pick up a newspaper is going to be on the lookout for it, so mostly, this is just a bunch of cops sitting around fishing for dumbass.

    1. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by ornil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the potential thieves read the newspapers and stop stealing cars (they don't know which one is the trap) that would do just fine.

    2. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Mike+Schiraldi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What do you think a car theif does with a stolen car? They bring it somewhere. And then what happens? Someone else brings it somewhere else. Eventually it winds up in a chop shop. Just as they're getting ready to rip it apart, every link in the chain gets busted.

      Then you grab their address books and check out their phone logs and see who they associate with...

    3. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      As far as "using our tax money", it probably is pretty cost effective - use a impounded car, throw in a few grand worth of electronics. Less expensive than having a bunch of police on a stakeout.

    4. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Oliver+Defacszio · · Score: 2, Funny
      "... within a few years"

      Whoops! You misspelled "hours" in your comment.

      --

      -
      Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
    5. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by MrRagu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The police don't only have the function of solving crimes they exist also to deter crime. You don't put more cops on the street so that more criminals get caught so much as you put cops on the street to make criminals think twice about committing that crime. This seems like an excellent deterrent and the article says that car theft has dropped in other places where the bait cars were used. So, yes they spent taxpayer money on this, but I'd rather have my car not stolen in the first place than have the cops find it after its been chopped.

      --


      No brain, no pain!
    6. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by n-baxley · · Score: 2

      Although, if crooks know that these cars are out there looking like any other car, they may be less likely to steal any car.

      The big problem with this is if they come up with a way to detect the GPS signal coming from the car. It would be cool if you could simulate any signature it gives off and deter crooks that are savy enough to look for the signal.

    7. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by brooks_talley · · Score: 1

      So your complaint is that it's not a perfect solution?

      Me, if my car were stolen, I wouldn't care much about whether it was a "dumbass" or a well-organized ring. I'm not sure what the dumbass-to-organized percentage is for car theft, but if it's like most crime, there are far more dumbasses out there than organized groups.

      So what if this bait car only catches stupid people? Less stupid people stealing cars = less stolen cars = good, at least the way I look at it.

      Cheers
      -b

    8. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      GPS is passive, like a radio. There is not signal, likely, until the car is stolen.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    9. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      Following your logic: Why do we bother paying cops? Sure, they'll catch some Bad Guys (TM), but crime will still happen anyway!

      This sort of defeatist attitude gets you nowhere. Just because crime still happens, and there is no way to stop it completely does NOT mean the police should stop *trying* to stop crime.

      Besides, they said it has lowered car theft in other areas. Sounds like they did their homework, and decided to try a new method of crime prevention. Kudos to the cops in D.C.!

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    10. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by FFFish · · Score: 2

      So we have a crook with the electronics knowledge to design and build a device that can detect the GPS signal from the car.

      Why, then, is he stealing cars instead of working in the electronics industry?

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    11. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by jbf · · Score: 2

      Doesn't matter. You can detect a receiver; that's the concept behind the VG-2 radar detector detector. It's also the reason why you can't use devices that _receieve_ signals on an aircraft.

      You might not turn on the GPS until the car rolls, but that's a different story...

    12. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by arbarbonif · · Score: 1

      Actually there will not be "a bunch of cops sitting around fishing for dumbass" there will be cops doing real work until a dumbass steals the car and it calls them to let them know. It allows far better multitasking than a stakeout to catch a car thief. In fact the cops can spend that time investigating the existing car robberies. They are not exclusive activities.

      Not bad for $6000.

    13. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      many passengers use GPS' on airliners. While not all companies allow it many do.

    14. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by raju1kabir · · Score: 4, Insightful
      So instead of investigating existing car robberies, they use our tax money to buy a car that is meant to be stolen. Great.

      What, you think that each thief steals one car and then retires?

      What they're doing here makes it less likely that your car will be stolen. If your car is the only one on the street, and someone wants to steal a car, there's a 100% chance that it'll be yours, and some <100% chance that it'll be recovered.

      On the other hand, if this trap car is also on the streets, then there's only a 50% chance yours will be selected for theft. And there's a 100% chance the thief will be caught before he comes back to steal your car.

      You should be on your knees thanking the Arlington police for this.

      (Personally, I don't like it, because I believe that car theft improves urban quality-of-life by driving up the cost of car ownership, but that's neither here nor there for this discussion.)

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    15. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      mostly, this is just a bunch of cops sitting around fishing for dumbass.

      This may be news to you, but most car thieves are fairly stupid. If they were smarter, thy'd sell junk bonds or go into politics.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    16. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by phreaklegion · · Score: 2, Funny

      What they need is some sort of X-Ray machine concealed in the drivers seat, that bombards the thief's genitals with radiation...

      ...thereby cutting down on FUTURE dumbasses as well.

    17. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by DebtAngel · · Score: 2

      The guy designing the device is not the one stealing the cars. He's the one selling the device to the people stealing the cars, probably for (pulls percentage out of a random orifice) 20% of whatever the car brings in. I would say that's more lucrative than the average widget design position.

      Actually, if its supplementing a widget design position, its even better for the designer dude, right up until Tony breaks his legs.

      --

      Is this post not nifty? Sluggy Freelance. Worshi

    18. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why, then, is he stealing cars instead of working in the electronics industry?

      Selling those devices to would-be car theves?

    19. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by penguinboy · · Score: 2

      You're not detecting the "GPS signal" so much as spurious emissions generated by the receiver's electronics. Most likely, sufficient shielding could be implemented to contain these.

      Of course, delaying turn-on of the GPS until the car moves would probably be a lot simpler.

    20. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by IMarvinTPA · · Score: 1

      This is off topic but,
      Arlington isn't DC. It used to be a long time ago, but Virginia decided to take it's part of the district back. National and the Pentagon are in Arlington too.

      IMarvinTPA

    21. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by j_w_d · · Score: 1

      First, publishing the story automatically reduces the level of car theft, since the thieves don't what car they look at is the problem vehicle. Second, this is a valid means of investigating car theft. You have to acquire a reasonable suspect, and chop shops rarely have signs advertising their business. Third, career crooks mostly ARE dumbasses who learn their trades during stints in prison. You can imagine my amusement to learn that one local institution with the words "Vocational Institute" in the name was in reality a maximum security prison. The reason three strikes works is that the return on your educational investment as a crook simply isn't there anymore. By the time you learn your trade, they throw away the key. Fourth, and last, the cops will be spending your tax dollars regardless.

      --
      ------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
    22. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by jbf · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but AFAIK, it's illegal in the States and on US flag carriers, by FAA regulation, so it's not a airline policy matter, it's a federal regulation.

    23. Re:Fishing for dumbass... by topham · · Score: 2

      It is not illegal to carry, or use a GPS on aircraft in the U.S. as a passenger.

      Period.

      It may be against the Airlines policy, or the Pilot (who gets last say).

      please search google/groups for GPS and airline, you'll find the discussion comes up a lot in sci.geo.satellite-nav

      Anytime someone says it is by FAA regulations request a regulation number. There isn't one.
      There is one for the guildines airlines may use to allow, or disallow such devices

  20. Arlington, VA by sulli · · Score: 5, Interesting
    My hometown! Well done guys. Arlington is cool in a number of ways - many police officers live in the county, so they drive their patrol cars home and keep them in the driveways. When a cop is your neighbor you can have a better relationship with the PD.

    But I'm surprised the headline wasn't: Grand Theft Auto Illegal in Arlington, VA (yro, games)!

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Arlington, VA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd feel a lot better about cops in my neighborhood (and them about me) if it were no big deal to invite them over after work and smoke a few blunts.

    2. Re:Arlington, VA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is more common in certain counties in California and Hawaii, methinks.

    3. Re:Arlington, VA by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      Arlington is cool in a number of ways - many police officers live in the county, so they drive their patrol cars home and keep them in the driveways.

      HUH? Arlington != country... Saying that about on par with saying that Manassas is a metropolis. It's right across the river from DC, for godsake!

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  21. so.. by seann · · Score: 1

    Who's going to come to my house today to build a device to scramble GPS/Cell Signals in a 50 meter radius? We'll go on a car stealing spree, they'll never know what hit them.

    --
    I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    1. Re:so.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US and other countries, it's illegal for civilians to own jamming equipment. If jamming gear was legal, the cops wouldn't be able to use radar to catch speeders. >^..^

    2. Re:so.. by seann · · Score: 1

      In the us and other countrys, stealing cars is illegal. If stealing cars were leagal, the cops would be speeding.

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
  22. World's Most anti-cliamactic car thefts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a television show that exhibited one of these bait cars in action. Was two or three years ago, however. Good news stories this is not.

  23. Who Cares?? by HappyCycling · · Score: 1

    I would much rather have a car thief steal the "bait-car" rather than yours or mine, right? Why does /. consider this a "Bad Thing"?

    1. Re:Who Cares?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does /. consider this a "Bad Thing"?

      Uh, where did you see that written?

  24. Hello, my name is K.I.T.T.! by Zenjive · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...and I am driving you to the nearest police station where you will be handed over to the authorities. Thank you and have a nice day!

    --


    A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with. - Tennessee Williams
    1. Re:Hello, my name is K.I.T.T.! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WOW, I just replied to the dude with the Dukes reference and now this! Man, what a day. Two classic car shows....almost makes me wish I had cable cuz I KNOW there's some channel that still plays this stuff. Has to be.

    2. Re:Hello, my name is K.I.T.T.! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, spot the 80's child. I'm not even sure half of the people on /. are old enough to catch the reference.

    3. Re:Hello, my name is K.I.T.T.! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure but i think TNN plays Dukes of Hazard, don't know about Knight Rider.

      David Hasselhoff is my hero! there should be a David Hasselhoff channel: All David Hasslehoff, all the time! NOT!

    4. Re:Hello, my name is K.I.T.T.! by Zenjive · · Score: 1

      Mod me as "dated"!

      --


      A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with. - Tennessee Williams
  25. Not necessarily by laetus · · Score: 2

    If you read the article:

    He does not anticipate any successful challenges from defense attorneys that the tactic is entrapment.

    "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."

    BTW, Jose doesn't look happy in his booking photo.

    --

    "We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
    1. Re:Not necessarily by jgerman · · Score: 2
      I've said this before, but that's a judgement call. Anyone could implant the seeds, the criminal (yes criminal) should have had enough sense not to commit the crime. It's still a crime regardless of whether or not an officer suggest it or a private citizen. I think ven the extreme case of a cop egging someone on to commit a crime makes any difference.


      Officer: "come on kill that guy, you know you want to, come on kill him"


      Citizen: (after ten minutes of being bugged) Oh ok.


      (In court)


      Citizen: it way entrapment your honor


      Judge: you fucking killed somebody dumbass

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    2. Re:Not necessarily by the_consumer · · Score: 1

      And the cop is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    3. Re:Not necessarily by jgerman · · Score: 2

      Fair enough ;) But that's a whole lot different than entrapment. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want that guy walking the streets.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    4. Re:Not necessarily by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      cops think everything that they do is legal. doesn't mean that they're right.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
  26. Entrapment! Or, not... by Dirtside · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can already hear the cries of "entrapment" about to spring up all over this article, so I'll point out this definition of entrapment, which would seem to indicate that this method (placing a "bait" car in likely spots) is NOT entrapment. I imagine that a court would actually need to rule on this (IANAL), but it's fairly clear-cut to me. Simply placing a car in an area where it is likely to get stolen would not, to any reasonable person, qualify as "government agents [persuading or talking] the person into committing the crime".

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by dattaway · · Score: 1

      Forget those urban legend prison stories. Why don't you test this legal theory out and steal one of these cars yourself? You might be pleased to know justice does prevail.

    2. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      so, you are saying that this *is* entrapment?

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    3. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by richlb · · Score: 2

      I whole-heartedly agree. Car theft is a big problem where I live. Even more of a problem, though, is theft of items from inside the vehicle. Someone sees a leather jacket in the backseat, smashes the window and takes it. I've always thought there should be an easy way to "sting" these guys. I applaud the police.

      My only concern is that it's so EASY, cops may just get lazy and not develop the good old "detective skills" that they should be using.

    4. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by egriebel · · Score: 1

      Simply placing a car in an area where it is likely to get stolen would not, to any reasonable person, qualify as "government agents [persuading or talking] the person into committing the crime".

      That's still not going to keep some damn ambulance chaser lawyer or pansy-ass liberal thinktanker from crying "entrapment" and spending more taxpayer $$ on frivilous lawsuits.

      --
      ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
    5. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Lawsuits? I am pretty sure that Grand Theft Auto (not the game) is a criminal offense and the scumbag lawyers would be paid out of the criminals pocket unless he goes with the public defender, who would probably just make a deal with the DA for a lesser charge.

    6. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Shagg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My understanding of entrapment is that it means the police can't try to persuade you to do something illegal that you otherwise would not have.

      I don't think them placing bait cars in prime locations could be considered entrapment. IE, they're not encouraging law abiding citizens to steal the car. If they had an undercover cop at the scene trying to talk passers-by into helping him steal the car, that would be entrapment.

      --
      Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
    7. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by garver · · Score: 2

      Not entrapment... unless its a phat car... with the doors unlocked... the keys in... the engine running... and a wad of benjamins hanging out of the glove compartment.

      Seriously, where does it start to become entrapment?

    8. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Skyshadow · · Score: 2
      If you fall for that one, you deserve to get caught.

      Seriously, though: this is why we have courts. The only job of the police is to catch people who do bad things (most car theives, BTW, don't just steal one car). It's the job of the courts to both dispense justice and protect people from having their rights violated. This is why evidence obtained illegally can be thrown out, regardless of how damning it is.

      Watch Law & Order some time; they explain this pretty well in the first five seconds of each show.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    9. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by geekoid · · Score: 2, Redundant

      in order for entrapment, it must 'lure' someone into a crime they otherwise wouldn't commit.
      So in this case, it all depends on where the car is, and would it attempt a someone to take it for a joy ride who otherwise wouldn't of done so.

      I would be surprised if the car is left unlocked, and I'm sure they don't leave the keys in the ignition.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    10. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by 56ker · · Score: 2

      They're saying it isn't.

    11. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Sabalon · · Score: 2

      When the police are right there with you saying "hey man...look at that car...we should steal it. Here's a slim jim. Let me show you how to jimmie the lock".

      Bet it makes a DEA undercover agent's life hell.

    12. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by techstar25 · · Score: 1

      ALthough the article says that they dont' any problems with people accusing entrapment, it would be entrapment if they left a brand new car, with a shiny new cd player, with the door WIDE open and the keys in it. Okay, that might be entrapment. They said that they put garbage and such in the car to make it look as normal as possible

    13. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by haystor · · Score: 1

      I read about a sting operation to catch people soliciting prostitutes. The unusual thing about this one was that the cop dressed like a prostitute was wearing a ball cap with the word "POLICE" in 4 inch high letters on it. When the johns asked if she was a cop she replied, "yea right, I'm a cop."

      Of course, they hired her.

      --
      t
    14. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by haystor · · Score: 1

      Why do people always qualify their statements with IANAL (I am not a lawyer). Even if a lawyer is on the boards, they'll qualify their statements with "this is not legal advice". And even if you hire a lawyer, you'd be hard pressed to get a guarantee from them that anything that say is in fact true.

      --
      t
    15. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we should arrest and imprison people who refer to a car as "phat".

    16. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Skip666Kent · · Score: 2

      Only the first few times, then they'll have precedence.

      --
      **>>BELCH
    17. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      I know what _they_ say, I was interested in what dattaway's point was.

      Why don't you test this legal theory out and steal one of these cars yourself?

      Does this mean he thinks it is or isn't entrapment? I thought the original post was saying it's not. The tone of his comment seems to disagree.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    18. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by prophecyvi · · Score: 1

      Heck, how many lawyers have you EVER seen on Slashdot???

      We need a new saying, instead of IANAL, we need just IAAL. :)

    19. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by AxelBoldt · · Score: 2

      The legal definition is really irrelevant: the job of the police is to reduce the number of crimes and solve crimes with actual victims, not to artificially create crimes just so that they can improve their arrest statistics.

    20. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by 4of12 · · Score: 2

      Not entrapment... unless its a phat car... with the doors unlocked... the keys in... the engine running... and a wad of benjamins hanging out of the glove compartment.

      A car like that would be less vulnerable to theft.

      Most any streetwise person would accurately presume said vehicle belongs to a drug dealer.

      Drug dealers punish foes with a lot less mercy than virtually any cop.

      Q.E.D.

      P.S. By the same token, a DrugDealerCar is not what you want to take back and forth on your next holiday vacation in Tijuana. Not unless you enjoy waiting in line for long searches.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    21. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dipshit, if they artificially create one crime, put the guy in jail so he can't commit 10 other real crimes than crime has been reduced. Same as backburing a wild fire. You know a lot of firemen actually set fires on purpose! I thought they were supposed to reduce fire! Oh no! Dumbfuck.

    22. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re: your sig. Atleast I can get some work done on my Windows OS. Linux doesn't have shit for me. So until you actually get something going for people that actually work on computers (Instead of your constant system config mastubartion) SHUT THE HELL UP!

    23. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, why can't I "Friend" AC??? Ha!

    24. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by yzquxnet · · Score: 1

      but parking an unlocked crime does not create any new crimes. No one forced anyone to steal the car. They did it anyways. It would be like saying that me putting up a mailbox in my yard caused someone to come by an bash it in with a baseball bat.

    25. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      " Not entrapment... unless its a phat car... with the doors unlocked... the keys in... the engine running... and a wad of benjamins hanging out of the glove compartment.

      A car like that would be less vulnerable to theft."

      It works in Queens, but I wouldn't try it in certain parts of the Bronx of Brooklyn.

      The key is to do it in a middle/middle or lower/middle class neighborhood. The problem is if you do it too often, the neigborhood gets richer as the crime rate goes down, and then all the pros show up and think, "Look at what stupid rich boy did.", even though it's the same car/neighborhood.

    26. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Heck, how many lawyers have you EVER seen on Slashdot???

      A few. Not many, but more than zero.

      We need a new saying, instead of IANAL, we need just IAAL.

      Try a Google search for "site:slashdot.org IAAL", and you'll get several hits. Note that most of them come with a different disclaimer -- instead of "IANAL", they'll say something like "IAAL, but this should not be considered legal advice."

    27. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a grammatical error in your sig.

    28. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a spelling error in your comment.

    29. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Nathaniel · · Score: 2
      "the job of the police is to reduce the number of crimes and solve crimes with actual victims, not to artificially create crimes"

      When this helps the police track a stolen car back to a warehouse with other stolen cars, this can help them solve crimes.

      The existance of 'bait cars' can also lead to a decrease in crime by raising the risks associated with stealing cars.

    30. Re:Entrapment! Or, not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the job of the police is to reduce the number of crimes and solve crimes with actual victims

      I guess you never had your car stolen. While it's not quite as bad as a B&E or a kidnapping, I would hardly call car theft a victimless crime.

      Also, such sting operations can generate valuable leads to well organized car theft rings.

  27. Except... by bananaape · · Score: 0

    Its only a matter of time before thieves figure out how to disable it...

    1. Re:Except... by tyler6000 · · Score: 1

      no, probably not.

  28. Kudos for technology in law enforcement by totallygeek · · Score: 2
    I am all for this type of law enforcement. I think this type of sting operation ought to be cheap enough to manage with centralized administration and small teams. Maybe this will be a decent deterrent, as jail time obviously isn't enough.

    1. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Jail time is only a deterrent if would-be crooks consider it likely they will be caught. The problem with the get-tough-on-crime attitude we've seen is that it's all geared to prosecution, not protection or enforcement. Which is what leads to 3-strike laws which put someone in prison for life for shoplifting, a criminal justice system that has been jailing - even sentencing to death - hundreds of innocent people, yet not making the streets any safer. If a crook faced 90% certainty of facing a reasonable sentence, I believe it would be far better deterrent than 10% certainty of facing a draconian one.

    2. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Streets are safer? Come to New York. There are parts of New York that I wouldn't walk through during the day that are now like Disneyland even at night.

    3. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by kent_eh · · Score: 1

      Jail time is only a deterrent if would-be crooks consider it likely they will be caught

      DING!DING!DING!
      Give that man a cee-gar (or at least more karma)

      If the criminal figures "they'll never catch me", then why would he give any cosideration to the punishment?

      This is such an obvious use of existing technology, it's a surprise that ALL police departments don't have this.
      Maybe the insurance companies should finance some of these for use by the local police. Sounds like a win/win to me.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
    4. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2
      New York's an exception because New York has done what I recommend: focus on consistent enforcement and police presence, not on draconian sentencing. NYPD actually respond to calls, are out on the streets.

      The problem is that deterrence is hard to measure. Punitive justice feels like it is getting results, because you have a guilty sentence and a guy going to prison (even if he didn't do it.) Successfully deterred crime is, by definition, Nothing Happening. Very hard to show that as a success. And when crime is successfully deterred, people start wondering why they are paying so much for the cops: after all, nothing's happening.

    5. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by pcidevel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am all for this type of law enforcement. I think this type of sting operation ought to be cheap enough to manage with centralized administration and small teams. Maybe this will be a decent deterrent, as jail time obviously isn't enough.

      Well I certainly think I'm all for this type of law enforcement, but when I begin to contemplate the future of these types of stings, I must admit that it scares me. I saw an example of this type of car used for an arrest on the discovery channel. They had two girls pull over to the side of the road and get out of the car and start yelling at one another about how girl 1 is just going to "leave his car here and he can come pick it up himself".. then she makes a big show of throwing the keys into the car and slamming the door (presumably without locking the doors) and then gets into her friend's car and off they drive. It's important to mention that before they did this big show, an undercover police officer drove around and found someone he thought looked like an individual who would steal a car (he scoped out a potential target) then they did the act directly in front of this person.

      Now I agree with the fact that stealing a car is stealing a car, but this seems to me to be quite a bit like monitoring for thought crime. Present a situation to an individual that is not likely to ever happen, then see if that individual is willing to break the law under these special circumstances. It is easy to see them bring it a step further. Lets say they decide to start catching muggers by having a guy walk out into the street and shout "Wow, I can't believe the ATM just let me withdraw $10,000!!!".

      Okay I still agree, a mugging is a mugging. Maybe now that they're catching all of the muggers and the car thieves, they decide to start trying to catch people who are willing to traffic drugs. They start going door to door with a small brown package and offer $10,000 to a person if he'll just deliver the small brown package to an address downtown. Suddenly the police are presenting hypothetical situations that could never exist in reality, just to see if people are willing to break the law in these extreme circumstances. Suddenly the police can transform ANYONE into a criminal, just by finding the threshold of risk vs. reward for that individual.

      I would think leaving one of these cars in a high crime area and waiting for them to get stolen is a noble thing. But it scares me when they begin to make false senario's and they target people who fit the profile of a car thief. It seems to me that they are creating crime with these hypothetical situations, then arresting people for having the potential to do wrong if an impossible situation were to occur. Leaving a locked car to be stolen is perfectly acceptable, but creating a situation that is too good to be true frightens me..

      --

      I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

    6. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by quinto2000 · · Score: 1
      I agree with you completely.

      This is entrapment, plain and simple. The police should be in the business of preventing crimes, not getting people to commit more of them. How about a good public transportation system? How about providing rewarding work for these people? Give them a reason to live. It may be true that many car thieves are repeat offenders, but having a tendency towards committing crime is not the same as committing a crime.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    7. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

      This is very much not entrapment. IANAL, but NAY; entrapment entails actively urging someone who was otherwise not inclined towards criminal activity. This is no more entrapment than an undercover cop trying to catch a rapist, walking alone in the park, is entrapment. If the cops walked up to some guy and said "hey, it looks like that car's unlocked - and maybe you can hotwire it! Probably could get a lot of money for it..." then that would be entrapment.

    8. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Bilbo · · Score: 2
      I would think leaving one of these cars in a high crime area and waiting for them to get stolen is a noble thing. But it scares me when they begin to make false senario's and they target people who fit the profile of a car thief.

      The article made the important distinction of entrapment, where the law enforcement people plant the idea of the crime in someone's mind. All of your examples (including the one you saw on TV) are examples of entrapment, where definite steps are taken to put ideas in people's heads. On the other hand, simply leaving a car in a high crime area, with no differentiation between the bait and any other normal vehicle, is just creating a way to tag someone who was already planning on stealing someone's car.

      --
      Your Servant, B. Baggins
    9. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And would it be entrapment if the cops said, "Hey, it lookcs like that car's unlocked, hope nobody hotwires it, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean?" Because that's really no different from what they did having that girl blatantly toss the keys in and loudly exclaim that she was going to leave it there.

    10. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Peale · · Score: 2

      I would think leaving one of these cars in a high crime area and waiting for them to get stolen is a noble thing. But it scares me when they begin to make false senario's and they target people who fit the profile of a car thief. It seems to me that they are creating crime with these hypothetical situations, then arresting people for having the potential to do wrong if an impossible situation were to occur. Leaving a locked car to be stolen is perfectly acceptable, but creating a situation that is too good to be true frightens me.

      This is an interesting point. But you have to remember the actual market for stolen cars stems from the fact that you must have a place to _take_ said cars (that is, if you're stealing for money instead of kicks).

      Those who are stealing for kicks will drive the shit out of the car, tear it up, burn it, and dump it somewhere. Someone stealing it for money has one thought in mind; get the car, dump it off, collect the cash, go to next car.

      So, pretty much, we're not going after the innocent with this scenario; we're going after the bad guys, the ones who would have done it anyway. We're just made their 'job' a 'little easier.'

    11. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yep - and you can bet that guy who has a %10 chance of doing a lot of time is going to make it worth his while

    12. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      finally, someone w/ some common sense! ( or at least who knows the cops...)
      let's weight these out...
      replacing stolen car - $15,000-$35,000
      cost of lawyer to save ass after trusting police - $5000-$50,000
      the thought of someone walking down the street yelling "wow, 10 G's" to a native Houstonian - priceless

    13. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by dryguy · · Score: 1

      This argument basically relies on the slippery slope fallacy:

      http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery- slope.html

      In other words, using cars as bait for criminals does not lead to the logical conclusion that the police will engage in entrapment using high cash payments as bait.

      --
      -- Stamp out entropy. ->dryguy@bellsloth.net
    14. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Erm, if the thief truly thought the girl was trying to get someone to steal it, he would realize it was a trick and not steal it.

      That's what makes it not entrapment. No one encouraged the criminal. By pretending to be a victim, they, by defination, are not encouraging the criminal, if they do so they're being a piss-poor victim. Victims automatically discourage the criminal, or at least try to do so.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    15. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by kesuki · · Score: 2

      I'd like to point out two things... first of all the cars used are specifically chosen for the popularity with car thieves. Secondly, they are locked and without keys inside them. The thief has to be able to break into the car and hotwire it to steal it. Since the cars chosen take seconds to jimmy the lock, and can easily be hotwired and have the steering lock broken it doesn't provide a real barrier to theft. And since it isn't a stage show it isn't entrapment. if a car left alone and locked is broken into and started without the keys it isn't entrapment. IMO the place to draw the line is when you start to leave unlocked cars with keys in the ignition or whatever... maybe leave the keys under the floor mat or up under the visor, but the car should at least be locked, maybe with a window partially open, although that could tip off a thief if the car sat through a rainstorm or two.

      Another thing to keep in mind is that this kind of tool isn't preventing even one person from becoming a criminal. All this tool is doing is making sure that more criminals spend time behind bars for the crimes they commit. Prevention should be the goal of society, because incarceration costs more to society than if that person could have been convinced to never comit a crime in the first place.

    16. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Draconian measures 90% of the time will definitely lead to lower crime rates, so I propose we change tactics to INSTANT FLAMING DEATH by electrostatic shock. Start dragging your feet now, Cowboy Neal...

    17. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      From the description given, it sounded to me like the role the girl cop was playing was that of pissed-off girlfriend who didn't mind if the car was stolen because it was her boyfriend's car and she was mad at him. Now, any sensible thief would see that as a golden opportunity.

      Or, in your words, she was being a bad victim, and thus, voila, entrapment because a good viction would not be encouraging people to steal her boyfriend's car because she was mad at her boyfriend.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    18. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen a French movie Le Gendarme de Saint-Tropez (or one of the later parts, I don't remember) where Louis de Funès drives 5mph in mountains with 20 cars behind him?

    19. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a crook faced 90% certainty of facing a reasonable sentence

      I agree totally. If a car theif looked at a minimum 15 year lockup, they might think twice before breaking the law.
      One less bad guy on the streets.

    20. Re:Kudos for technology in law enforcement by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      From the description given, it sounded to me like the role the girl cop was playing was that of pissed-off girlfriend who didn't mind if the car was stolen because it was her boyfriend's car and she was mad at him. Now, any sensible thief would see that as a golden opportunity.

      She didn't say she wanted the car stolen, or that she didn't mind if it was stolen. If she had said that, sure, it would be entrapment.

      But she didn't give anyone the idea of stealing the car who wouldn't have stolen a car with the keys in it anyway, if they had seen the keys in it. She just made sure everyone nearby saw the keys were in it.

      Or, in your words, she was being a bad victim, and thus, voila, entrapment because a good viction would not be encouraging people to steal her boyfriend's car because she was mad at her boyfriend.

      No, she was being a perfect victim. She was being irreponsible and careless because she was angry, which is exactly the kinds of victims that criminals like.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  29. Way to read the article! by DrEldarion · · Score: 2

    I'm so glad that the people on Slashdot read the article before posting.

    "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."

    -- Dr. Eldarion --

    1. Re:Way to read the article! by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      you can disagree with the police about their understanding of the laws regulating them. Frankly, police officers violate the law all of the time. It must come from being in a position with so much authority.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
  30. Scary! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 4, Funny
    "The car called us -- 'I'm being stolen,'...

    Cars can't talk.

    Why don't they 'salt' a few 1982 Lotus Turbo Esprits? Don't those blow up when you break into them?

    --
    "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    1. Re:Scary! by JordanH · · Score: 1
      • Cars can't talk.

      They can't? I'm sure I saw this TV show the other night with David Hasselhof where this Firebird talked. Then, there's "My Mother The Car".

    2. Re:Scary! by DickPhallus · · Score: 1

      Cars can't talk.

      This one does!

      --

      --
      Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
    3. Re:Scary! by parkrrrr · · Score: 1
      Why don't they 'salt' a few 1982 Lotus Turbo Esprits? Don't those blow up when you break into them?
      Only in Bond films.
    4. Re:Scary! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 2
      Only in Bond films. Wow someone got it. Some of these people need to get hit with a clue-by-four. I guess that film could be considered a 'classic' by now huh...

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    5. Re:Scary! by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 1
      --

      If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
    6. Re:Scary! by DickPhallus · · Score: 1

      Hehe... imagine a kight rider transformer? That would be sweet...

      Whoa... 80's overload!

      --

      --
      Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
    7. Re:Scary! by MikeD83 · · Score: 0

      I had an 86 Maxima and it talked to me. It told me convient things like "lights are on" and "left/right door open". - Mike

    8. Re:Scary! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For Your Eyes Only" is one of my favorite Bond flicks.

  31. Pretty Cool by Microsift · · Score: 1

    I remember seeing something similar on Donahue about 10-12 years ago. The guy had a recumbinant[sp?] bike with a ton of computer equipment on it, and he rode around the country, if someone tried to move the bike when it was locked down, it would call 911 and give its location.

    I think the bike was called Behemoth, I think that was an acronym, but I don't remember what it stood for.

    --
    My other sig is extremely clever...
    1. Re:Pretty Cool by jnik · · Score: 1

      Big Electronic Human-Engineered Machine, Only Too Heavy IIRC. He had god only knows how many computers built in and a load of ham gear; parts of each usable in motion and some of it only once standing still. A lot was in the trailer behind the thing.

      Last I saw (in a 1991 issue of QST), he was up to BEHEMOTH III and was working on #4, to be dubbed the "MicroShip." Haven't heard much since.

    2. Re:Pretty Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just do a search on google for the following terms:

      behemoth bike computer solar

      Don't feel like doing it myself but there is an actual site dedicated to the projects (yes several).

      I remember watching that exact show when I was like 10 years old. - Krash

    3. Re:Pretty Cool by artg · · Score: 1

      Steve Roberts.

      http://www.microship.com/ - geek heaven on the water.

  32. Increasing the 'catch rate' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Why don't they put a buxom blonde in the car to increase the steal metrics?

    1. Re:Increasing the 'catch rate' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dealer probably told them "for the millionth time, she does *not* come with the car" ...

  33. Entrapment by garren_bagley · · Score: 1

    RE: He does not anticipate any successful challenges from defense attorneys that the tactic is entrapment.

    "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."


    Doesn't this depend on the car they actually use?

  34. No by sulli · · Score: 2

    The guy stole the car. It happened to belong to the ACPD. And it happened to have fancy electronics in it. But he still stole the car. So he's toast.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:No by shine · · Score: 0

      No, this is BS.

      The car belonged to the government, which is all of us, including the car thief. How, may I ask, can you steal from yourself. This is what he was doing. Only taking property that he already owned.

      (Blam, bang gavel)

      Case dismissed, defendant set free with an apology from the police.

      Judge Shine.

    2. Re:No by The_Unforgiven · · Score: 1

      Funny, but stupid.

      He's stealing soemthing that belongs to the people *collectively*.

      How would you like it if I fenced off central park and said I was a citizen, so I own it?

      --
      http://wsulug.org
    3. Re:No by Rakarra · · Score: 2
      The car belonged to the government, which is all of us, including the car thief. How, may I ask, can you steal from yourself.

      Wow! I'm so glad I can walk into the local government offices and start hauling away 'my' computers. :)

  35. Great! by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now thanks to the Wasington Post, I know there are a bunch of cars sitting unlocked, and all I need to do to steal them is bring some radio jamming equipment! Sweet!

    1. Re:Great! by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      I really doubt most car thieves (the ones that would be stealing late model cars off the street) would know much about jamming radio signals.

    2. Re:Great! by farnsaw · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and when you are caught, you will be charged with breaking federal regulations set by the FCC in addition to the other crimes.

      --
      "Computer Scientists can count to 1024 on their fingers" (non-mutant, non-mutilatated, human computer scientists)
    3. Re:Great! by brunes69 · · Score: 2

      Didn't you see Gone in 60 seconds? That movie should have taught you that all car theives are electronics experts who can record and manipulate RF signals on a whim!

    4. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and next you're going to tell us how l33t the kids in "Hackers" are cause they trashed a Gibson, right?

    5. Re:Great! by brunes69 · · Score: 2

      It was a joke. Lighten up.

    6. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is a "bloackout"?

    7. Re:Great! by esnible · · Score: 1

      I live in NYC. I have no need of a car, but I do need a GPS unit and a wireless modem. Sweeter!

  36. Hmm, Didn't I see this on COPS about 5 years ago. by UnkaFuggly · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This is not news in any sense, except possibly in the "local news sucks" sense. Slashdot... Maybe you ned to get a few more people with a bit more ability to discern what are actually important changes & announcements in technology and what is merely recycled "Real-People" "stories".

    --
    -- "If I can't Dance, It's not my revolution" - Emma Goldman
  37. What bothers me.. by CptNoSkill · · Score: 1

    Are the lawyers who are going to claim 'entrapment' and get these criminals off...

    1. Re:What bothers me.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's what judges and juries are for...are you a civilian i.e. not familiar with the common law?

  38. Entrapment by moniker_21 · · Score: 2

    "A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case."

    The guy they arrested was arrested with burglary tools on his person. So quite obviously he did in fact have previous intent to commit, and enrapment won't be an issue.

    --
    I posted to /. and all I got was this stupid sig
  39. I'll bet it *was* locked by dscottj · · Score: 1
    Guys, check out one of the last lines in the story:


    " In addition to facing a grand larceny auto charge, Gonzalez, 40, was charged with possessing burglary tools" [emphasis added]


    Burglary tools = slim jim & other sorts of unlock tools. I'll bet nickles to quarters that the car was locked, and this guy jimmied it open somehow.


    Leaving a car on a street unlocked with the keys inside is entrapment. This isn't.

    --
    AMCGLTD.COM. Where cats, science fictio
    1. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaving the car unlocked with the keys inside isn't entrapment any more than an attractive woman walking down the street in a sexy dress is "asking" to be raped.

    2. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by marcsiry · · Score: 2

      Naah, leaving an unlocked car on the street isn't entrapment. That deosn't incite you to cause a crime-- you're not suppossed to steal stuff, regardless of its secureness.

      Now, if there was an undercover cop lurking nearby, pointing out the car was unlocked and offering you fifty bucks to steal it for him-- that's entrapment.

      --
      Marc Siry || interactive media professional, motorcycle enthusiast ||
    3. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by raju1kabir · · Score: 2
      Leaving a car on a street unlocked with the keys inside is entrapment.

      Only if you can convince a jury that an ordinary person would be compelled to steal the car under such circumstances, a tough sell if you ask me.

      You've never seen a car left running unattended at the curb outside a store? I live in Washington DC - not exactly Mayberry - and I see that regularly.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    4. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by forii · · Score: 1

      Leaving a car on a street unlocked with the keys inside is entrapment. This isn't.

      Just like how if someone crawls through an unlocked window into your house, it isn't breaking and entering, because obviously you were inviting them to do so.

    5. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but if you left your house unlocked when you went on vacation to come home to an empty house, your house it could be enough to make your home insurance company balk at covering your loss, because you did not do your own "due dilligence"... Since you'd need to call the cops on something like that (the insurance company will insist on seeing a police report), the cops are going to investigate, and conclude that the lock wasn't forced or picked, so the only way in was someone had a key or the door was unlocked.

    6. Re:I'll bet it *was* locked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaving the car unlocked with keys isn't entrapment. Now, if they painted "Steal Me!" on the side, you might have a case.

  40. I am puting in my order for one of these by cosmicpossum · · Score: 1

    ...to track my teenage son!

    I especially like the remote kill switch.

    --
    (This sig intentionally left blank)
    1. Re:I am puting in my order for one of these by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      they've had remove kill switches out for years...

      I saw one in the J.C. Whitney book back in 1992. I was going to get one, but then I figured the novelty would wear off.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    2. Re:I am puting in my order for one of these by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Tragic auto accident kills local teen on busy highway - details at eleven"

    3. Re:I am puting in my order for one of these by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's only fun to kill your teenage son a few times.

  41. I've got a better idea... by Dimensio · · Score: 2

    ...but it probably wouldn't go over well and might be difficult to implement.

    Instead of GPS trackers, the cars could be rigged to explode when the ignition was started. Of course in this case you need failsafes to make sure that nothing else will set off the bomb. You also need to worry about collateral damage and it'll get expensive after awhile...

    ...then again, it is government spending. And it will insure a low repeat offender count.

    1. Re:I've got a better idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ensure. Insure refers to some sort of financial shared risk thing. Really.

    2. Re:I've got a better idea... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      In South Africa, car-jackings are common. They also often involve the owner of the car being assaulted or murdered. So often, in fact, that car-jackings are automatically considered to be murder attempts. So, one can legally employ lethal countermeasures. This resulted in a car with built-in flamethrowers, under the car and shooting upwards, fully legal. You can probably still find the articles on CNN....

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    3. Re:I've got a better idea... by FFFish · · Score: 2

      Electric windows. When the ignition is turned on, the windows go up, the doors lock, and cyanide gas pours into the compartment.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    4. Re:I've got a better idea... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the problem with law in South Africa. Almost everything is punishable by death, so a criminal will likely kill you while robbing you, just so there's no witness. Hey, if he's caught, he's dead either way, so why not murder you and cover some tracks?

    5. Re:I've got a better idea... by bloodSausage · · Score: 1
      Exploding the perpetrator might be overkill (pun intended), but I've heard of disabling systems which
      • lock all the doors
      • kill the engine
      • turn on the radio really loud
      • crank the heat to maximum
      In other words, makes the criminal(s) uncomfortable.
    6. Re:I've got a better idea... by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      Um, intersting.

      Now after this works, what are you going to do with a car that's been saturated with posion?

      Nitrogen works just fine.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    7. Re:I've got a better idea... by Rakarra · · Score: 2
      So much for the idea that harsh penalities like the death penalty are a deterrant to crime.

  42. Stolen Truck by yintercept · · Score: 1

    Most interstate truckers these days have satellite tracking devices. The primary use of the satellites is mondane stuff like tracking shipments, filling out driving laws, routing and the like.

    One of the first four trucks my company installed the system on was stolen. After stealing the truck, they drove it to several warehouses; so one GPS/Satellite unit took down both the thief, but several chop shops and stolen goods warehouses.

    Having even a small percentage of cars with tracking devices will take a big bite out of car theft. It would be cool if someday we did the same thing with bikes; Then I could ride my bike to University without having it or its parts stolen.

    1. Re:Stolen Truck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      buy an old Schwinn Varsity at a garage sale for $10 or something, instead of your "big investment" $100 Costco/Sam's Club/WalMart Huffy MTB. flip the drop handlebars over if you hate those, to make it look like even more a piece of shit. If the chain is rusty, a couple of spokes are broken, hey, bonus for you, but still rideable to/from school, etc. Odds are, a bike thief will try to steal a locked-down MTB rather than your unsecured, sad, ragged Schwinn. They're not taking the bike to ride it (although that is a part of taking it, to ride away with it). They want it for the parts. NO one wants Schwinn Varsity parts.

    2. Re:Stolen Truck by yintercept · · Score: 1

      I would take the advice, but my old Schwinn Varsity had the seat and both wheels stolen.

  43. entrapment? by fewl · · Score: 1

    ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.


    I can see it all now...
    thief: "Really officer, anyone dumb enough to leave their car unlocked in DC is just ASKING to get their car stolen. I didn't WANT to do it. The car made me do it."
    --
    Your actions on earth echo in eternity.
    1. Re:entrapment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, not legal entrapment, as in defective police procedure.

      But, I think they ought to use another form of entrapment - PHYSICAL. That is, spend a few more bucks (yeah, I know, they've already spent quite a few as it is, but...) to hack in the door locking system to the remotely-operated kill switch!

      Yeah, I realize that the perp might've broken a window to get into the car in the first place (thereby precipitating an additional charge of littering, with all that herculite glass strewn on the pavement), but depending on the exact model bait car (and its shape/design), trying to crawl out of an open/missing window instead of using the door will slow down the crook somewhat.

      I'm kind of amused that it's taken the police this long to use APRS technology invented by ham operators a decade or so ago, which has also been used by storm chasers (e.g., "Twister") as well.

  44. Oh, gee, thanks. by I+am+the+blob · · Score: 1

    ...selecting from among the most commonly stolen vehicles. Nationally, that list includes Toyota Camrys, Honda Accords and Oldsmobile Cutlasses.

    Great, if this works, thieves will stop picking on the most commonly stolen vehicles, thereby increasing the risk that my Kia Sportage will get stolen!

    Who am I kidding, I could leave that thing in a dark lot with the engine running and the doors open and nobody would touch it. Bad, bad Kia.

    Learn from my mistake. Don't buy a Kia, kids.

    --blob

    --

    All sweeping generalizations suck.
  45. Sounds like a good place to steal $3,000 worth of by trentfoley · · Score: 1

    How long until thieves break in to the cars to steal the gps and wireless equipment?

  46. All well and good, but by BoBaBrain · · Score: 1

    I think I'll stick with my "bottle-of-poisoned-whisky-in-the-glove-compartmen t" system.

    --
    I am a Karma Library.
    1. Re:All well and good, but by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2

      Yeah, nice idea. When your first passenger idly opens the compartment and takes a secret swig whilst you pop into a 7-11 or something and then, like, DIES.

      Plus, in the eyes of the law, even for thieves; killing isn't considered to good for them; it's too bad for you- you're going DOWN.

      Or when the thief doesn't like whiskey and gives it to his sister...

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    2. Re:All well and good, but by forii · · Score: 1

      Or when the thief doesn't like whiskey and gives it to his sister...

      Hey, they still share the same genes. I'm all for natural selection in this case.

    3. Re:All well and good, but by Tattva · · Score: 2
      Plus, in the eyes of the law, even for thieves; killing isn't considered to good for them; it's too bad for you- you're going DOWN

      But if he just used Schlitz the effect would be the same and it would be perfectly legal!

      --
      personal attacks hurt, especially when deserved
    4. Re:All well and good, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he was, like, joking.
      <br>
      <br>
      Anyway, it isn't murder as the thief isn't forced to drink the whiskey.

  47. I live in DC.... by dryueh · · Score: 2

    ..and if I see this thing parked in front of my apt, it's so keyed.

    1. Re:I live in DC.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you 12? Why would you post such trash with a +1? And is that horse faced bitch on you website your girlfriend or your sister?

    2. Re:I live in DC.... by dryueh · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      Whoah!

      Matter of fact, the +1 bonus was unintentional...karma just got up to 25 and I posted without realizing that the bonus is automatically applied without saying you don't want it applied.

      So calm down. Yikes.

    3. Re:I live in DC.... by dryueh · · Score: 1

      shit....I did it again.

    4. Re:I live in DC.... by danielobvt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      soo.... You support car thieves? Anything that makes thieves think twice about taking my stuff is a good thing. Particularily since there is no way to accidentally get caught by this ploy (hardly anybody accidentally steals a car. The only scenario that they could accidentally take the car is if the car looks like it is theirs, and their key somehow makes it work. And even then you could explain it away.). Anyway, I think this vehicle is being used by Arlington cops, and seeing as Arlington is not DC then you shouldn't have any problems.

    5. Re:I live in DC.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so an asshole.

    6. Re:I live in DC.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This seems to be going around...

      OKAY folks, the Arlington VA cops are doing this, not DC cops.

      No, they are not the same. There is a river between VA and DC. The border is the VA side of the river (yes, different than most borders defined by rivers).

      Related items:
      The Pentagon is in Arlington, VA, not Washington, DC.
      National Guard Bureau is in Arlington, VA not Washington, DC.
      The CIA is in Langley, VA, not Washington, DC
      The NRO is in Chantilly, VA, not Washington, DC.
      The NSA is in Ft. George Meade, Maryland, not Washington, DC.

      The Congress, Supreme Court, Court of Military Appeals and The White House ARE in Washington, DC, no matter how badly that town needs to be given back to Maryland.

    7. Re:I live in DC.... by dryueh · · Score: 1
      Ok, you know...I was kidding

      I was also hyped up on dayquil all day..staring at a computer with little to no work to do. The post was stupid, yeah yeah yeah.

      But what a response, eh? God...if you come across shit, don't read it! Mod it down! Harrassing people is just childish..

      Off topic..whatever. I don't think I care anymore. Community my asshole.

      The original intent of this post was supposed to reflect the frustration of having a police car parked in front of my apt for days waiting for someone to steal it and having to park around the block or something....obviously, my dayquil brain couldn't get anything across. Stupid dayquil/allergies.

  48. More danger to people... by rtstyk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More danger to people when they're entering/leaving the car if this gets really popular because the thieves will stop trusting the free standing car. I can imagine the thieves resorting to using a gun to get the person out of the way and then steal the car.

    Also I suppose the thieves can just observer the car for a while. If no one uses it for 2 or 3 days then it's a given that's a bait. The cops might have to have people using the car in some realistic way.

    d.

    --
    I hate the fact that you people don't salute me
    1. Re:More danger to people... by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      You are assuming that most car thieves would make the step from GTA to Armed Robbery, Assault with a Deadly Weapon, and even murder. Most car thieves are looking to get in and out as quickly as possible with as little hassle as possible.

    2. Re:More danger to people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The cops might have to have people using the car in some realistic way.


      How do you know they're not already doing this? I sorta assumed they would have a plaincloths cop move it at least once a day, and they need to keep the car washed or it is _really_ obvious it's been sitting there not being used.

  49. This is cool but... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

    They designed it poorly. The damn thing should not just shut off with the kill switch, but lock the dumbass in.

    It should take still photographs of his face with a hidden camera, while he's in the act.

    Hell, the thing should have external hidden cameras, so that it can take pics of vandals.

    If they wanted to, they could make this car a REAL pain for criminals.

    1. Re:This is cool but... by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can see it now; the car locks itself, then starts driving around in circles while the radio plays a continuous loop of N'Sync at 100 decibels.

    2. Re:This is cool but... by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      It would be amusing if it continuously played Celine Dion warbling the "Titanic" theme. Or would that be police brutality?

      (Heh. The car phone rings... "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law...").

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    3. Re:This is cool but... by fishbowl · · Score: 2


      >They designed it poorly. The damn thing should
      >not just shut off with the kill switch, but lock
      >the dumbass in.

      ...and fill the car with anaesthetic gas...

      I want a remote killswitch for my car. Just
      dial a cellphone number and a fuse link burns.
      Since there's a relay, it's just a small step
      to lock the doors... Toxic gas release ... steel spike through the seat... brake line pressurized...

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    4. Re:This is cool but... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      They designed it poorly. The damn thing should not just shut off with the kill switch, but lock the dumbass in.
      That would be illegal, since it amounts to entrapping.
    5. Re:This is cool but... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

      Booby traps are illegal. Besides, you don't want the thing malfunctioning... "Here honey, let me change the radio station *BOOM*". I'm also sure that playing N'Sync would be illegal too. Though the car thief might wish you had booby trapped it instead.

    6. Re:This is cool but... by cruelworld · · Score: 2

      Wrong numbers would really suck then.

    7. Re:This is cool but... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the police just lose them in the crowd of teenagers who already drive like this?

    8. Re:This is cool but... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      He's not talking about a booby trap, he's talking about murder. A remote killswitch is something he would trigger, and hence it's not a booby trap.

      And only dangerous booby traps are illegal.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    9. Re:This is cool but... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

      What booby traps aren't dangerous? It kinda goes with the territory. As far as the law is concerned, anything remotely or automatically triggered is a booby trap.

  50. Ricochet wireless modems did it first by t0qer · · Score: 2

    I forget what the original name was but the Ricochet modem was used in NYC so taxi companies could track down stolen taxi's. Later that system was purchased by Metricom and reworked to become the Ricochet wireless system we know today. Even after Metricom purchased it, there were times it was used to track things like stolen customer laptops, cars, basically anything that was attatched to it could be tracked.

  51. ? entrapment ? by duran.goodyear · · Score: 0, Redundant

    uh.... doesn't that constitute entrapment???

    I'm no legal expert, but that seems a bit over the line to me.

    1. Re:? entrapment ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only are you not a legal expert, you're not even an expert on reading the fucking article.

  52. We can do this now with the dashpc... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The dashpc has this functionality. If anyone would like to contribute to the proejct, please feel free to.

  53. Nothing Really New by ShawnDoc · · Score: 1

    The cameras, cut off switch, auto lock mechanism are nothing new. This has been done for several years by several major metropolitan cities (And I'm sure a few smaller ones). The only thing new is the use of the GPS so police can be sent. In the past when this was done it required police be watching to make the arrest.

    So I guess at least it free's up a couple officers who otherwise would have to be posted for survailance.

  54. Entrapment by kaszeta · · Score: 2
    Doesn't this constitute some form of entrapment?

    Not necessarily. At least in most jurisdictions, "Entrapment" is law enforcement officers inducing or encouraging a person to commit a crime when the potential criminal wasn't inclined to commit the crime. Like many crimes, intent is important.

    For example, if the cops are doing a drug sting, in which an undercover agent is selling drugs on the street, if a customer merely comes up and buys drugs, it's usually not entrapment, since the guy would've bought the drugs if the seller wasn't a narc. But if the agent pressures the buyer if the buyer wasn't already motivated to buy drugs, then it probably is.

    In this case, it would be argued that the person stealing the car was already inclined to steal a car, so there would be no entrapment.

    But yes, there is a lot of grey area here.

    (No, I'm not a lawyer)

  55. I can see their budget now by nizo · · Score: 2

    Next years budget:

    $1,600,000 for a few sports cars that can be driven around by officers and used as "bait".

    "Yeah but look how many idiots we caught with the peice of junk we used last year"

    1. Re:I can see their budget now by buckeyeguy · · Score: 2
      Eh, not that likely... the car theft stats come out every year, and it's usually the same makes: 1990's Hondas and Toyotas.

      Not exactly the high-end stuff.

      --
      I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
  56. Entrapment? by DataSquid · · Score: 1

    Does this article qualify? With the number of definitions and cries of said procedulral error I've seen posted, you'd think so.

    --

    DataSquid.net, a little about me.
  57. No Entrapment by EXTomar · · Score: 2

    Entrapment is the act of enticing people to commit crimes by making exact request for them to commit the crime and catch them.

    A easy example of entrapment in a sting is classic prostitution sting. If the police woman offers "The John" money for sex that is entraping. However if the police woman implies that she is there as a prostitute and "The John" comes forward and offers money for sex that isn't entrapment.

    Leaving a car out on the street to see who will steal it is a great way to setup a clean sting. As long as the police never suggest that they want someone to steal the car then the car is stolen by a person of their own modivation.

    1. Re:No Entrapment by swb · · Score: 2

      If the police woman offers "The John" money for sex that is entraping

      Haha. No one should ever fall for this, I mean, if some woman is offering you money for sex you should assume either she's a cop or that you have died and that Heaven is just like earth, except for all the assumptions about how the world works are in your favor....

  58. Entrappment silliness by lythander · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If I leave a wallet on the sidewalk with bills hanging out and someone picks it up and walks off with it, they've committed no crime. If they walk up to my unlocked car with the keys in it parked legally, they break the law as soon as they open my door. I'm not required by the law to lock it. Temptation isn't entrapment.

    Entrapment is my promising to send you pictures of hot chicks, then sending you pictures of little kids, then arresting you for having them. You have been persuaded or coerced into committing a crime, whether you'd have committed it yourself later or not.

    1. Re:Entrappment silliness by kaszeta · · Score: 3, Informative
      If I leave a wallet on the sidewalk with bills hanging out and someone picks it up and walks off with it, they've committed no crime.

      Actually, in most case it is---you've intentionally taken the possessions of another person for your own use. In most US jurisdictiosn that is the definition of "theft". Not that anyone will set up roadblocks to catch you...

      Also, if somehow the original owner tracks you down, even if the police don't consider it a crime, you can still be sued for "conversion", which is the act of taking another persons property for your own use (essentially, it's a fancy way of saying "theft", except that it implies no malicious wrongdoing).

    2. Re:Entrappment silliness by scotch · · Score: 2
      Furthermore, IIRC from a law class way back when, there are fine distinctions between Lost property and Abandoned property (and maybe other categories I forgot) and what your obligations are before you can claim said property as your own.

      A found wallet is likely lost and not abandoned, and a finder has an obligation of making a reasonable attempt to find the owner. Otherwise, you have theft. A parked car is likely neither lost nor abandoned, so anyone taking possession of the car would be committing theft.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    3. Re:Entrappment silliness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but if a bag of money falls off an armored car (you don't see the car drop it), you see the bag and spend the money, the Armored car company WILL do what it can to make sure you are busted, even though it was their similar fuckup.

    4. Re:Entrappment silliness by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Entrapment is my promising to send you pictures of hot chicks, then sending you pictures of little kids, then arresting you for having them. You have been persuaded or coerced into committing a crime, whether you'd have committed it yourself later or not.

      That's not entrapment, and it's not even illegal. Entrapment is if you started talking about how hot this 17 year old was, and would I like to see her pictures, etc. then I say yes and you arrest me. You encouraged me to commit the crime, and without you there would have been no crime at all.

      But simply out of the blue sending people nude pictures of little kids does not make them guilty of any crime what-so-ever. (Assuming that you're a cop and you admit what you did. Otherwise, they might get conviced of a crime, but they still didn't really commit it, they were framed.)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    5. Re:Entrappment silliness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, in some areas it IS illegal to leave a car parked with the keys in it. It's called "open ignition". That wouldn't excuse a thief who stole the car, however.

  59. saw this on TLC by bluebomber · · Score: 2

    I saw something like this on TLC a couple of months ago. I think they were operating in DC, Detroit, dunno, some big city. The difference there was that they didn't allow the thief to STEAL the car, they just lock the bastard in the car and radio police to come pick 'em up (or the cops are watching from across the street).

    Really fun to watch those stinkers learn they've walked into a trap! Lots of different reactions -- all amusing.

    This was also the plot of a Knight Rider episode.

  60. Car model by oldmildog · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure all this will teach thieves is to not steal Mercury Grand Marquis.

    --
    They have the Internet on computers now?
  61. In other news... by moxruby · · Score: 1

    ... the Recording Industry Association of America was widely condemned by popular geek discussion forum Slashdot.org for its practice of offering illegal mp3 downloads and then prosecuting takers.

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon now, this is hitting too close to home. What was that post earlier about all of us breaking some lws occasionally. I used a new year's resolution to "get clean". All my software is legit, and I've never downloded an MP3 from napster. I even had to convince my parents it was wrong. Man! Talk about feeling wierd.

  62. Not only is it legal... by germinatoras · · Score: 1

    ...it's a good way to catch crooks. Look at what Jose got slapped with: Possession of burglery tools. He had to break the lock on the door, and somehow get the igition going with his theft tools. Police didn't make it easy at all - it was just another Toyota in the parking lot from anyone's point of view.

  63. Finally!! by Anarren · · Score: 1

    Whether or not it's new, it's a law-enforcement application of technology that doesn't run the risk of trampling civil rights. Well, OK, not much risk, anyways, since I certainly don't view car theft as a civil right. ;-)

    --
    "Knowledge is of two kinds: we know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information." -Samuel Johnson
  64. Bike Theives Must Die!!! by toupsie · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Amen!

    I live in NYC and nothing turns my stomach more walking down the sidewalks is seeing a bike chained to a pole stripped everything attached with a bolt. I am an avid cyclist in the city and I would never, ever leave my bike outside because of theft. Cops don't even care. They don't seem to realize that bikes can cost hundred and hundreds of dollars or like my Specialized, thousands. It is a big deal monetarily.

    ABC had a 20/20 episode where they had a hidden camera and a bike chained to a post. It took only 5 minutes before the thieves went after it every time they set it up. Typical response of the thief was "Oh, I thought this was my bike. Sorry!", then they would run away.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    1. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by wiredog · · Score: 3, Funny

      Do they leave the frames up on cinder blocks?

    2. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      About 20 years ago I saw the aftermath of a cop shooting a bike thief. The youngblood tried to pedal away but the man in blue wasted him with a very large bullet. This was near the corner of 21st and L in NW DC near the old Safeway. Blood and internal organs were splattered all over the sidewalk. It was the last thing that boy ever stole. The movies don't get the gore right. After you've seen the real thing, the glisten and shiny deep purple/maroon hue of internal body parts will stick in your mind forever.

      Can't say that I had any sympathy for the young punk. Justice was served on the street. Then again, Charles Bronson in Death Wish is one of my all time favorite flicks.

    3. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by qurob · · Score: 1

      Thousands for a BIKE?

      To ride around the CITY?

      I could see if you were a hard core mountain biker...

    4. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      Here at the University of Nottingham you can walk around and see neat little pieces of bike-racks removed with pipe-cutters.

      There are some buildings I can't even use anymore because all the bike-racks near to them are of the vulnerable-style.

      Of course, university security is spending all it's time replacing these cut sections so it doesn't look like they have a bike-theft problem

      ojw. (3 bikes, 2 years)

    5. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny the way that is. I use to be an EMT and had to deal with a number of accidents. I found it interesting how many ppl can not deal with the gore that ensues, yet many of them will slow down and watch accidents and cause 2'ndary accidents.

      I will ahve to say that the blood and guts does not bother me, but I am unable to tolerate the smell of burnt flesh. Even cattle. I hate well down steak any where near me. I saw too many burnt humans and just start throwing up now. I once tried to go into a meat packing plant and could not get downwind of the rendering plant.

    6. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by swb · · Score: 1, Troll

      I thought since they took away your guns you guys were crime-free over there...

    7. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Cyno · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the thief thought it was worth it. Personally I would rather take a baseball bat to the thief or something that would rough them up pretty bad, but avoid killing them over property or money. But we kill terrorists. So I can see how thieves or software pirates can be stereotyped into that category.

    8. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      blibbleblobble writes:
      here at the University of Nottingham ... bike-racks removed with pipe-cutters.
      Have you reported this to the Sheriff? Where's Robin Hood when you need him ...
    9. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (insert random Hungarian gibbering) Keyser Sose!

    10. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by toupsie · · Score: 2

      I am. I have a set up for the city and the country (Garmin GPS equiped...I get lost a lot).

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    11. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +5 Absolutely ****ing Hilarious!

    12. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Hittite+Creosote · · Score: 1
      That's not the worst of it. Look in the cycle lock with the security card gate. See the rack with the big hole in it? That was where I locked my bike. With multiple locks. In daylight. Yes, next to the busy carpark. By a thief so confident he wouldn't get challenged despite hacking away at the rack and my bike locks that he was willing to go into a bike lock-up with only one exit.

      University security are spending all their time driving around in their little vans rather than do their blasted jobs. Oh, and they refused to send out an email warning people to keep an eye out for the little scumbag who's stealing the bikes. So because of that (and the fact that people plainly can't be bothered to report seeing this thief in action) there isn't a single safe place on campus to lock a bike.

      Of course, what I'd like to see now is a decoy bike that when stolen, triggers an explosive charge that sends a heavy spike hurtling up the saddle column.

    13. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by bodhimindspirit · · Score: 1

      When I lived outside of Boston and worked in Cambridge, I used to commute by bike. There was no need to own a car because of the availabilty of alternative (although slower) public transportation. I sank over a thousand into it, and if I'd had the money, I would have upgraded to lighter tires, a better frame, etc. and could have easily spent several thousand doing so. If this is your primary and only mode of transportation, those numbers aren't unrealistic. After all, how much is gas, registration, parking, maintenance, insurance, tolls and the occasional ticket for even a second-rate used car?

    14. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Jonathan · · Score: 1

      I live in NYC and nothing turns my stomach more walking down the sidewalks is seeing a bike chained to a pole stripped everything attached with a bolt.

      So, people getting shot, mugged, or raped wouldn't turn your stomach more? The NYC PD has its hands full with serious crimes.

      I could never get all that fired up about thieves. They just steal stuff. Stuff is easily replaced.

    15. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by toupsie · · Score: 2
      So, people getting shot, mugged, or raped wouldn't turn your stomach more? The NYC PD has its hands full with serious crimes.

      Well I don't see people getting shot, mugged or raped when I walk down the street. I see stripped bikes on every block. Property theft is a serious crime. That's why its a felony in most cases for items valued over $500.

      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    16. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      The police have experimented with GPS-tracker bikes (like the cars in the body of this article) but they're so expensive that the police need to borrow them, use them on a decoy bike, and get them back afterward -- you can't use them on your own bike

      (you can get them for cars if you trust the company, but cars cost more to replace. I'd also prefer GPS-tracker signals to be encrypted using a key I generate, which I can give to the company when I report it stolen)

      Decoy bikes DO work though; there are many examples of police turning up to collect their decoy bike, along with a garage-full of other stolen ones.

      Microdots and coding don't work at all. Datatags don't work, because they can't transmit outside of the bike's steelwork (i.e. you need to have the saddle out to detect them)

      And yeah, the yellow-jacketed twats on scooters certainly don't help

      I think we need the vice-chancellor, a pair of handcuffs, and a centrally-located bike rack at night...

    17. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by cheezit · · Score: 1

      In college I worked at a funeral home, and got to see and smell many cremations. I had been a barbecue fan as a teenager. Now I am a vegetarian (for many other reasons as well, but that was sort of a turning point). That sort of sickly sweet charred flesh odor...ick.

      --
      Premature optimization is the root of all evil
    18. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by blibbleblobble · · Score: 2

      Where's Robin Hood when you need him?

      Well actually, anyone going after my bike when it's at home (downstairs in the kitchen) will have my broadsword to contend with, so property defense may not have changed that much since good King John's day...

    19. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you allowed to hit a bike thief in the back with a baseball bat if you catch him?

      Just a nasty thought.

    20. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by tom.allender · · Score: 1
      Here at the University of Nottingham you can walk around and see neat little pieces of bike-racks removed with pipe-cutters.

      I can vouch for that. Mine and two friends bikes were taken at the end of last term, when someone crowbarred their way into Sherwood Hall bike shed...

    21. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming someone would want a vice-chancellor. I don't think there's much of a market for Administrators...

    22. Re:Bike Theives Must Die!!! by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 2

      I think Sherwood Hall bike shed's were broken into fairly regularly during my stint there and I finished 4 or 5 years ago. Obviously not much improvement since then.

      Have they replaced the mouse with the missing ball yet? And then there was the time I got zapped by the tumble dryer. Those were the days....ah, memories.

      --
      Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  65. Cool! by smagruder · · Score: 2

    Now, where can I buy the fake stickers that read:

    Car contains theft-prevention surveillance equipment. If you take this car, you will be convicted and you will get prison time.
    --
    Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
    1. Re:Cool! by bucklesl · · Score: 1

      I'd much rather have..

      Warning! Unathorized use of this automobile may or may not trigger explosive devices.
      --
      help fill in hidden movie endings @ End of the Credits
    2. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just asking for trouble then. Almost as bad as the assholes with I Hate Cops bumper stickers.

  66. Techno wanking by joib · · Score: 2

    Why bother with all this electronic stuff when a few kg:s of C4 under the seat will do the job as well, just connect the primer to the ignition in the car. Of course the car will be totalled too, but hey, at least you don't have to feed them crooks in prison. As an added bonus big explosions look cool too!

    1. Re:Techno wanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd settle for a hidden stun gun in the seat, with the trigger set to a circuit which is only active when the car's engine runs. That way the perp would be nicely tenderized when cops arrive.

    2. Re:Techno wanking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just have the ignition shut off, the doors electronically lock, windows automatically roll up, and then gas the fuckers inside. Come by, air out the car, dispose of the bodies, and set it up again!

    3. Re:Techno wanking by rworne · · Score: 1
      Lesse, according to what I see, it costs an average of $25,000 a year for incarceration of your average criminal in state or federal prison. (Somewhere I heard this is actually much higher). Anyhow, setting aside costs such as prosecution, attorney's fees, court costs and *ahem* jury pay. It is by far cheaper going the C4 method. It has all the great things that make a great deterrent:

      It's cheap. A nice used stealable Camry will cost probably $9-12,000--Considering new ones go for $18-19,000. Add the equipment - no need for GPS and high-tech tracking stuff here. Probably a cheap cell-type system that dials 911 then triggers the C4 (I haven't shopped for C4, though it's probably real cheap for the Guv'ment, lets say $1,500). So we have: 12,000 + 1,500 + $500 (phone) + (yeech!) Cleanup costs. If you do it right with a shaped charge, you might be able to shoot the thief right through the roof causing minimal damage to the surroundings. The car can be hauled off on a flatbed for recycling.

      If the criminal is a repeat offender (such as on a third strike) this can be a considerable cost savings to taxpayers.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
    4. Re:Techno wanking by agallagh42 · · Score: 2

      The AC's idea above would be much cheaper. Just have the car roll up the windows and then pump poison gas inside. Cops come, air out the car, dump the body, reload the gas, and they're set for another. The only recurring charge is reloading the gas canister, and if you like, the cell phone bill for the alerting mechanism. I guess you may have to pay to have the body taken care of too (burial, cremation, dumping in the harbor, whatever).

      --
      Carpe Cerevisi - Seize the Beer
    5. Re:Techno wanking by rworne · · Score: 1
      I don't doubt at all that it's cheaper. But when you add in that Cops-type reality shows they love to show on Fox network will generate much more revenue showing catapulting car thieves rather than watching someone scratching away at the glass as they slowly asphyxiate.

      Besides, the *BOOM* from the C4 method would pretty much alert everyone in the neighborhood that another car thief is rocketing his way up to the moon. Gas is too silent and easily not noticed. In-your-face enforcement sends a bigger message.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  67. This isn't really a new thing.... by dainkenkind · · Score: 5, Informative

    Minneapolis and a few other cities have had a similar program running very sucessfully here over the last 5 years. I believe a couple of the people who were busted even tried to use the entrapment defense, which was summarily shot down in the courts since no one made them steal the car, or even gave them the idea to.

    1. Re:This isn't really a new thing.... by andyf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, five years ago, Minneapolis police didn't care if you got your car or any of its contents stolen. Now they just don't care if you get anything stolen out of it.

      I've seen signs up warning about bait cars at bus stops here. I find it kind of funny really, because you'd think that people who steal cars would have their own cars and not have to ride the bus. Unless car theft is really just done by people who are forced to ride the bus because they don't have a car... :)

      --

      Photos of bits of the past hiding in the present: afiler.com
    2. Re:This isn't really a new thing.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bus stops (or Metra stops) aren't usually actively patrolled. Most people who drive to them do so early in the morning to be to work by 8am, and return sometime in the afternoon (mostly after 5pm). An 8-hour window of opportunity.

      Or like the Metra station by Great Lakes NTC. Since this lot is privately owned (it's not on the base), people get "long term passes" to park their cars there for an extended period. Invariably, many/most of the cars there with those tickets have been smash-and-grabbed.

  68. footing the bill by tps12 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals." What is the point of locking up some guy for trying to steal a car that was designed to be stolen?

    I do not want my tax dollars paying for a car to be used as bait. I do not want to pay for cops to pretend to be drug dealers to catch would-be customers. I don't want to fund cops' propositioning prostitutes, and I don't want to pay for gigantor magnets that pull the guns out of people's pockets.

    Someone needs to rein these guys in.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:footing the bill by egriebel · · Score: 1

      This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals."

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't one follow from the other? Last I heard, an ounce of prevention was worth 0.454 Kg

      --
      ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
    2. Re:footing the bill by ffoiii · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why isn't that "someone" you?

    3. Re:footing the bill by Stiletto · · Score: 2

      In this case there is a BIG difference.

      The theft of our "dummy" car is a victimless crime. No one suffers when it is stolen. Not all "criminals" cause damage to "innocents".

      I pay the police through my tax dollars because they are a reasonably strong deterrant to criminals who would otherwise harm me. I don't pay them to encourage a crime so they can swoop in and bust (and make $$$ from) the perps.

      This behavior is disgusting.

    4. Re:footing the bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If they are arresting these people and putting them in jail. Then these thiefs aren't out stealing your car. Therefore its called 'crime prevention'.

      Protecting the law-abiding sounds like 'Pearl Harbor' mentality. Don't do anything unless bad things start happening.

    5. Re:footing the bill by AlienSquid · · Score: 1

      The whole purpose of this car is to deter other car thefts from happening. Once word gets out on the street that if you steal a car, the car may turn you in. Would be thiefs will think twice about stealing a car.

      now that the police have put this fear of being caught into thier heads, car thefts will drop (and car insurance will drop). the police can now concentrate on other crimes.

      the next car they don't steal may be yours.

    6. Re:footing the bill by scotch · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You've obviously never had a car (or anything else) stolen then. The poeple who steal cars usually steal lots of cars. And the people who stole these cars undoubtedly would have stolen another car if the bait car wasn't there. The car theft racket in the US is horrible. The percentages of car thefts that are solved, then of those that result in conviction, and then of those that result in the convict doing any meaningful time are all very low. (low percentage) * (low percentage) * (low percentage) = very small percentage of avenged victims. Crime pays in this case. A police officer friend of mine told me that in Seattle, convicted car thiefs rarely do any time.

      All your other exmaples of what you want the cops doing are hard to lump together with car theft. Car theft is a crime that results in a loss to its victim. Drug use and prostitution are somewhat victimless crimes. If you don't have problem with people stealing cars, maybe someone should steal your car? Gun ownership isn't a crime outright, so I don't know where you came up with that one.

      How the fuck are you supposed to "protect the citizens" if you can't "hunt down the criminals"?

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    7. Re:footing the bill by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      There's no deterrent effect if they can't catch the criminals because they cannot find them, nor is there much evidence to suggest that "bait" cars turn non-thieves into thieves, instead of misdirecting those who intend to be car thieves into stealing the wrong cars.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    8. Re:footing the bill by jgerman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are a dumb ass. Hunting down car thieves lowers the probability that your car will get stolen. Just the fact that it's been done once helps you out. I don't want my tax dollars paying for cops sitting on the road with a radar gun, however I do want them to continue getting real criminals off of the street. Guess what, that's the beauty of the tax system, you can pretend that your money doesn't go to sting operations and I can pretend mine doesn't go to traffic cops.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    9. Re:footing the bill by koreth · · Score: 2
      That might hold water if the typical car thief stole just one car in his lifetime. I really doubt that's the case.

      Me, I'd consider it harmful to have my car stolen, and if the police can reduce the likelihood of such without violating anyone's civil rights (and I don't believe there's a right to steal cars, whether or not the police own them) I'm all for it.

      The presence of bait cars may wind up being a strong deterrent to car thieves, since they'll be unable to tell whether a given car will get them caught or not. Even if you say you only want police to act as deterrents, you have to agree that no deterrent is effective unless it bites once in a while.

      And exactly how much money do you think they're making from the guy in the article?

    10. Re:footing the bill by ChaosDiscordSimple · · Score: 5, Insightful
      This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals." What is the point of locking up some guy for trying to steal a car that was designed to be stolen?

      What's the point? There are a certain number of people who want to steal cars. Given the choice between: 1) Criminal steal bait car, gets caught nearly 100% of the time and is off the streets for at least a short time and 2) Criminal steals my car (or my friends car, or my parents car), gets away nearly 100% of the time, and is able to steal another car tomorrow. I'd prefer the bait car, thanks.

      Prostitution and drug dealing is arguably different. If the law and the police weren't involved, everyone involved would be willing to allow the action (the sale of sex/drugs) to occur. Car theft is different. As the owner of the car, I never want someone to steal my car. There are no sane arguments for why car theft is good. Catching someone who steals cars is good. These people are predators who know that they are breaking the law and know that they are depriving another human being of their physical property.

      Law enforcement is supposed to product the law-abiding. Protect them from what? Criminals. Catching the criminals before they steal from the law-abiding seems like effective, pro-active protection to me.

      I for one hope police use bait like this in more cases, I know too many people who have had car windows smashed and car stereos stolen. I know too many people who have had apartments broken into.

    11. Re:footing the bill by Mullen · · Score: 2

      Drug use and prostitution are somewhat victimless crimes.

      Drug use is not victimless crime since hardcore users are going to knock people over the head or steal for their next fix. Drug Abusers rarely have jobs that can support thier habit.

      The groups that import drugs into this country are most violent and cause a lot of coruption in countries that grow, process and transport drugs. A good example would be Mexico; it would be a much nicer country if their were no drugs flowing through it.

      --
      Linux O Muerte!
    12. Re:footing the bill by patmfitz · · Score: 1
      This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals."

      Their motto might be "to protect and serve", but the police have no obligation to protect individuals. The following web site shows that the courts agree: Public Safety: Fact or Fiction?

    13. Re:footing the bill by Stiletto · · Score: 2


      That's a good point. If there were enough "bait" cars around to make it statistically probable enough to make a thief think twice, that's great.

      But I think that along with myself, the (grand)parent poster is concerned with the tone of the Washington Post article. The focus is CLEARLY on "catching the perp" rather than "serving and protecting" which, if you take a realistic look at policework today, is exactly what cops are doing more and more.

      I am also personally against the practice of officers offering drugs for sale and posing as prostitutes--just my opinion of course. If your conscience permits you to lock people up without even a victim, hey it's your world--I just live in it.

      I would ask cops whom my taxes pay to clean up real crimes, rather than providing criminals with more opportunities.

    14. Re:footing the bill by edrugtrader · · Score: 2

      welcome to the world of libertarianism. you are now an official member.

      no matter what the law says, everything you said IS entrapment (in my mind, and many others)

      car theft has a victim, the cars owner. but in this case, this is a victimless crime. buying drugs is a victimless crime. propositioning prostitutes is a victimless crime.

      libertarians = (vicitimless crime != crime)

      --
      MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    15. Re:footing the bill by scotch · · Score: 1
      Drug use is not victimless crime since hardcore users are going to knock people over the head or steal for their next fix

      Drug use is more-or-less victimless. Knocking people over the head is not vicitimless. Stealing is not victimless. Drug use != knocking people over the head. Drug use != stealing. Not all drug users knock people over the head or steal. Many drug users have normal jobs. YMMV.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    16. Re:footing the bill by zik0 · · Score: 1

      >What is the point of locking up some guy for trying to steal a car that was designed to be stolen?

      You think if this car had not been there he would have gone home and read /.?

      The man stole a car. The longer he is locked up, the longer it will be before he steals mine.

      Where do I sign up to have them use my car?

    17. Re:footing the bill by EReidJ · · Score: 1
      This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals."

      Isn't keeping car thieves off the street "protecting the law-abiding" by making sure my car isn't stolen? So often, the police are accused of being reactive rather than proactive, i.e. "We caught the murderer but the victim is still dead." My favorite thing about honeypots like this is that they get the criminal before they have a chance to steal my car. It will also have the further effect of reducing the number of people who are willing to try to steal cars, as "this might be a cop car!"

    18. Re:footing the bill by phillymjs · · Score: 2

      car thefts will drop (and car insurance will drop).

      Sadly, you're probably only half-right. Those fscking greedy insurance companies will find another BS reason to keep rates high.

      ~Philly

    19. Re:footing the bill by scotch · · Score: 1
      So if the government owns the car, there is no victim? What kind of logic is that? These bait cars have owners - the tax payers own the cars. Stealing goverment owned cars is not a victimless crime. Or maybe you think stealing from the government is OK? I guess a true libertarian might say the government is the theif, so you can steal whatever you want from them.

      Ah, libertarianism. Looks good on paper, though.

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    20. Re:footing the bill by eric6 · · Score: 1

      yes, but it isn't the drug use that is a crime. drug useis victimless, in that the only "victim" is the user. The robbery to support one's habit, that's the crime. the violent thuggery in transportation, that's the crime. providing a product to willing customers and consuming that product is no crime.

      --

      --
      fight global cooling

    21. Re:footing the bill by lunky · · Score: 1

      > I don't pay them to encourage a crime so they can
      > swoop in and bust (and make $$$ from) the perps.

      Who's encouraging a crime?
      and what $$$ "making" are you talking about?

      --
      lunky> c++; lunky> do{;}
    22. Re:footing the bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
      The theft of our "dummy" car is a victimless crime. No one suffers when it is stolen. Not all "criminals" cause damage to "innocents".

      Nonsense. The theft is not victimless in the mind of the thief, because he doesn't know that the car is 'bait'.

      I'm all for elimination of prohibitions on truly victimless consensual 'crimes' like prostitution and (much) drug use. But calling the current case "victimless" is ridiculous.

    23. Re:footing the bill by Bluetick · · Score: 1

      Except having traffic cops pays for the more serious policework. A lof ot the funding for police officers comes from traffic duty.

    24. Re:footing the bill by Jonny+Balls · · Score: 1

      Gigantor magnet you say? i could find better things we can use that for than pulling the guns out of criminals pockets... we just fly it around the IRS building, target the hard drives, it would be a much better thing to do.

      --
      --JonnyBlog
    25. Re:footing the bill by tps12 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      After perusing (= carefully reading) responses to this message, I have reconsidered.

      It is true that by using this car-bait technique the police will effectively rid the cities of criminals (at least car thieves, but there is no reason this principle could not be used to catch other criminals, such as gamblers and pedophiles). In this way, we achieve the ultimate protection. As one reply said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Likewise, the best defense is a good offense, and we should nip these kinds of activities in the bud.

      I do no longer mind funding for as many of these sneaky cars as is necessary to finally clean up the streets of America. My one request is that they be utilized only in areas which have a surplus of parking, and that they not be driven during rush hours. Traffic affects us all in more ways than one.

      --

      Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    26. Re:footing the bill by jgerman · · Score: 2
      I didn't say I expected them to go away. I would just prefer if they did. Most of there money seems to be coming out of my pocket.


      Though it does bug me that speed limits are kept low through the efforts of insurance lobbyists. It's not for the sake of safety, it's been shown that the speed limit doesn't make a big difference in accident rates, in fact in some cases the raising the speed limit has resulted in less accidents. Nor am I happy that the same rules apply to different classes of vehicles. On a motorcycle I am much safer at high speeds than a car, and vice versa in an SUV. It's basically an artificial way to create a crime to generate revenue.

      If they want to do that fine, but how about this, allow a high speed license, you can still limit it , but set it higher for those that took the advanced driving course, renew their license every year, and pay extra for the privilege. Then you get my money every year, regardless of whether or not I get caught, plus you can still nail people who are speeding without the license. It's a pipe dream I know, but it's mine ;)


      Anyway what I was trying to point out your taxes aren't earmarked for any particular thing than mine are. You can say how much of my our money goes to specific things. If the government had to keep that kind of accounting they'd have to triple taxes just to afford to do that much more work. Besides the fact that if you divvied it up, you'd probably find that a miniscule percentage of you money goes toward any one particular thing. Personally there's a lot of things that my taxes pay for that I don't like, I get raped while people with kids get a break, I get raped because I make too much money to write off my tuition, welfare, ect. But the amount of money I pay probably is well short of the amount needed to fund those things that I do want, national defense, FDIC, ect. Same as everyone else.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    27. Re:footing the bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A police officer friend of mine told me that in Seattle, convicted car thiefs rarely do any time.
      this is unfortunately true, one of my best friends in SoCal had his car stolen and the theives broke windows and tore the back seat out to get to the meaningless items in the trunk (basketball) because they were too stupid to pull the latch to open the trunk from the inside (wtg retard) and got caught driving it a few days later only two blocks from where it was stolen. He ended up only getting light probabtion, only a few months

    28. Re:footing the bill by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 1
      If the law and the police weren't involved, everyone involved would be willing to allow the action (the sale of sex/drugs) to occur.

      Oh, man, I needed a good laugh. I'll keep this in mind when the crack house up the street which is lowering the property values in the neighborhood, sells some bad crack to a pimp, who also happens to beat girls, goes on a tear and kills the next door neighbor.

      Guess again. Not everyone would be willing to let all this to happen. Wouldn't this just welcome the return of mob justice?

    29. Re:footing the bill by bobol6 · · Score: 1

      Law enforcement is supposed to product the law-abiding.

      That's what the Bush administration wants you to think.

    30. Re:footing the bill by fliplap · · Score: 2

      I can picture it now, a scantly dressed 10 year old sitting on a craps table in Time Square asking passerbys to "come play"

    31. Re:footing the bill by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      I'll keep this in mind when the crack house up the street which is lowering the property values in the neighborhood, sells some bad crack to a pimp, who also happens to beat girls, goes on a tear and kills the next door neighbor.

      Again, there are laws against assault and battery and murder. The selling of the drugs in and of itself poses no risk to anyone except the user. (And yes, if someone tries to drive while high, there are laws against that as well.)

      And if you live down the street from a crackhouse, move. No one is forcing you to live there.

      Just my $.02

    32. Re:footing the bill by John+Ineson · · Score: 1
      The poeple who steal cars usually steal lots of cars. And the people who stole these cars undoubtedly would have stolen another car if the bait car wasn't there.
      Bullshit. This is not 'Gone In 60 Seconds', this is real life, and a large proportion of crime is opportunistic.

      This may not be entrapment, but it is dangling a carrot in front of desparate people and bored kids.

      Oh sorry, I forgot -- criminals are all inhuman montsters, bent on incinerating your home and slaughtering your grandma. God forbid we think of them as frail human beings, like the rest of us.

    33. Re:footing the bill by BinxBolling · · Score: 1
      This may not be entrapment, but it is dangling a carrot in front of desparate people and bored kids.

      In what way does this constitute a "carrot"? Judging from the article, there's nothing any more enticing about this car than any other random parked car. If that's a carrot, then the streets of most cities are just littered with carrots.

    34. Re:footing the bill by CryoPenguin · · Score: 1

      Except that if the car thieves know that bait cars aren't used in places where there's no empty parking (ie, places with lots of cars) they'll just target those areas.

    35. Re:footing the bill by scotch · · Score: 2
      Oh sorry, I forgot -- criminals are all inhuman montsters, bent on incinerating your home and slaughtering your grandma.

      Nice strawman jackass. I never claimed any such thing, or anything remotely related to it. I claimed car thieves rarely do time - and that set you off. The mere implication that car thieves (whether they steal one car or many) should in some way be pusished has set you off in a frency.

      God forbid we think of them as frail human beings, like the rest of us.

      Again, a strawman. I never said we shouldn't treat them as humans. But what the fuck do you think we should do? Car theives, whether opportunistic or otherwise, are a huge burden on society. When someone steals my car, it costs me dearly in time and money. It costs everyone money by driving up insurance rates that everyone must pay. What do you propose we do with car thieves? Give them counseling? Because that's about all we do now, and it isn't helping.

      And I seriously don't understand how anyone can defend a criminal by saying the crime is opportunistic. All crime is opportunistic. All of life is opportunistic. A person will weigh the risks and rewards everytime the decision to steal a car comes up. Guess what? The rewards are good, and the risks are slim.

      Lots of murder is opportunistic, should we not pushish that, you big sensitive idiot?

      I just drove home, and I couldn't believe the number of carrots parked along the side of the road. Poor, criminals, all that enticement - what the hell are they supposed to do?

      HAND

      --
      XML causes global warming.
    36. Re:footing the bill by Uncle+Gropey · · Score: 1

      That is exactly the point: removing drags on human progression from the gene pool. At least temporarily. I know this post doesn't offer much, but I needed to vent. That is all, carry on.

    37. Re:footing the bill by tps12 · · Score: 2
      Except that if the car thieves know that bait cars aren't used in places where there's no empty parking (ie, places with lots of cars) they'll just target those areas.

      This is sounding better and better. If lots of cars is already going to mean there need to be lots of bait cars, then the bait cars should help out with some of the traffic problem. Why don't they double as taxis? This would help offset the cost to taxpayers, and give the average working stiff a break.

      --

      Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    38. Re:footing the bill by second+class+skygod · · Score: 1

      >This demonstrates perfectly how the job of the police has gone from "protecting the law-abiding" to "hunting down criminals."

      You've got it backwards. The original and correct role of the police force is to catch criminals. When they are very lucky, they sometimes catch crimals before the crime is committed. This is, theorectically, a "protection" function. However, their main function is now and has always been to apprehend those who actually break laws (forgetting for a moment the various sidelines that occasionally pop up such as various forms of corruption and padding the department's coffers with seized assets).

      As far as I can tell, the notion that the police are there to protect you is a recent phenomenon (last half of 20th century). I have some theories that might explain where people get such ideas but they should be debated in some other context. Whatever people think, protection is definitely not the main role of the police.

    39. Re:footing the bill by multiplexo · · Score: 1
      Bullshit. This is not 'Gone In 60 Seconds', this is real life, and a large proportion of crime is opportunistic

      And how does that excuse it? If someone date raped your friend because she was drunk would you accept the defense of "Hey, the bitch was drunk and passed out so I figured `here's an opportunity` ripped her panties off and fucked her in the ass"?

      This may not be entrapment, but it is dangling a carrot in front of desparate people and bored kids.

      Well first of all any kid who wants to relieve his boredom by stealing cars needs to spend some serious time in the joint. There he can relieve his boredom by trying to figure out how not to be anally raped in the shower. Anyone who is desperate enough to steal a car should get to spend similar time in the joint. I view this as a means of punishing stupid people with poor impulse control. Were it up to me the cars would have a claymore mine wired into the dashboard behind the steering wheel. As soon as the car is on a clear stretch of road you'd detonate the mine and let 700 .32 calibre steel pellets shred the fucker who stole the car. This would cost some money, as the car wouldn't be good for much after this, but paying $25,000 or so to eliminate the kind of people who steal cars strikes me as a good bargain.

      I have the pleasure of living in King County Washington which has the distinction, dubious, of being one of the highest car theft areas in the United States. Most car thieves in King County do little if any time. Which means that they get out of jail and steal more cars and sometimes these car thieves do things such as run their stolen cars into other people's cars at high speeds, killing the occupants of the other car as happened last December to a couple who was driving home late at night not more than five miles from my house. But we shouldn't condemn them for stealing cars and endangering others and occasionally killing people, we should remember that they're frail and human. And while we're at it we should remember that Ken Lay and those execs at Enron are frail and human, and the accountants at Arthur Andersen are frail and human and the guys who slammed those airplanes into the World Trade Center were frail and human too. Bleeding heart forgiveness for everyone! Let that be the order of the day.

      --
      cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
    40. Re:footing the bill by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Nonsense. The theft is not victimless in the mind of the thief, because he doesn't know that the car is 'bait'.

      Close, but it's not victimless at all. It's a fucking car theft, and cars have owners, and, hence, victims. Sure, it's the city's car, but the city can certainly be the victim of crimes. Or did it suddenly become okay to steal police cars and firetrucks?

      They aren't asking for the car to be stolen, they're not making it easy to steal, they're just parking in a bad area. To counteract this, they have had a very very very good cat alarms set up in the car.

      The mere fact that no thief is going succeed in stealing this car and getting away with it does not make it any different than any other car theft. It's not a 'trick', it's actual car theft.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    41. Re:footing the bill by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      But I think that along with myself, the (grand)parent poster is concerned with the tone of the Washington Post article. The focus is CLEARLY on "catching the perp" rather than "serving and protecting" which, if you take a realistic look at policework today, is exactly what cops are doing more and more.

      How, exactly, do you "protect" without catching criminals? You ignore them, instead?

      I am also personally against the practice of officers offering drugs for sale and posing as prostitutes--just my opinion of course. If your conscience permits you to lock people up without even a victim, hey it's your world--I just live in it.

      What on earth does victimless crimes have to do with catching car thieves? Car theft is not a victimless crime, it's one of the most serious non-violent crimes you can commmit, and for a good reason.

      I hate victimless acts being crimes. I also would hate for my car to be stolen. Stealing my car is not victimless.

      I would ask cops whom my taxes pay to clean up real crimes, rather than providing criminals with more opportunities.

      How exactlly did they provide criminals with more opportunities? There were 1,000 cars out there the criminal wanted to steal, now there are 1,001. While that looks like 'more', in reality they only steal one car at a time. They aren't going to walk outside, see no cars they want to steal, and come back later. They'll just look around till they find one.

      They is no mathmatical way that more cars can get stolen using this method. Each thief will continue to steal X a day, but this way we'll start pulling them off the street at a rate directly propotional to the amount of cars they steal.

      Oh, and, BTW, another job of the police is to deter crime, which this does nicely. Can you honestly say that at least one car thief, since this story has come out, hasn't decided to not steal a certain car, because it might be rigged?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    42. Re:footing the bill by Stiletto · · Score: 2

      How, exactly, do you "protect" without catching criminals? You ignore them, instead?

      In this case, it's pretty safe to assume that someone who steals the bait car has stolen cars before. But this is not always the case when police bait for crimes. Say a cop approaches someone who has never bought drugs in his life, and offers him some. If the sale is made, that cop has just created a criminal for the purpose of busting him.

      You are also grouping humanity into two categories: "criminals" and "non-criminals". I assume you classify yourself as a non-criminal. Yet the world isn't this black and white. Ever coasted through a stop sign? Ever bought a used car and declared less than it's value when paying the tax? We have all done _something_ that's against the law. So when you say the police's job is to go out and "catch criminals" you may be asking for them to catch you, too.

      What on earth does victimless crimes have to do with catching car thieves? Car theft is not a victimless crime, it's one of the most serious non-violent crimes you can commmit, and for a good reason.

      Stealing a dummy car whose only purpose is to get stolen, is a victimless crime.

      Oh, and, BTW, another job of the police is to deter crime, which this does nicely.

      I'm not arguing that. I agree that another job of the police is to deter crime, and these bait cars certainly do. But I'm against the method of deterring crime, when that method involves staging crimes for the sake of busting them.

    43. Re:footing the bill by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      In this case, it's pretty safe to assume that someone who steals the bait car has stolen cars before. But this is not always the case when police bait for crimes. Say a cop approaches someone who has never bought drugs in his life, and offers him some. If the sale is made, that cop has just created a criminal for the purpose of busting him.

      Which, of course, is why that's illegal. The person, whether it's a drug buying bust, a prostitution bust, no matter whether they're buying or selling, the non-cop has to request to illegal thing. The cop cannot offer, or attempt to buy, anything. They just stand around, waiting for someone to solict them to do an illegal activity.

      You are also grouping humanity into two categories: "criminals" and "non-criminals". I assume you classify yourself as a non-criminal. Yet the world isn't this black and white. Ever coasted through a stop sign? Ever bought a used car and declared less than it's value when paying the tax? We have all done _something_ that's against the law. So when you say the police's job is to go out and "catch criminals" you may be asking for them to catch you, too.

      I didn't ask for anyone to catch anyone. I said it was their job. And, yes, it's the cop's job to catch me when I speed, or run a stop sign, and heaven knows I haven't paid all the taxes I should have. But I'm not an idiot, I know it's the cop's job to catch me.

      The mere fact that I personally don't want to be caught has no bearing on their job description, or what they are spending money for.

      Of course, I hope they're spending money based on the harm the crime causes society. Me treating a stop sign like a yield sign doesn't cause any noticable harm to society, and stealing cars, like I said, causes a lot more harm, it's one of the most serious non-violent crimes out there. And once you ignore all the silly things that have been given harsh penalties for political purposes, like drug laws, it's one of the most seriously punished, too.

      So if the police have 10,000 dollars and can either catch ten jaywalkers or one car thief, I want them to catch the car thief.

      But that's not really relevant, I don't make those decisions, the police do. Usually various department's budgets reflect the harm of the crimes, and sometimes they start getting random and the government has to go in and fix them.

      If you feel it's not worth the amount of money spent to catch the car thieves, and you live in a community where the cops are doing this, go ahead and complain, see if you can change their mind. But saying 'I break the law too.' is not a useful objection to catching car thieves.

      Stealing a dummy car whose only purpose is to get stolen, is a victimless crime.

      Howso? the government bought that car, didn't they? They rigged it with a bunch of electronic equipment, didn't they? It's very valuable, probably about the same price as a police car.

      The mere fact that you expect a crime to happen does not make it 'victimless'. I have left objects where I would not be surprised if they were stolen, and I would still be the victim if they were in fact stolen.

      The mere fact that a criminal fails does not make it victimless, either. By that defination, all robberies that we solve are victimless, because the people usually get their money back. So we'd have to let the culprit go.

      Victimless is when all parties consent. The police department is not consenting to have these vehicles stolen. They are expecting to have it stolen, but expectations are not the same as consent.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    44. Re:footing the bill by Rakarra · · Score: 2
      we just fly it around the IRS building, target the hard drives, it would be a much better thing to do.

      I hope not! I've got a refund coming!

  69. Hope they have lots of these cars by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    As soon as Mr Gonzalez gets out of jail (or whatever his sentence) or even in jail, he'll tell everyone the details of the car. They'll have to keep rigging up new cars to prevent the local car thieves from identifying them and avoiding them.

    It is only a matter of time before the average crook figures out how to jam GPS. The motivation (jail) is certainly there to learn how.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  70. Is it REALLY legal? by unixwin · · Score: 1

    Ok so its not entrapment, so what are they going to do next?
    Parade nude chiks on the road and then arrest ppl. for watching "offensive material" in public places??

    --
    -- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
    1. Re:Is it REALLY legal? by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Entrapment would be having a police officer siddle up to people and say "Hey, that car's unlocked. Why not steal it?"

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  71. Technology vs. the underclass by rhizome · · Score: 2

    You sure don't see many technological innovations being directed at automated crimefighting in boardrooms. Those boardmembers sure hate the idea that someone would inconvenience them by taking their stupid car, though.

    --
    When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    1. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by b0bby · · Score: 1

      That's kind of a lame argument, since much (most?) crime is directed towards poor people, auto theft included. In fact, car theft is probably less of a concern to 'boardmembers' than to the general population.

    2. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the victims of car theft are rich people. the victims of crime in the boardroom are poor people.

      our elected officials know that the only way to keep their jobs is to sell favors to the rich people (keeping campaign contributions coming in), in order to buy votes from the poor people (using propaganda).

      things will remain this way in america for as long as the populace remains a mass of uneducated consumers driven by media. and it looks like the people who want to keep it that way are winning.

    3. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

      Rich people have decent car alarms.

      Poor people do not.

      Idiot.

    4. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by thelizman · · Score: 1

      the victims of car theft are rich people.

      You're a dumbass. The most heavily stolen car is the Toyota Camry, followed by the Honda Accord and the Chevy C1500 Truck. These aren't rich people cars, which just goes to show that people like you who promote class warfare don't actually care about the numbers, just so long as it sounds good.

      the victims of crime in the boardroom are poor people.

      You're an even bigger moron. Crimes that occur in the boardroom take money away from investors and stockholders - of which the "poor" are rarely in the group.

      our elected officials know that the only way to keep their jobs is to sell favors to the rich people (keeping campaign contributions coming in), in order to buy votes from the poor people (using propaganda).

      And the poor people are more than happy to sell their votes for welfare programs, good feelings, and promises of programs that benefit them directly. In the vote economy, the rich may provide the capital, but the idiots who let their vote be bought are the ones who fuel the system.

      things will remain this way in america for as long as the populace remains a mass of uneducated consumers driven by media.

      Such as yourself

      and it looks like the people who want to keep it that way are winning.

      Thanks to, in part, you.

    5. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by thelizman · · Score: 1

      Why do you class-warfare morons inject yourself everywhere even when it's not relevant? The most stolen car is a TOYOTA CAMRY - not exactly a rich persons car. Meanwhile, crimes that occur in boardrooms usually impact people who have the money to invest in those companies - which by the logic and you and your class-warfare ilk are the RICH.

    6. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by harborpirate · · Score: 1

      Poor people do not own cars worth stealing.

      Because they are poor.

      How many car alarms did you ignore today? 1? 10? More?

      Lets examine the situation here:
      A "late model sedan" a.k.a late 90s Honda is put in a poor, run down neighborhood and left with the doors unlocked.

      Poor people recognize this car:
      A) Does not belong there. (Despite what the article says)
      B) Is not owned by anyone they know.
      C) Is unlocked. (By trying the door)

      For a person walking by this car represents easy money. If you were poor, would you walk by $10,000+ sitting on the street?

      Granted, most of the people who steal this car are going to already be car theives. But you have to admit there is a distinct possibility that this car could tempt someone who was not a car thief to become one.

      Seems now the refrain goes: "Give me your tired, your poor..." - so I can throw them in jail.

      Take an introductory college course in Criminal Justice or Sociology. It'll really open your eyes.

      I'll leave you with this:
      Who steals more: poor people scraping a living, or rich people in the boardrooms of corporate America? What theft has more impact on the lives of most people?

      --
      // harborpirate
      // Slashbots off the starboard bow!
    7. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by stripes · · Score: 2
      You sure don't see many technological innovations being directed at automated crimefighting in boardrooms

      Not in boardrooms, but the SEC uses so pretty neat stuff in detecting likely (illegal) inside trades and other stock, futures, and commodity fraud.

      Plus there is some older tech used to catch white collar crime: wiretaps, and other servalance equipment.

    8. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're an even bigger moron. Crimes that occur in the boardroom take money away from investors and stockholders - of which the "poor" are rarely in the group.

      They also tend to destroy jobs, jackass.

    9. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by rhizome · · Score: 2

      Hah, well since Andersen Accounting is getting off scot free in the Enron disaster, I'd say we have a long way to go before we achieve parity (surveillance requires a court order, bait-cars do not). There's a huge difference between one person not being able to get to work because their car was stolen, and 1,000 people not being able to get to work because their job was thrown away by some shady executive.

      --
      When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
    10. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by multiplexo · · Score: 1
      Poor people do not own cars worth stealing.


      Because they are poor.


      Actually lots of poor people have their cars stolen, the assholes who steal them aren't into it for the money, they just want to joyride and fuck something up. The guy whose car is stolen is then fucked becuase he has no way to get to work, pick up his kids, get groceries, etc. He's probably not a card-carrying, slashdot reading member of the lumpenintelligentsia such as yourself though, so you really don't care.




      Lets examine the situation here:
      A "late model sedan" a.k.a late 90s Honda is put in a poor, run down neighborhood and left with the doors unlocked.

      Poor people recognize this car:
      A) Does not belong there. (Despite what the article says)
      B) Is not owned by anyone they know.
      C) Is unlocked. (By trying the door)

      For a person walking by this car represents easy money. If you were poor, would you walk by $10,000+ sitting on the street?

      Granted, most of the people who steal this car are going to already be car theives. But you have to admit there is a distinct possibility that this car could tempt someone who was not a car thief to become one.


      Let's examine the situation here: Federal agents posing as arab sheiks offer bribes to members of Congress. Several of them accept and are then arrested. Granted, most of the congressmen who took these bribes were criminals. But you have to admit that these bribes could tempt someone who was not a criminal to become one. Oh wait, we're describing Abscam, Oh wait, this is a bullshit defense and most of them ended up in jail where they belonged. Perhaps they met some car thieves there.


      Seems now the refrain goes: "Give me your tired, your poor..." - so I can throw them in jail.


      Only if they're car thieves.


      Take an introductory college course in Criminal Justice or Sociology. It'll really open your eyes.


      Take some advanced college courses in criminal justice or sociology, then you might actually learn something and not spout mindless crap like this on /.


      I'll leave you with this:
      Who steals more: poor people scraping a living, or rich people in the boardrooms of corporate America? What theft has more impact on the lives of most people?


      Who cares? What does the one have to do with the other? The last asshole I heard using this defense was Rush Limbaugh, Limbaugh was trying to explain how the Democrats were worse Bush because they sucked up to Global Crossing and Enron while Bush only sucked up to Enron. I didn't buy this bullshit line of reasoning (if you can call it that) from Limbaugh and I'm certainly not going to buy it from you.

      --
      cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
    11. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by thelizman · · Score: 1

      Prove it....

    12. Re:Technology vs. the underclass by harborpirate · · Score: 1

      He's probably not a card-carrying, slashdot reading member of the lumpenintelligentsia such as yourself though, so you really don't care.

      I do care, thats why I my post tries to point out that the target of this trap is often poor people who often feel they have no alternative but to steal. Seems you're the one who doesn't care:

      Seems now the refrain goes: "Give me your tired, your poor..." - so I can throw them in jail.

      Only if they're car thieves.


      I'm not even going to comment on your irrelevant stuff about Abscam. A program busting rich congressmen for taking bribes and one busting poor people for stealing cars aren't even similar in the terms of my argument.

      Take some advanced college courses in criminal justice or sociology, then you might actually learn something and not spout mindless crap like this on /.

      I did learn something in those classes. This isn't mindless crap, but I'd argue your double talking "you don't care about them, throw the bastards in jail" post is.

      Who cares? You SHOULD care. The police are busy wasting your tax dollars and mine in order to put more poor people in jail. Meanwhile, corprate American criminals continue to rape and pillage the country while you and I pay for it. What I'm saying is, shouldn't we be spending money to trap corporate theives costing us billions than poor people costing us millions? Shouldn't we be after people who steal out of greed rather than those who steal out of need?

      --
      // harborpirate
      // Slashbots off the starboard bow!
  72. Uh, no. by Blrfl · · Score: 1

    Leaving the car out there as a tempting target doesn't constitute entrapment. Even having an officer in plain clothes tipping likely thieves off to the fact that the car is easily stolen doesn't count.

  73. No, it's not entrapment... by YouAreFatMan · · Score: 1

    ...any more than it is to have undercover cops posing as hookers to catch the johns. Maybe it would be if they put a sign that said "steal me" on the car (I don't know what kind of sign they would put on the hookers, but that's a different story).

    --
    Robotiq.com is heavily tested on animals
  74. Would it be stealing if... by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 2

    Would it be stealing if I hopped in the car and drove it back to the police station?

    Since this news is now out in the public, I'm sure the Washington DC police are already working on other secret plans for catching "the bad guy". Kinda like military technology documentaries (propaganda) that supposedly show the latest in military technology... fact is, they're showing the latest *declassified* information, which means they're already truly onto bigger and better things.

    --
    Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
    1. Re:Would it be stealing if... by jgerman · · Score: 2
      Would it be stealing if I hopped in the car and drove it back to the police station?


      In a word. Yes.


      In four. What a stupid question.

      --
      I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
    2. Re:Would it be stealing if... by The+G · · Score: 2

      Since this news is now out in the public, I'm sure the Washington DC police are already working on other secret plans for catching "the bad guy". Kinda like military technology documentaries (propaganda) that supposedly show the latest in military technology

      Or, to take the conspiracy theory one more level, they never developed such a car at all, but know that spreading the rumor of it will deter car thieves :)
      --G

    3. Re:Would it be stealing if... by cr@ckwhore · · Score: 1

      oooh! Saucy!

      --
      Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
  75. in the UK we just nick expensive cars by johnjones · · Score: 2

    that way the Police cant aford them and you know its safe

    "why is it bad unlocking codes are all the same we need to get into the cars and we are the only ones with the key"-- rep

    Porsche has a dealer code for the unlocking IR that you can clone and get into all 1998 models funny as fuck to watch peoples face when you open their car via your watch (-;

    regards

    john jones

  76. If this is entrapment.... by greechneb · · Score: 1

    Then wouldn't setting up a honey-pot on the internet also be considered entrapment?

  77. purpose of publisizing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    while i find this absolutely fascinating and think it's really neat, doesn't it kind of defeat the purpose of the whole operation if you publicise that you're doing it in the Washington Post?

    or are they trying to use this as a *deterrent* to car theft, by sending signals out to car thieves that "hey, perhaps when you jimmy open that car YOU ARE WALKING INTO A TRAP! maybe you should just go back home and yell at your sister instead." that actually would make a lot of sense, now that i think about it..

    on the other hand, either way maybe its a moot point, since i guess car thieves aren't *that* likely to read the washington post.

    meanwhile, does anyone else find it hilarious that half the threads thus far in this slashdot story concern entrapment, but none seem to acknowledge that the next to last paragraph in the washington post story *directly addresses* the legal entrapment issue? c'mon, people, read the fricking article.. when will you find out the slashdot burbs neither try nor pretend to be accurate representations of the story?

    1. Re:purpose of publisizing? by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I think it would be funny if about half the cities started doing this, and about half the cities starting saying they were doing this, and the two categories had no relationship to each other whatsoever.

      In other words, every city is eiter doing it and telling people they aren't, doing it and telling people they are, not doing it and telling people they are, or not doing it and telling people they aren't.

      And, just to make it more interesting, have everyone change randomly each month.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  78. More Poor People in Jail Big Deal by Nightspore · · Score: 1

    Fine, Jose is going to jail but remember that no "important" white guy from Enron will ever see the inside of a prison cell, no matter how many lives he wrecked with his corruption. Also remember that you have been, and will be, the victim of more white-collar crime in your life than any other form. Personally, I'm more worried when my government gets hijacked than when my car gets ripped off.

    "Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you king." - Dylan

  79. Does it matter? by sdo1 · · Score: 2, Troll

    The ones who get caught stealing the car will spend a night or two in jail, get probation (maybe), and get another line added to thier probably already long list of offences to society. Then they'll be back on the street.

    In the meantime people are getting locked up for writing software that the MPAA and/or RIAA (or Adobe) takes offense to. Or for smoking a plant. Or for consentual activities between adults.

    The wireless GPS car is all very well and good, but taking thousands of dollars worth of property that is not yours is an offense that, IMO, should land someone in jail for a time on the order of decades, not days. But we all know exactly what will happen to those who are arrested.

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:Does it matter? by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      In the meantime people are getting locked up for writing software that the MPAA and/or RIAA (or Adobe) takes offense to. Or for smoking a plant.

      Plants have rights too!

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    2. Re:Does it matter? by Tideflats · · Score: 1

      Sit in on some actual superior court cases. You'll feel better.

  80. They've been doing this for years... by pbrammer · · Score: 1

    They've been doing this sort of thing for a long time now. They'd sit on the street in another vehicle while watching the bait car. When someone stole the vehicle, the cops would hit a button on a remote thereby disabling the vehicle. Then the cops gingerly stroll up to the car, arrest the guy, and repeat the process...

    Of course, now, maybe they don't have to watch the vehicle with the GPS and other equipment they have...

  81. kill switch by jeffn7 · · Score: 1

    I guess that means 'wildest police chases' won't be getting much new footage from DC

  82. Not only that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... you get a GPS into the bargain, too!

  83. "Wireless"? by Unknown+Bovine+Group · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do they really need to say "Wireless"?

    Was there a (not-so-successful) previous attempt at this, but with wires coming out of it?

    --
    m00.
    1. Re:"Wireless"? by zapfie · · Score: 2

      No, it's not like that. They mean it has wireless communication capabilities versus NO communication capabilities, not versus wired communication capabilities.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
    2. Re:"Wireless"? by thrillbert · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, actually there was, but it was not the wires running to a wodden shed nearby that detered the theives, it was the AS/400 with the satelite dish mounted in the trunk that looked suspicious to most.

      Although some were caught contemplating it by the television crew parked next to the car, no one seemed to raise the courage to attempt stealing the car.

      Of course, it could have just been stage frieght...

      ---
      Swiss Cheese - The ultimate paradox.
      The more cheese, the more holes. The more holes, the less cheese.
      Therefore, the more cheese, the less cheese.

    3. Re:"Wireless"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you an actual moron, or do you just play one on Slashdot?

  84. Re:Saw it on Learning Channel awhile ago... by ScUmM_BoY · · Score: 1

    I remember that. I think it was the Descovery Channel.

  85. It's been on "Caught on Video" too by swb · · Score: 2

    I think that's awesome when they lock the guys in the car automatically and they can't get out. It's even funnier when the cops are calmly walking towards the car and the theif's panic level starts to hit maximum.

    A hidden alarm/alert and a locking door system couldn't cost more than $5k. I think they should put these in lots and lots of places. It might actually put a dent in the car theft business.

    1. Re:It's been on "Caught on Video" too by bluebomber · · Score: 2

      I think they should put these in lots and lots of places. It might actually put a dent in the car theft business.

      Yeah! And put hidden cameras in the dash, so we can record the panic level hitting maximum. Ooh, and maybe webcast directly from the cameras... :)

    2. Re:It's been on "Caught on Video" too by DustMagnet · · Score: 1
      I've seen video tapes from bait cars on TV.


      It is really funny. When the car stalls and the doors all lock, they panic. Then they see the cops calmly walking over and they freak. One guy started kicking the windows hard, but they aren't normal glass, so they wouldn't break. These thieves are total scum and I hope they get post tramatic stress disorder from it.


      Too bad the penalties for property crime are so small, we mostly use our jails for drug crime.

      --
      'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
    3. Re:It's been on "Caught on Video" too by swb · · Score: 2

      Too bad the penalties for property crime are so small, we mostly use our jails for drug crime.

      And too bad we're too stupid to realize that our property crimes are almost always tied to the artificially high prices being charged for drugs.

      Not only would not wasting time on drugs free up massive police resources to fight property crimes, people wouldn't have to steal to afford them. I'm sure there would be some theft, but if you could get high for a month on $20, how much would you have to steal?

  86. New device for the accessories market... by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 2

    It won't be long now until Ron Popeil has an infomercial for the:

    AutoTrapp (extra 'p' for a catchy name)

    Along with a has-been or no-name actress and a paid audience with great clapping ability, you too can find out how you can get this remarkable device (which also cleans vinyl records) for,

    Not $3000,
    not $2000,
    not even $1000,
    but for 4 easy payments of $99.95 (plus $78.34 S/H)

  87. Re:Entrapment anyone? by Anonnymous+Coward · · Score: 1
    I'm not one either, but I wouldn't think it'd be entrapment until an undercover cop said to the thief "Hey, buddy--check out the unlocked Vette with the keys in the ignition!"

    Otherwise, while it might be temptation, it ain't entrapment.

  88. Great trick to play on the new guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Run a car thief ring? Sick of that snot-nosed punk that thinks he knows everything and has asperations of taking over your "business"? No problem; just tell him about this "hot item" that's a cinch to steal.

    This is also great for getting rid of rival car thiefs.

  89. This has been in the consumer market for some time by jwbing · · Score: 1

    LoJack
    This tracking technology has been available in the states for some time. It actually uses the police radio networks directly, unlike the on*Star systems.

  90. Troll? I think not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is absurd. You post what is your honest opinion about something, and if a moderator so much as disagrees with it, it's a troll?

  91. Needs a catchy name... by himself · · Score: 1

    How about "war parking"?

  92. Re: footing the..Mods, please put down crack pipes by Software · · Score: 1
    What is the point of locking up some guy for trying to steal a car that was designed to be stolen?
    Because stealing a car is against the law. The car wasn't designed to be stolen; it was designed to catch thieves. Car thieves tend to steal more than one car. Lock up a car thief, and you're preventing some car thefts from happening.

    How did this get moderated 4, Interesting?

  93. fine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    steal it and you'll not only get a new car,
    but new surveillance gear and new gps in addition.

  94. That would be a civil suit by morven2 · · Score: 1

    and thus a quite different animal to a criminal prosecution. (BTW, references please?)

    My guess would be, if this story is true, that the car's owner simply had a crappy lawyer defending him, or none at all. That won't be the case in criminal court, where the prosecution tend to be fairly good at getting people busted.

  95. N'Sync? by wiredog · · Score: 3, Funny
    driving around in circles while the radio plays a continuous loop of N'Sync at 100 decibels.

    I think that'd violate the Constitutional restrictions on cruel and unusual punishments.

  96. Better yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just release cyanide gas on the driver.

  97. Re:Wait a minute...RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arlington Commonwealth's Attorney Richard E. Trodden ... does not anticipate any successful challenges from defense attorneys that the tactic is entrapment.

    "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."

    ReadTheFoookinArticle

  98. License plate.... by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

    HNY POT ?

    1. Re:License plate.... by rusty0101 · · Score: 1

      TAR BBY

      -Rusty

      --
      You never know...
  99. My ASS was loaded with GPS and look what happend!! by 4/3PI*R^3 · · Score: 0, Troll

    GPS

  100. Darling, I will be on business to DC... by GdoL · · Score: 1

    With GPS will be easy to track him down to some cheap Hotel.

    --

    ------I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either.------
  101. Lojack by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative
    Lojack has been around for a decade. Lojack dates from the 1980s, and has a reasonably good record.

    It's not a GPS-based system. It doesn't even use the cell phone network, relying on its own infrastructure. It's based on car units and direction-finding receivers in police cars. Each car unit has a transmitter and receiver, but doesn't normally transmit. The unit constantly listens for a message on an FM broadcast station subcarrier. On receipt of the proper message, the unit starts transmitting the "I'm stolen" signal, which is received by receivers in police cars. The signal doesn't contain any positional information; somebody has to do the direction-finding job the hard way.

    Lojack covers major metropolitan areas in about a dozen states. It requires cooperation from the local cops, so it takes a major marketing and negotiation effort to get it into a city.

    1. Re:Lojack by burts_here · · Score: 1

      yeah, they have a system called Tracker (originall or what) in the uk sounds very similair, you pay about £500 for the box, then £50 or somthing a year.
      Plus clifford alarms make a blackjax system that imobolises the car if it gets hi jacked, you just let the car get nicked then press a button and when the crooks next stop at traffic lights it kills the engine sets of the alarm, hazards, smoke machine (prob locks the doors if you want a pissed of car thief locked in your car) and allegedly nothing short of major surgery will get it started again.

      --
      Burt "Out of my mind back in 5 minutes"
  102. IANAL by Microsift · · Score: 2, Funny
    But I play one on TV... It seems like the reason this would not be entrapment is that the police aren't doing anything that a normal citizen wouldn't do.


    Normal people don't pay for sex, so if a cop offers a prostitute money for sex, that's entrapment.


    Normal people do leave their car's in places where the car can be stolen, the fact that the police can track this particular car just improves the chances of the police catching the criminal.


    Put another way, if you had a phat car and left the doors unlocked, keys in, engine running with a wad of benji's hanging out of the glove compartment, and I stole your car, I would not have an entrapment defense.

    --
    My other sig is extremely clever...
    1. Re:IANAL by Carbonite · · Score: 1

      Normal people don't pay for sex, so if a cop offers a prostitute money for sex, that's entrapment.

      Actually, this doesn't really sound like entrapment. From the link provided by a parent post:

      ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case. However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime.

      Since the prostitute is obviously ready and willing to have sex for money, there is no entrapment. It would be a different matter if some average person was offered money for sex, especially if the officer had to persuade them. That would most likely be considered entrapment.

      Carbonite

      --
      ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
    2. Re:IANAL by coyote-san · · Score: 3, Funny

      There are actually two different types of entrapment.

      If an undercover cop tells you to do something or he'll blow your head off it's an absolute form of entrapment. This situation is rare, but not unheard of.

      But if an undercover cop makes you an offer too good to refuse it's a much more grey area. Many normally law-abiding citizens may be tempted by these offers, and there have been some high profile cases thrown out because the cours ruled that a reasonable person would not be able to resist the bait. E.g., I seem to recall that John DeLorean was acquitted because of this - the pressure to save his company was so great that no reasonable person could avoid the quick money for moving a relatively small amount of drugs.

      It's hard to imagine a situation where car theft is irresistable, but it's much harder to make blanket statements about victimless crimes.

      --
      For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    3. Re:IANAL by IMarvinTPA · · Score: 1

      Undercover cop: I'll give you a blow job for a penny.
      The John: Hmm, If you make it free, you have a deal, but I'm not comfortable with the paying thing...

    4. Re:IANAL by Microsift · · Score: 1
      Since the prostitute is obviously ready and willing to have sex for money, there is no entrapment. It would be a different matter if some average person was offered money for sex, especially if the officer had to persuade them. That would most likely be considered entrapment.


      Okay, how do we decide if the person was "average", or "ready and willing to have sex for money." I think the "average" person would love to get paid to have sex. Hell, I'd be having sex right now if I could get paid for it. So, if some female cop I was attracted to offered me money for sex, I might say WTF!


      --
      My other sig is extremely clever...
  103. My DICKwas loaded with GPS and look what happend!! by 4/3PI*R^3 · · Score: 0, Troll

    GPS

  104. Grow a brain! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    You are a fucking moron. Cops exist not only to solve existing crimes but to deter future ones. They are doing their jobs in each and every case that you listed and we are all better off because of it.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  105. No, I found it interesting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whether I agree or not is irrelevant. The post led me down a path of thought I might not otherwise have walked, and I was interested in that path, and the post.

    The path of thought is something like this: It's not a waste of money because

    a) a thief who steals a bait car will (hopefully) be easier to convict
    b) a stolen bait car does not lead to a day, week, month or more without a car for someone.
    c) no insurance money is spent replacing a stolen (GPS transpitter equipped) bait car
    d) the car WILL be recovered and re-used, so its cost can be amortized, unlike the costs of regular stolen cars

    But as I thought these things, I also thought, "why is this different from other crimes and crime prevention methods?"

    a) The actual crime of stealing cars is NOT a victimless crime. The owner is of the car is the victim. This is (arguably) not the case with sex or drug transactions between consenting adults.
    b) This method of crime prevention only works on criminals! It is impossible for anyone to claim they accidentally broke into a bait car, or were convinced to do so by an agent.

    My conclusion is that I'm in favor of this method of counter-acting the destructive nature of theft, but I wouldn't have as clear of an idea why had it not been for the post complaining about it.

    So yeah, it interested me.

  106. South Africa by ctp · · Score: 2, Informative

    Car rental places in South Africa are even offering the option of renting cars with or without the flamethrowers installed.

  107. Damn right its a Big Deal! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    Thanks for trying to display the auto theif in a sympathetic light. In any case some people's lives are truly fucked up when their only means of transportation is stolen. It has a big effect on OTHER poor people, you know the law abiding ones.

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    1. Re:Damn right its a Big Deal! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not to mention, most of the people who steal ARE poor..

      silly contradicting poster, posts are for dorks

    2. Re:Damn right its a Big Deal! by Nightspore · · Score: 1

      Sure. All I'm saying is that while you're feeling happy your little car is being "protected" from the "bad guys", the guys looking to pillage your pension, social security and 401k funds have got pals in the White House helping them out.

      You'll realize who the real crooks were when you're a toothless street beggar forty years from now. Just don't get any ideas about stealing a loaf of bread - those will have their own GPS tracking in place by then.

      - Night

    3. Re:Damn right its a Big Deal! by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Right now I'm 22. I've been thinking about my own financial situation in concerns to my retirement since I was 15. I've already set myself up so that I won't need social security or a pension. I don't even expect social security to be around when I'm old enough to be eligible for it. There's nothing preventing someone my age from gathering and then properly investing his/her resources, both financial and time, in order to save up a huge amount for retirement. So for me, car theives are the bigger threat.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  108. Hello You're On Car Talk! by sulli · · Score: 2

    Cars do talk, or did at one time. Back in the 80s there was a fad of sorts of cars telling drivers status updates and safety warnings: "Please fasten your seatbelt," "A door is ajar," "Please refill the oil," etc. They drove owners nuts and didn't last long. But they lasted long enough for Eddie Murphy to do a very funny bit about them - I can't find a transcript on google, but I bet someone has it.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Hello You're On Car Talk! by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      Cars do talk, or did at one time. Back in the 80s there was a fad of sorts of cars telling drivers status updates and safety warnings: "Please fasten your seatbelt," "A door is ajar," "Please refill the oil," etc. They drove owners nuts and didn't last long.
      When I was working for $BadCompanyWhichMakesAddictiveProducts, some 20 years ago, they suddenly replaced their whole fleet of company cars with those talkers. At least one senior director sent one in the ditch when the car suddenly said "your gas is low" while he was cruising along the highway...
  109. It's only victimless because it's bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The police won't catch anyone with bait cars if no one is willing to steal the cars in the first place. I much prefer this to waiting for a thief to steal a citizen's car and then trying to find and prosecute the theif. This "bait" method is much more likely to lead to a conviction (more evidence), and if the theives know this is going on in an area they will be a lot more careful about which cars they try to steal.

    To protect myself, all I have to do is make my car look like bait. :)

  110. the parable of the sword by kuma · · Score: 1

    the sword which takes life, gives life...

    while you may have valid concerns about what constitues crime, your post is patently stupid. are such vehicles stolen because they are so enticing, or because someone was *looking* for wheels to swipe?

    if such a car is stolen, might not that mean your car is left untouched on the same street?

    protecting the law abiding is impossible if you maintain a purely defensive posture. even aikido which eschews harming any attacker includes strikes.

  111. I tend to agree, but... by j09824 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I tend to agree that it isn't entrapment. But depending on what they do, it may be dangerously close and set a bad precedent for other areas of law. Also, if they leave the key in the ignition, they will probably end up catching many more low-level crooks that might otherwise not steal cars.

  112. not for catching the thief, by CRM+Slave · · Score: 0

    it's for tracking him back to the chop shop. that's where you can do some longer lasting damage to the criminals.

    extrapolate to the most obvious point.

  113. Plane theft by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    Hmm, maybe they could do the same thing with planes lol.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  114. Been done WAY before! by DnemoniX · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Minneapolis / St. Paul Police departments have been using this for at least two years. Wireless kill switch and viedo included. They flip a switch the car dies the doors lock and the lights start going nuts. Surround the car and BUSTED... But seriously nothing new to see here.

  115. They were throwing away anyway by Jonny+Balls · · Score: 1

    Hey... people throw trash out on the side of the street, and they leave their cars on the side of the street. You could just say they were leaving it out for the trash guys, makes sense.

    --
    --JonnyBlog
  116. Someone stole yo battry! by wiredog · · Score: 2

    I say we go get the motherfucker!

  117. Silly assumption... by El+Camino+SS · · Score: 2

    there is publicity for this car being left in the open to be stolen, so anyone in the area stealing cars that can pick up a newspaper is going to be on the lookout for it

    Yeah, the cops are so incredibly stupid that they are going to put the exact same car on the front of the paper out to catch thieves.

    Meanwhile, at a Dunkin' Donuts:

    "Hey Steve, I just came up with an idea, I think the criminals have noticed our specific car, and we might need to move all of the electronics to A NEW CAR. That way they won't know that it is the rigged car."

    "Buddy, you just made detective."

  118. That's news?? by Tim+Ward · · Score: 2

    They've been doing similar in the UK for many years. You don't need the GPS rubbish either, you just arrange that the car doors lock the moment someone shuts them, and don't provide any means to open the doors or windows from inside.

  119. Kill Switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To cause the car break down... Do they install windows in the car's computer?

  120. Re:entrapment (moving off topic) by Merlin_80000 · · Score: 1

    (ianal) actually in my state (Louisiana) the car is an extension of your home(as is the area within the home's fencing). so if someone breaks into your car you can shoot them under self-defense

    --
    Please keep in my that my ADHD keeps me a little scatter brained and I sometimes can't focus long enough to
  121. The next step... by tomzyk · · Score: 1

    ... is to put tasers in the vehicles so that even if someone tries to steal something from your car (ie. car stereo/cd/mp3 player) they get zapped and just lie there quivvering until the authorities get there. Of course, in this case, the vehicle should probably call the paramedics as well as the police though.

    --
    Karma: NaN
    1. Re:The next step... by British · · Score: 2

      That was featured in a bogus commercial in one of the RoboCop movies. The owner opens his car door to find a totally char-broiled car thief spill out.

    2. Re:The next step... by slykens · · Score: 2
      ... is to put tasers in the vehicles so that even if someone tries to steal something from your car (ie. car stereo/cd/mp3 player) they get zapped and just lie there quivvering until the authorities get there. Of course, in this case, the vehicle should probably call the paramedics as well as the police though.

      While I certainly would like to see this idea implemented it is, IIRC, illegal in America to booby-trap a car or house to cause injury to someone. This also leads to the warning labels that you see indicating "This house protected by ADT" or some such agency.

      Unfortunately, "This house protected by Heckler and Koch three nights a week, you guess which three" doesn't qualify as legal warning.

    3. Re:The next step... by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      Course besides being illegal, think about it. How many times to people space out and open their cars before turning the alarm off by accident? Just takes one little slip up and you get caught in your own trap. Ouch! :)

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
  122. Not new, but funny to watch by DeadBugs · · Score: 2

    I have seen a similiar car used in California. They had the police footage on one of those "real video" shows. The car has cameras inside the vehicle showing the thief in action. After the car is stolen the Police activate a starter kill switch that not only stops the car but locks all the doors and prevents the windows from being rolled down. The video footage of the theif trying to get out is very entertaining. One car theif actually punched out the drivers side window at was half way out when the police caught up and arrested him.

    --
    http://www.kubuntu.org/
  123. Make and Model? by 4of12 · · Score: 2

    So, like, if I live in DC and my personal automobile is the same make and model as the bait car, then perhaps I could expect my car theft susceptability to decrease?

    If they used enough of these of particular kinds, then I'd expect it to show up in the car insurance actuarial tables.

    Unfortunately, the bait car is probably not a car that I would be likely to own. Mebbe a mid-1980s orange Yugo?

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  124. Not in Hollywood.... by mblase · · Score: 3, Funny

    It catches car thieves, but only car thieves. This is one of the few uses of technology that has zero probability of catching "the wrong guy".

    I'm now waiting for the first action movie out of Hollywood that features a tough, no-nails cop breaking into an available car to chase an escaping murder suspect, only to be stopped in traffic two minutes later by a different part of the department.

  125. Ohmigawd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew there was a reason we needed a mod along the lines of "Stupid".
    I mean, not to flame this guy or anything, but dang!

  126. Entrament? by El_Nofx · · Score: 0, Troll

    Isn't this entrapment?
    The police trying to get someone to commit a crime and then bust them when they do.

    Sounds fishy

    --
    It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
    1. Re:Entrament? by kasek · · Score: 1

      "Entrapment is where the government plants the seed of a crime in the mind of individual who would not otherwise be criminally inclined," Trodden said. " . . . We don't want that. But if we had somebody who was out there, ready to steal something . . . it's good police work."

      nuff said.

  127. A better idea: by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    When the thieves get into the car, the doors and windows lock. The car then drives itself for a few miles before smashing the occupants into a specially built brick wall. The car would be a write-off and the police could remove all the devices, then claim insurance for theft and damage. The thieves would be dead so it wouldn't fill up the prison system or waste the time of overworked judges. Also, you would be using different cars each time, and the thieves wouldn't be able to tell anyone about it (they are dead) thus, no-one will catch on.

    Or, failing that. you just chase the stolen car, surround it and OH MY GOD HES GOT A GUN!!!! shoot the *armed* thieves.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    1. Re:A better idea: by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      You could always leave a bunch of (unarmed) guns inside the car before they steal it.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  128. So? by cjpez · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    So you posted at +1. Big whoop. It's more effort to turn it off than it is to leave it turned on. That troll just made it sound like you went to all this trouble to post at +1. Bah. Just ignore 'em.

    1. Re:So? by dryueh · · Score: 2
      Correction: an 'anonymous' troll.

      Anonymous, and mean. I haven't felt offended in a while.....and definitely thought that I'd feel offended coming off of Slashdot!

      So it goes..

  129. the next step by HighTeckRedNeck · · Score: 1
    When they get the car to lock the guy in and drive him to the prison on its on (giving him a fair trial on the way) we'll all pay a little less for car insurance and court time.

    Now if they will just make atm machines with super glue and stun guns.

  130. The best way to deal with car thieves... by belgar · · Score: 1


    ....is burn em up!:-)

    --
    What does it mean to wake out of a dream
    and be wearing someone else's shorts?
    BNL, Born on a Pirate Ship (1998)
  131. Only the GPS part is new by mttlg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Using bait cars that can be disabled remotely to catch car thieves is nothing new - video from these cars has been on many of the countless police videos shows that were big before the more recent "reality" shows. The new thing is the use of GPS to track the cars, eliminating the need to keep police officers sitting around watching the car. This frees them up for other things while the car thieves still get caught.

  132. I can't wait! by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    How long until somebody complains that this is a blatant violation of privacy?

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    1. Re:I can't wait! by killthiskid · · Score: 2

      Well, considering the post above you mentions 'blatant violation of privacy', i'd say that they thought of it before you thought of them thinking about it.


      ;)

  133. READ THE ARTICLE, DUMBASS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    It explicity explains why this is NOT entrapment!

  134. RoboCop by danielobvt · · Score: 1

    in one of the movies they had this fake commercial where the criminal was trying to steal the car and the the cars active defense was locking him in and electrocuting him. Then all you had to do was open the door, let the BG fall out of the car and drive away.
    Sometimes it feels like we are heading that way. They now have the option of adding flame thrower type stuff to cars in South Africa to prevent carjackings.
    Car Wars, here we come.

    1. Re:RoboCop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Car Wars, here we come.

      The Bus Strikes Back

      Return of the Cart

  135. great... by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    so what about this grey ford taurus that's been parked in the same spot at church for almost a year now? the windows are turning brown and their is dirt and pine needles under and around the wheels...is that abandoned?

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
    1. Re:great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gotcha beat on that one. There's an old car parked in one of the far stalls of our apartment's lot. Apparently it's beent there for close to 15 years! According to the landlady, nobody's lived in the apartment that long and she has no idea whose car it is.

      Why they don't have it towed is beyond me.. I park for 61 minutes in a 1 hour parking area and I'm immediately ticketed!

    2. Re:great... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Depends on your state.

      Usually if it's there for more than a day or three, and you don't want it there, it's considered abandoned and you can call the cops to come tow it away.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
  136. Death Wish: Synopsis by Nonesuch · · Score: 2
    It's not as simple as that -- as I recall, "The Giggler" was directly or indirectly responsible for at least one murder, as well as rape:

    http://www.jabootu.com/deathwish3.htm

    ...
    The next morning, Paul and Rodriguez are on patrol when the Giggler grabs another purse. They give chase, but are soon outdistanced. (We only see Bronson running in very short clips. This helps imply that his character is running the whole distance, without causing Bronson's heart to explode in his chest.) "This Wildey friend of yours," the disgusted Rodriguez asks, "can he catch this guy?" Kersey nods yes. Back at the apartment, Bennett asks who Wildey is. "You'll see!," the impish Kersey replies. Next we see Kersey accepting a cake box sized parcel at the mail service shop. Laying the package on his table at home, Kersey looks up, and we see that all his neighbors are in attendance. "Wildey's here!," he tells them. Oh, boy! Finally, we're going to meet Wildey. Man, after all that build-up, this is going to be great!

    Needless to say, it's not. Wildey turns out to be a gigantic semi-automatic pistol manufactured by Wildey, Inc. "Real stopping power," Kersey notes. Then, like some transparent audience shill in an infomercial, Bennett pipes up. "Is that like a .44 magnum?," he asks. No, Kersey replies. The .44 is a pistol cartridge, the Wildey magnum is, "a shorter version of the African big game cartridge." (Whatever that means.) You know what that means, right? Kersey's packin' bigger than Dirty Harry! You go, Dude! ('Dude'? I've got to stop doing that.) Anyway, it's reassuring that Kersey will be toting the kind of firepower that you'd use to nail a rhinoceros or elephant.

    Now comes the movie's low point, surprisingly revolting even for a picture like this. Maria is assaulted by Fraker and three more of the gang. Almost immediately, her shirt is ripped opened, as this scene is being used as an excused to bare some breasts. (This is why the almost pathologically modest Maria isn't wearing a bra; it would get in the way of breast baring.) Frankly, I had thought that the reprehensible practice of using rape scenes to inject some 'sex' into a picture had gone by the boards, even in exploitation flicks. Unfortunately, this film proved me wrong. My only advice is to have your remote ready when this scene begins.

    We cut to Rodriguez, crying in his apartment. You can tell that it's his because of the decorative sombreros (!) on the wall. Kersey and Bennett are there to provide comfort. The report has come in: Maria was raped, but her physical injuries are restricted to a broken arm. Kersey orders a taxi and takes Rodriguez to the hospital. Meeting with her doctor, they learn that Maria has in fact died. The arm was badly shattered, resulting in blood clots that broke loose and made their way to the heart.

    Back at Kersey's apartment, he's lovingly assembling new cartridges for his Wildey. Then, tucking the piece into his waistband, he heads out for the street, grabbing a camera case. (Unsurprisingly, a big logo for Nikon is quite noticeable - this is a classic example of produce placement, even though in this case I suspect it was arranged by the Pentax company.) Kersey walks down the block to the local grocery, and buys himself an ice cream bar. He also tosses one to that kid who gave him the power salute earlier. Back on the street, he spots the Giggler, and lazily hangs the camera case over his shoulder. Sure enough, the Giggler takes the bait. This time, however, Kersey is ready. He pulls out the Wildey and blows him away. This leads to an uproar of applause and celebration from the locals, as 'triumph' music plays in the background.

    The next morning the rest of the gang is bummed out. "They killed the Giggler!," one sensitive young hood cries. "They had no business doin' that," Fraker agrees. Meanwhile, Shriker shows up to check out the crime scene. A woman, one of the celebrating citizens from the previous evening, runs over to give him her two cents. "I'm glad he's dead," she shouts. "He took my pocketbook three weeks ago!" (Wow, talk about a law and order mentality!) Shirker pulls back the sheet to examine the corpse, complete with a neat circular 'wound' through his chest. "There's not much left of this sucker, is there?," he inquires. Well, yeah, actually. Pretty much all of him, save for the part of his chest through which the bullet passed. I mean, they're not going to have to collect his remains with a sponge or anything.

  137. The privacy implications are astounding by Muddie · · Score: 2, Troll

    They'll make everyone want one of these, and since they conveniently can't tell you where the device is that triggers this event because then the burglars would know, they could monitor you at any time. What's to say that they don't set it off saying "Hey..I'm going over the speed limit here. Come arrest me".
    And of course we can't put these things into computers first or some other segment of society where there might have been a chance of the person getting nabbed wasn't brown. Let's exploit minorities even further. Yay. Now, I know that maybe -- just maybe he would have taken a car no matter what, but you could make the argument that maybe crack wouldn't have been such a hit if we didn't push that into the black community too, or maybe they would have found it anyways and exploited it on their own.
    And why don't we do this with guns? Things that kill people, so we could know where they were at all times, but I'm sure the NRA wouldn't hear of that.
    I think this is going too far.

    1. Re:The privacy implications are astounding by A.Soze · · Score: 1

      Some rental cars companies already have pilot programs that do exactly this. They calculate your trip time from point A to point B, average that figure and determine whether or not you were speeding. They will then assess a company-dictated fine (no law-enforcement connection here yet) on your bill when you bring it back.

      --
      "Goodness, how did you people live long enough to invent tools?" -Hobbes (the tiger, not the philosopher)
    2. Re:The privacy implications are astounding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG I'm breaking the law, but as I'm a /. poster, I'm ABOVE it!

  138. Why didnt they wait until the car got to the buyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then they could have gotten a whole nest
    of the bastards. Maybe the car was going
    to a chop shop. Maybe the car was going
    to a drug meet. Maybe the car was going
    accross state lines.

    Sounds like a great use of technology
    though.

  139. Amen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, if it does not belong to you, you may not claim it. It is theft, plain and simple. Some folks think the phrase possession is 9/10ths of the law, means that IF they have it, then there is a 90 percent chance that it belongs to them. Actually, it means that if you have a piece of property that is missing, lost or stolen, then you are guilty of theft unless you can prove otherwise. Simple common sense would show this to be true. No reciept, you stole it. One cannot borrow anything WITHOUT asking.

    1. Re:Amen by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Which, of course, makes all janitors master thieves for picking up things people leave laying around.

      Wait, no, that would be idiotic.

      If it was truly as you suggested, why would police stations have written policies about 'lost and found' items? Wouldn't the mere existence of a lost and found encourage people to break the law by picking up other people's property?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  140. Re:Why didnt they wait until the car got to the bu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you use a Commodore 64 to post that?
    What's with the 40 columns?

  141. keeping car washed bad idea by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    if you keep it shiny washed and waxed, it'll stick out as a police car...think about how many average cars on the road are washed and how many have pollen clinging to them?

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
  142. Not a new idea... by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    It's not a new idea, but it IS a good one. Not sure what I was watching, but they showed video from a camera inside that caught the bust, it was classic! ^^ A bunch of teenagers pile in, ready for a joyride, they get going and then, confusion.... The car stops working, and glides to a halt as police officers surround the vehicle (Meanwhile the stupid kids are freaking out, and trying to bust out the windows (Did they mention it also LOCKS ALL THE DOORS when they hit the killswitch? ^^ )

    And if you want to cry entrapment:

    A) I'm pretty sure it isn't.

    B) Keep complaining about things that actually CATCH people, and sooner or later, someone's gonna drive off in YOUR car!

    But, as always this is just my 2&yen

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
  143. Bait laptops by ewg · · Score: 1

    Now let's have the same idea applied to laptops--leave trackable portable computers unattended in airports and hotels as bait.

    --
    org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
  144. How about another post asking if it's entrapment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It hasn't been answered enough times yet. Tell me again.

  145. Now we know what happened to... by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 1
    ...KITT once "Knight Rider" was cancelled.

    Help Michael! I'm being stolen!

    I think the crooks will catch on once they notice the red LED strobing light at the front of the car.

  146. My car in DC got vandalized 3 times - GO COPS!!! by Infonaut · · Score: 2
    I lived there for three years, and my car had windows broken twice and once it got keyed. I lived on Scott Circle and at two different locations on Capitol Hill. My car wasn't expensive. I wasn't doing anything to anyone.

    I actually seriously considered buying a crossbow, so i could sit atop my condo building at night and wait for some asshole to come along and fuck with my car. I figured I wouldn't kill him - but a leg shot would be satisfying.

    I have no clue why anyone would sympathize with car thieves. This program does nothing to hurt honest people who are living their lives. Maybe you've just got a knee-jerk reaction to The Law, but in this case, the cops are doing something that helps make normal people's lives easier.

    Considering how pathetic the District cops usually are, this is a good sign.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  147. well by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    keying the car is vandalism...but then...I guess you don't support the boys in blue...

    as for the ac troll...it was pretty harsh, yeah, but that's why you ignore ac trolls...if they don't have the guts to show who they really are, it really isn't worth your bother to get upset...indeed, if you spend any amount of time on slashnet, you get used to flaming them right back

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
    1. Re:well by dryueh · · Score: 1
      Yeah...well..

      I've been doped up all day on Dayquil and I'm blaming it for that post (read: hyperjumpy-things.don't.make.much.sense/that's what you get for working a job where you've got nothing to do all day but still get paid an hourly wage so there's not enough justification to just go home).

      If it weren't for the cops, I'd probably be dead considering where I live.

      I was going to hold a pep-rally for myself as a victim of APTroll-Attacks, but then realized that, well......you know.

  148. Thtfffffffffftt....... what, man? (nt) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    <exhales

  149. think about it this way by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    you can claim the insurance money and buy a toyota :)

    then again...wasn't it kia that was advertising how great their cars were in terms of warranty/price/etc compared with everyone else? my thought seeing those commercials was "that's the only way you're gonna sell those pieces of junk"....but then...I'm biased...I got a Volvo.

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
    1. Re:think about it this way by I+am+the+blob · · Score: 1

      I doubt the insurance money would pay off the loan. Argh.

      I should have known better. I really should have. Mine was also sold before they adopted the 10yr/100,000 mile warranty. It's likely the reason they adopted that warranty scheme. It was my first new car, and it's been more trouble than any of my used cars. Two different dealers made two different attempts to repair faulty hub seals (one under warranty and another under recall), both of which have failed, and now I've got front hubs which will not only not lock, but have significant damage because they've been sucking water in for the past three years. And now I'm out of warranty.

      I could go on, but I'm already way off-topic.

      Ah well, I'll know better next time. Expensive lessons are the most well-learned, I suppose.

      --blob

      --

      All sweeping generalizations suck.
  150. entrapment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if that's considered entrapment and consequently how it holds up in the courts?

  151. They should! by John+Harrison · · Score: 2
    Bruisin Berry Slurpees Suck!

    Not only that, but at the local sev, they got rid of Cherry and introduced Sour Cherry at the same time the new WWF inspired flavor came out. Now I am stuck drinking my specially ordered caffiene free Dr Pepper with real sugar.

  152. Private consumer level - onstar by ringrose · · Score: 1

    My impression was that if you had Onstar, and your car was stolen, you could call them and they'd kill the engine remotely.

    But I could be wrong, I don't have the service. Would someone who has details care to comment?

    --
    There's always one more bu6
  153. Doing this yourself... by slykens · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There is a guy out in Washington I think that has done something similar with his car and what I base this post on...

    You can do something nearly simliar with your own car if you want to pay the monthly service charges on CDPD or a similar packet data network. Basically grab a CDPD modem that is capable of telemetry. Tie a NEMA capable GPS receiver to it. When you need to know where your car is telnet to the CDPD modem on a particular port and watch the NEMA stream. Heck, redirect it to something like Delorme AAA Map'n'Go and watch your car drive down the road. I imagine it would be a simple exercise to direct the police to your vehicle.

    Now, this working as an effective recovery device depends on the car being able to acquire a GPS signal and maintain it, ability to communicate on the CDPD network, and finding out your car is stolen before it is stripped or the battery is disconnected.

    1. Re:Doing this yourself... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      finding out your car is stolen before it is stripped or the battery is disconnected.

      Well ... we have battery backups for computers, do about the same thing ... when the battery is disconnected, then do one final "here I am" signal and shutdown.

      You probably wouldn't even need to shutdown ... if the current draw is low enough, and the battery was sufficent, you could keep pinging for a few hours/days before you do shutdown.

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
    2. Re:Doing this yourself... by deft · · Score: 1

      if you go through all that work, certainly dont hook it up to the car battery... let it have its own!

      --

      There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    3. Re:Doing this yourself... by Skyshadow · · Score: 2

      At that point, it might just be easier to hire a midget to hide in the back seat with a shotgun.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  154. chop shops, too by runswithd6s · · Score: 1

    This also opens up the possibility of not only catching the thief, but also the chop shops. Thieves are born every day with the promise of quick money. If you kill one chop shop, you stop the source of money for a number of thieves.

    --
    assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
  155. I live in DC....So do I by e2d2 · · Score: 1

    I had my car stolen in DC (Georgetown) one night and it sucked. I was on a great date with a woman I really liked and everything was going great. I parked down near the waterfront under the whitehurst freeway. I never felt so confused as I came back and saw my car gone. I thought they might have towed it, maybe I drank too much and forgot where we parked. I didnt think anyone would steal it because the car was a POS old 190k mile camry and I parked it next to the quite common for Georgetown range rover. It ruined the date but it taught me to park in safer places. I eventually got it back but it was never the same. The thief had took the radio and CLEANED the car. It had no dirt in it and was actually cleaner than when I had parked it. I only found an empty 40 oz of old english and a baby toy in the trunk. God only knows what they where doing.

    As for the DC police and your negative attitude toward them I can kind of relate. After speaking with them about the car and getting nothing but attitude I was surprised when it turned up about 3 weeks later. I thought they would simply dismiss it as another car lost. I've had other encounters that are just as bad but not worth mentioning.

    But I don't think this entraps anyone. Car theives are POS that don't really care that they took part of your life for a joy ride. I have never seen anyone accidentally steal something.

    1. Re:I live in DC....So do I by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only found an empty 40 oz of old english and a baby toy in the trunk. God only knows what they where doing.

      Obvious, the 40 was to get a chick drunk and make porn resulting in a baby. Obviously a celebration related to yesterday's Supreme Court ruling.

  156. If GEICO were smart ... by beanerspace · · Score: 2

    If GEICO, Allstate and a few other biggies were smart, they'd foot the bills to equip various police departments of large metropolitan areas.

    For example, here in the D.C. area, it might be cheaper for said insurance companies to help equip the Montgomery & PG county police on the MD side, rather than have to reimburse owners for stolen Lexus', Hondas and Toyotas (even though they rarely, if ever give you the full value).

    It might also save them the costs of having to repair stolen vehicles that are recovered.

  157. BOOT to the head... by Skip666Kent · · Score: 2

    For saying "Sweet!". Don't feel bad. The guy who said "It's all good" got a boot to the crotch!

    --
    **>>BELCH
    1. Re:BOOT to the head... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about "my bad" or "cool beans"???

  158. The article says it isn't new by alispguru · · Score: 2

    They even mention Minneapolis as the place where they got the idea. You do have to read past the first page to see that, though.

    --

    To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
  159. Now only.... by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2

    if they would put the gang bangers who involve innocents in "drive bys" straight to the chair, we will be in good shape. This is a good thing...Less tolerance and smarter tactics for taking down the slugs of the world. Score 1 for the good guys.

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
    1. Re:Now only.... by Lil'wombat · · Score: 1

      The problem with this type of solution is that it catches only DUMB criminals. By changing the natural selection, mark my words were just going to end up with SMARTER criminals that will be harder to catch.

      --

      Truth: If it's not one thing, it's another

    2. Re:Now only.... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Huh? We'll end up with less criminals. They may be smarter on average, but that's a rather wacky quantity to judge by.

      Would you rather have five geniuses trying to kill you, or five dumb guys, five average guys, and the aforementioned five geniuses all trying to kill you?

      I don't know about you, but for me, the fewer, the better.

      As an added bonus, smart criminals tend to be less violent (A burglary is much easier to get away with than a robbery, etc.), and tend to orient toward very large targets, who can withstand losing 25% of their net worth a lot more than a poor person can stand having his Camry stolen.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  160. idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    read the article shit for brains.... entrapment.. what a noob...

  161. My favorite car alarm by Nyckname · · Score: 1

    I don't know if this is still on the market, but I heard of it ten years ago. It isn't completely automatic for reasons that will become obvious.

    When your car alarm goes off you get paged. If it was indeed stolen, you dial a number which activates the system. The next time the car comes to a complete stop the engine dies, the windows roll up, the doors lock, and a 95db alram goes off inside the drivers compartment.

    Nothing like instant justice.

    cheers

  162. I got your luck too by shaldannon · · Score: 2

    I park for half an hour at Auburn University's student health clinic in the "A" zone and still get a ticket even though I'm getting an antibiotic shot in the butt....it takes them three years and threats of legal action, even with copies of the receipts, to get the stupid ticket and charge revoked.

    --


    What is your Slash Rating?
  163. Automotives Want To Be Free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've just GPL'ed my Delorian.

  164. I wish my car-md-radio ... by frankske · · Score: 1

    had such a system when they stole it three weeks ago :-(

  165. Here is the article... with movie by awharnly · · Score: 1
    Here's the CNN article. Only US$600 for the modification - I can see it becoming the latest fad for the lo-rider set.

    The article also has a very dramatic Quicktime movie of it in action.

  166. Mormon Bike protection plan by Brigadier · · Score: 2



    Have you tried the Mormon Bike Protection Plan, one very long chain and a big old lock. I grew up in Jamaica where they regularly did their rounds. what was funny was how paranoid they were. They would at each stop even if the were standing there chain their bikes to the the biggest heaviest thing that was cemented in the pavement

  167. "Wireless" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, DUH....

  168. Boomerang by Maniwaki · · Score: 2, Interesting
    A company in Montreal is offering an anti-theft device similar to this:

    http://www.boomerangtracking.com

    Because of this system many car thiefs in the Montreal area are working differently. Now they steal a car and will leave it in a public parking for a day or two. If the car is still there, i.e. the police did not pick it up, then they will steal it for good.

  169. flypaper and bug spray... by djcatnip · · Score: 0

    When you have an annoyance, you use the appropriate tools to deal with it. Bravo.

    --
    I make these: http://beatseqr.com
  170. Hmmm by gvonk · · Score: 2

    Are you thinking of entrapment , "A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit."

    or... unreasonable detention (this is probably what you are thinking)

    or trapping?-- As in do the police officers lock him in, skin him, scraping the skin to remove fat and flesh, wash it, and treat him with a series of chemicals that soften and preserve, or tan, the skin?

    --


    El Karma: excelente(principalmente la suma de moderación hecha a los comentarios de los usuarios)
    1. Re:Hmmm by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

      I'm pretty sure this would be considering a reasonable way to subdue a felon, safe to both the victim and suspect.

  171. Re:Saw it on Learning Channel awhile ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Descovery Channel.

    you should be watching Sesame Street not D i scovery!

  172. Law breaking, GPS, and the common man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Anyone remember this argument. The Rental car
    company w/ the GPS speed monitor, which gave
    fines to the renter when a certian speed was
    exceeded. This is something I'm more concerned
    with.

    article from wired

  173. Rape Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They need to come out with a bait women to catch rapists.

  174. Automotive Honeypot by SchmittHouse · · Score: 2, Funny

    My friend told me about a similar car (a Honda Accord) owned by the Ventura County Sheriff that would stall, lock all the doors, roll up the windows and call the police a few blocks from whereever it was stolen.

    In most Southern California towns it lasted about two hours before someone came by and drove off.

    In his town, after two weeks of sitting at the side of the road, unlocked, with the keys in the ignition, it still hadn't been stolen. OTOH, this was in Simi Valley, a town (and I am not making this up) that has a Denny's that closes. Every night.

    My friend took this as an omen and a few months later decided to move.

  175. Faulty Logic: More danger to people? by Nonesuch · · Score: 2
    All too often I see people respond to this sort of program by suggesting that making 'non-confrontational theft' less convenient for crackheads might drive them into commiting more confrontational crimes, so we shouldn't take steps like this. Making burglarly more difficult might cause more home invasions. Making auto theft more difficult increases car jacking. Allowing concealed carry will cause muggers to just pre-emptively shoot people in the back. This sort of thinking amounts to OSHA for criminals.

    rtstyk writes:

    More danger to people when they're entering/leaving the car if this gets really popular because the thieves will stop trusting the free standing car.
    This has already come to pass. One reason for the surge in carjackings was that more and more cars have factory installed alarms and anti-theft systems that prevent quick hot-wiring of unattended vehicles.
    I can imagine the thieves resorting to using a gun to get the person out of the way and then steal the car.
    It's a big jump from stealing an unattended car while the owner is gone to armed robbery.

    To quote RazzleFrog (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=31300&cid=336 7016):

    "You are assuming that most car thieves would make the step from GTA to Armed Robbery, Assault with a Deadly Weapon, and even murder. Most car thieves are looking to get in and out as quickly as possible with as little hassle as possible."
  176. This will only catch the badly organized car thief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The reason is that the good thieves have semi trucks with faraday cages. They steal the car, drive it up a ramp into the truck. It has now vanished from your CPDP network, GPS network, etc.


    Of course, these people aren't stealing the Honda Civics either...

  177. But we already did that by BHS_Turf · · Score: 1

    While working for a tracking company, 3 years ago we had this same technology exactly. The Vancouver Police trialed it, but the monopoly vehical insurance company (ICBC) would not allow it. We had the vehicle tracked in realtime to a cop car using CDPD modems. We also had an applet so that you could watch the chase in real time on a kick-ass map and monitor the status of the headlights, door locks, and engine. Alas, the technology was shelved by the company that bought us. :(

  178. Remote disabling is dangerous by edp · · Score: 2

    "they also had the technology to disable the vehicle -- stopping it in its tracks."

    That is dangeorus. It could cause an accident involving innocent people in other vehicles. I hope they use it only when the police have the vehicle in sight and can control the disabling precisely. If they have to relay a message over the radio to a central location to get somebody there to send a signal back to the car, that's too much lag time. The situation could have changed from a safe time to disable the vehicle (traveling slowly, nobody nearby) to a fatal time (entering highway).

    1. Re:Remote disabling is dangerous by dismayed · · Score: 2
      From reading the article... *cough* You know that the officers stop the vehicle when they have it in view... I'm sure that they've thought about the public safety factors too, don't you? Honestly?

    2. Re:Remote disabling is dangerous by kindbud · · Score: 2

      This remote-disabling feature is available on high end car alarms. The alarm includes a hidden GPS receiver and cell phone. The owner is alerted by pager or SMS when the car alarm goes off. The owner can call the car's hidden cell receiver, enter a PIN, and the next time the car comes to a stop, the ignition cutout activates. The disabled car then signals the owner its location.

      I was offered this system when I bought my Durango in 1998, but not all components to the service were available at that time, so I got a conventional ignore-this-siren-too alarms with ignition cutout. But no remote disabling, no GPS coordinates, no hidden cellphone with PIN. I can start my car with the keychain remote, though. That's kinda nice.

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
  179. Hacker's Challenge by A.Soze · · Score: 2, Funny

    I want to see a web site with a rendered map of the city. Then, I want to see a red pulsing dot that is the stolen car. Then blue dots representing the police, chasing said car. Maybe, as the police get closer, it could speed up the music that plays too. Perhaps a selection from the "Looney Tunes" library would be apropos... This could revolutionize the media coverage of high speed chases! Imagine the revenue possibilities in L.A. alone!

    (Oh, wait... Did I just offend the /. community by mentioning "revenue"? ;) )

    --
    "Goodness, how did you people live long enough to invent tools?" -Hobbes (the tiger, not the philosopher)
    1. Re:Hacker's Challenge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're part of the /. community too moron.

  180. Like a honeypot? by El+Volio · · Score: 2
    Sounds pretty similar to the activity involving honeypots these days. For those who haven't heard of it, the idea to to have a system that may or may not be vulnerable (lots of people use default installs but hardened systems are becoming more common) that are heavily monitored with the idea that if they're broken into, the admins can use them as a research tool to learn more about how the blackhat community works.

    Some people also use them as "detection" or early warning devices, e.g. the low-hanging fruit idea: if you have a vulnerable system amongst several real production systems, hopefully the honeypot will get compromised and you'll be able to detect the intruder before he gets to the real targets. Interesting to see the same thing done here...

    --

    "You can never have too many elephants on your team."

  181. "Kill" switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How does the kill switch work? Is it a poisoned needle or electroshock?

    1. Re:"Kill" switch? by mlk · · Score: 1

      Big spike up the arse.

      I'd love to stick a GPS in my mobile that sends in cords when I SMS it.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  182. my friend did his mission in Guana by sideshow · · Score: 1

    which is realitivly down the street from Jamaica. Anyway, he didn't get a bike but the guys before him got stabbed by some bike theives.

    He had to walk.

    --

    Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.

  183. Just More Equipment by meggito · · Score: 2

    I guess I'll have to check to make sure the next car I still isn't emitting any oddball signals. This will be about as effective as the club.

  184. The US needs more of this by thePredator · · Score: 0

    I am so glad to see this stuff happen, using technology to fight crime. Now they need more stings on houses setup for burglars, bikes with C-4 in the bike seat, I want a whole world setup like this to fight lame ass criminals

  185. Kill car thieves by osgeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I had my car stolen from me once. When you work your ass off to pay for and maintain a vehicle, you feel totally violated to have some piece of shit come along and take it from you. My car was everything I owned, everything I had worked toward... then some son of a bitch stole it.

    I have no mercy for those assholes.

  186. Or get an Amatuer license and do it for free by Fastolfe · · Score: 2

    Amateur radio has lots of digital modes you could use to have your car send you a radio "instant message" when it thinks it's being stolen. Connect a GPS receiver to it, use something like APRS, and you can have it broadcasting its position to you digitally. You could even rig a "kill switch" function into an APRS message, so long as you don't mind the fact that any other amateur radio operator can send the same message. (Encryption is a no-no.)

    1. Re:Or get an Amatuer license and do it for free by n6mod · · Score: 2

      You could even rig a "kill switch" function into an APRS message, so long as you don't mind the fact that any other amateur radio operator can send the same message. (Encryption is a no-no.)

      Huh? While encryption is prohibited (and the FCC considered spread-spectrum to be encryption for far too long), authentication clearly is not. Otherwise, we'd all have to publish our autopatch codes.

      -Z

      --
      You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
    2. Re:Or get an Amatuer license and do it for free by Fastolfe · · Score: 1

      I suppose not. But once you use your autopatch codes, anyone listening on the uplink knows them too.

      Though I guess you could get sophisticated and rotate through some codes to authenticate yourself (a la SecurID).

      But yah, you're right. I just think of everything I do over-the-air as exposed and insecure.

    3. Re:Or get an Amatuer license and do it for free by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      I suppose not. But once you use your autopatch codes, anyone listening on the uplink knows them too.

      Though I guess you could get sophisticated and rotate through some codes to authenticate yourself (a la SecurID).

      Yeah, because my car often gets stolen repeatedly. I disable it, and here comes another bastard who comes along, un-disables it, and steals it again. ;)

      You could just come up with a new code each time, you know. Cars only actually get stolen once a day at most, and you hopefully will have it back in your possession before it's stolen again. ;)

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  187. this is already available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Malta this is already available for anyone willing to pay for the service.

    The system records the car's position every 5 minutes or so (they keep a complete log for quite a long time). If it is moved without permission (i.e. without key) like pushed or towed or stolen then it triggers an alarm at the local police station who will pinpoint the car in seconds.

    Unlike this system though, it doesn't use GPS so the price per unit is quite cheap. Furthermore, insurance companies are already offering a discount to whoever installs one of these units.

  188. Amateur radio and APRS by Fastolfe · · Score: 2

    For those of you interested in doing something similar with your car, consider getting yourself an amateur radio license, buy some hardware, and have your car broadcast its position. Do a net search for "APRS car" for information, or check out http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs.html. I might recommend the Kenwood TH-D7AG radio, which has most all of the functionality you would want in a hand-held package.

  189. GPS Jammer Schematics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  190. Not if they're taking it to the police, right? by Gorimek · · Score: 2

    I thought the Upstanding Citizen thing to do was to take it and turn it in to the Police Lost & Found??

    Can the street cleaners pick it up, or is it just supposed to sit there until it rots from exposure?

    To be less glib, I guess the distinction is the "for your own use" part. It seems like you could always claim you were on your way to the police with it though.

  191. Not plain, not simple, not entrapment. by mindstrm · · Score: 2

    Entrapment is the police GET you to do a crime and then charge you for it. The kind of crime you would not have committed were it not for their interference.

    Parking a car in an area known for car theft and waiting for it to be stolen is not entrapment, it's fishing. I believe as long as they can show the crime would have happened anyway.

    Going undercover, going up to a street kid and telling him there is a car 2 blocks over with the keys in the ignition, THAT is entrapment.

  192. LoJack by qqtortqq · · Score: 1

    Actually, LoJack doesn't use anything fancy like cellular triangulation- some cops in areas that are lojack covered have LoJack recievers on their dashes that give a signal strength and direction of any lojack signals being recieved.

    Its pretty unfancy, but it occasionally gets the job done.

  193. Isnt this blatant lie by Edmund+Blackadder · · Score: 2

    " It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. " where did they come up with that legal requirement. even if it is a contractual requirement it is not a legal one, and a school is not bound by a contract between microsoft and some other random pc donator.

    1. Re:Isnt this blatant lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, dude, wrong story...

  194. They have done this in my neighbourhood by JeanBaptiste · · Score: 1

    For years... I live in Mpls, MN (usa) and they have billboards everywhere with different peoples mug shots with the caption 'Caught by a bait vehicle'....

    And dont they do a similar thing in anti-hacking tactics... set up a computer that looks easy to break into, but it is really a bait box... they see who breaks into that, and then block their IP addy so they wont be able to break into the rest of their network
    unless they are as 3l337 as I am.
    or you are >:-)


    --No sig here, move along

  195. This is what I do. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My solution to not having my car stolen, is not living in an area populated by our african american citzens, who I must say are all upstanding folks.

    (falls on floor laughing).

  196. Proportions by Chump1422 · · Score: 1
    I don't understand your point here. If you drive a car that's more popular with thieves (for whatever reason) then you have a greater chance of having it stolen. If insurance companies have to pay more money on Camry claims, then they're going to charge more for Camry premiums. The reason they pay more on Camry claims is irrelevent.

    The point was that the cars in the top 10 most stolen are more likely to be stolen since they're so common. If there are a billion camrys and 10 corvettes, and 5 corvettes are stolen and 50 million camrys (camries?) are stolen, Camries would cost more in terms of payouts and would blow the corvette out of the water in therms of numbers stolen. But you'd be a fool not to realize that corvettes have a higher chance of being stolen and should be more expensive to insure.

    Statistically speaking, a stolen car has a higher chance of being a camry than a corvette in this case, but that shouldn't translate into higher premiums for camry owners, for the above reasons.

    1. Re:Proportions by Felius · · Score: 1

      I reckon you bet on black after a streak of reds in roulette too, don't you..

      --
      ..and I'll form the head!!
    2. Re:Proportions by Binky+The+Oracle · · Score: 2

      Ah, ok. I see the point now.

      But insurance numbers are based on more than theft. You're also paying for those other things I mentioned like accident rates, mortality rates, average repair costs, etc. More people driving a model statistically means more accidents and higher payouts.

      Like I said before, if a Camry costs the insurance company more to insure, you'll pay higher premiums. Period. Everyone should check out what a car's insurance cost is before buying - it's just like mileage and resale value.

      --

      Slashdot comments... splitting hairs since 1997.

  197. Huh by Skim123 · · Score: 2

    I guess I don't understand why the vast majority of the posts I am reading here are long the lines of: "Cool, using technology to nab the bad guys!"

    However, I would wager if this were a story about red light cameras catching those who ran red lights, or underpass speed detectors catching speeders and mailing them a ticket, you'd be decrying it as an invasion of privacy or whatnot.

    I guess I fail to see the difference, other than in the former case you're not the bad guy and in the latter you might be.

    --

    I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    1. Re:Huh by /dev/trash · · Score: 1
      I guess I don't understand why the vast majority of the posts I am reading here are long the lines of: "Cool, using technology to nab the bad guys!" However, I would wager if this were a story about red light cameras catching those who ran red lights, or underpass speed detectors catching speeders and mailing them a ticket, you'd be decrying it as an invasion of privacy or whatnot. I guess I fail to see the difference, other than in the former case you're not the bad guy and in the latter you might be.

      Well,shit, if privacy is the defense, let's open all the jails.....

  198. Been there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MTB's get nicked from my school very night. It must run to a couple a thousand $ per week. The sods in administration won't let us bring 'em inside or provide a lock up for them...

    So I get myself a drinkbottle, a 108db car alarm kit with motion sensor, a radio tracking device, and an extra lock for the disc brake. And of course a d-lock and cable lock

    The best solution is avoiding the situation altogether. The next best is deterrent. 3 rd is scaring the fsckers sh*tless with a LOUD noise, and if they keep going - send 'em over the bars when the front wheel locks up.

    The radio transmitter can locate them pretty fast in the sity.

  199. No place to put them by FattMattP · · Score: 2

    Too bad that there's no place to lock these people up since all our prison space is taken up with tough, career criminals like pot-smokers and ecstasy users.

    --
    Prevent email address forgery. Publish SPF records for y
  200. Sounds like a .. by bunungs · · Score: 1

    honeypot

    can't wait to see the logs from these babies!

  201. Or use MURS, and do it for free by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2

    MURS is license-free and content unrestricted. You can even use encryption.

  202. Celine Dion by commodoresloat · · Score: 2
    It would be amusing if it continuously played Celine Dion warbling the "Titanic" theme.

    They tried this but the CD player broke due to licensing issues.

    1. Re:Celine Dion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha.... my, aren't you funny. Wrong CD, asshole.

  203. Increasingly offtopic Re:Arlington, VA by sulli · · Score: 1

    Arlington is actually a county, not a city. In Va. there are many "free cities" not part of a county, such as Alexandria, Falls Church, and Fairfax City; there are also counties big and small, some with towns in them; and one of them (Arl.) is so small it doesn't have any towns in it.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
  204. Simple solution by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Take a GPS jammer with you when you go car-jacking.

    Might want to take a spread-spectrum radio jammer too, but it might be possible to track that down. But with a full-spectrum jammer, you don't have to worry about the kill switch either.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Simple solution by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      And next time you don't want police to ask passerbys which way you went, carry around a giant boom box and blare really really loud music from it so the police can't hear their answer.

      Wait a minute...what's stopping the police from following the jamming?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    2. Re:Simple solution by Nate+Eldredge · · Score: 1

      Fine, but now a carjacker has to get ahold of a radio jammer, which is likely to cost a fair amount of time and/or money. Raising the cost of committing a crime is a very effective way to reduce its incidence.

  205. Don't be absurd! by Linuxthess · · Score: 1
    Simple investigation of the matter will then reveal, that yes, this detained suspect does own an identical model.

    Also, what are the odds that two identical cars parked in close proximity will also have keys which work for both...
    Didn't think so too...

    -----------

    --

    I sig, therefore I was.
    1. Re:Don't be absurd! by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Also, what are the odds that two identical cars parked in close proximity will also have keys which work for both...

      My brother has had his Toyota Camry 'stolen' exactly this way. He left it parked, and a girl, that night, using her own key, got in his car, and drove across campus with it. No joke, her key fit both cars. (Later, they tested, and found out his key would unlock her doors, but not start her car.)

      My brother gets out there in the morning, see his car is not there (The other Camry is obviously not his, it has someone else's junk in the back.), and calls the police.

      The police are telling him to wait and see, etc, when the girl who drove off in his car gets back to where she parked 'her' car, and wonders where the hell it is. (The other Camry is obviously not hers, it has someone else's junk in the back, which she didn't notice in the darkness of the night before.)

      She calls campus security.

      Hilarity ensues.

      Seriously, folks, it's not as impossible as you'd think.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  206. It never ceases to amaze me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the ability of humans to rationalize behavior. "got screwed over" translates to "got what he deserved". Since I'm ranting, the earlier posts the losers whined about entrapment were total crap. You do a crime, you pay the price, regardless if the cops set it up or some old lady is losing her life's posessions. To answer the question about someone telling me an ATM is kicking out $10,000.00 accidentally, YES I would have the ability to not go steal. You act like it's something out of the ordinary. Well it's not. You sir are a loser, and run in a loser crowd. Nuf said.

  207. They do it in Los Angeles, too by cookd · · Score: 1

    They've been doing this for a year or more in Los Angeles. In some of the high-crime areas, car theft for joy-ride purposes is incredibly high. They leave the car unlocked with the key on the dash. Some nights they get 10 separate "bites."

    I spent a lot of time in these areas, and when I saw this on one of those "COPS" type shows, I just laughed. I have often walked by a car in those neighborhoods one day, and the next day the same car in the same place was burnt to a crisp (Molotov cocktail? I honestly don't know.) There are some scary places in this world, many of them in Los Angeles and D.C., and I am very thankful I don't live there.

    --
    Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
  208. Billy goat, Billy goat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to reply to this troll!
    "off the streets for a few years..." Well DUH! How many cars do you think a professional thief would get in a few years. MAN you are so dumb. Splat! Sorry guys... I had to run over that troll in the road.

  209. You guys just ruined it! by reo_kingu · · Score: 1

    Now what about all the car thieves in the DC ghettos that read slashdot!? Now they all know! You just ruined the whole plan!

    Come on guys, THINK!

  210. With three caviats by Bob_Robertson · · Score: 2

    When the "remote kill switch" is mandated in all new cars sold, it will not longer be "worthwhile technology".

    The comment about "entrapment" wouldn't be so laughable if theives hadn't already tried, and I believe succeeded, in using the fact that the homeowner had a "Welcome" mat as a defense. "They invited me in!"

    Lastly, on the stacking of charges, just what is a "theft tool"? ViceGrips? Hammer? Screwdriver?

    Which begs the question, what are "hacking tools"? Keyboard? ADSL?

    Prosecutor: Your honor, the defendant is guilty of 27 counts of having been in posession of criminal tools: Books.

    --
    The Ludwig von Mises Institute. The reasoning individuals economics
  211. a bollix? by maxpublic · · Score: 1

    Can the LoJack system be defeated with a bollix or 'noise generator'?

    Max

    --
    My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
  212. ViaSat anyone? by hempguy · · Score: 1

    Hello America? Am I missing something here? We have had this system in Europe for the past three years and it is called ViaSat, it costs about €1150 with a monthly subscription fee of €35. It has crash sensors which alert police or paramedics when your car has crashed, but it also alerts police when the vehicle has been carjacked. When a carjack occurs you just push a button or call the alarm central afterwards.

  213. Sure hope you are wrong about the keys by QuantumG · · Score: 2

    If you fail to secure your property, it is no longer your property. Simple as that.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  214. Not in Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Germany, Mercedes and BMW are two major brands. They are in the top-ten stolen vehicles in Germany.

    It's common to have a Benz or Beamer lifted and on it's way to (insert your favorite eastern European country here) at warp speed. It's even better if you do the thief a favor and go to Poland to do some shopping.

    But the market's not just Eastern Europe. As I heard someone say once "I could have that car on a boat to Brazil in 6 hours".

  215. remote kill ? by paulbeasd · · Score: 1

    "captainClassLoader writes:
    ... car, loaded with wireless surveillance gear, a remote kill switch and GPS ... as 'bait' for car thieves.
    ... they've just made their first bust with the vehicle.
    "

    So, are the thieves killed or are they arrested ?

  216. My uncle has been using this technology .... by Sparky9292 · · Score: 1

    ....for the last few years in Orange County California with the Prosecuting Attorney's office.

    Honda donates this car the police department, and they use it in areas that have high reports of car theft. The only new thing in this article is the GPS system. In the past, if the car lost the police, it would simply die because the signal turns off the ignition if out of range.

    The interesting thing is that the police really try to almost entrap someone into stealing the car. They stage a fight in front of the car in the busy neighboorhood with high car theft, and one of the actors drop the keys next to the car on the ground. Then the cops wait till someone picks up the keys and steals the car. What usually happens is that the keys will find their way to professional car theives, and at that point they tail the car.

    There's a microphone in the car, and the police will listen to the bad guys discussing where they will sell the car and everything is recorded.

    At some point, the cops will remote control the car, and the radio, and tell them to pull over. The cops can lock the car doors and slow down the car gracefully, however in some cases, the bad guys will simply kick out the window and try to escape. But the cops only do this when the car is complete surrounded, so no one has escaped yet.

    He says that's the funniest part, cause the theives freak out at the voice on the radio, and try to change channels. Then they try pumping the gas pedal to keep the car going.

    After cops do this for a while, the rate at which white honda civics get stolen is almost zero, and then they have to get a different model.

  217. Sounds like one of my ideas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Add a digital camera and you've got the car I wanted for our neighborhood a few years ago. Somebody (99% sure it was neighborhood kids) was stealing cars, like one or two a month, in our subdivision.

    Have something that flashes some light on the dashboard when it kills the engine and taking a few pictures when they look down to see what's wrong.

    Maybe the cops can't bust him for stealing the car, but I sure as hell could post his picture all over the neighborhood so somebody could call the cops any time he walks out of his yard.

    Even thought it would be a good business opportunity to rent the car to a neighborhood association for a month or two until it gets stolen. Cheaper, and probably more reliable, than having security guards or boosted police patrols. Hell, the car would probably be the cheapest part since I don't care how well it runs, it just has to get there.

  218. Well... by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    A GPS jammer would only need to block, or confuse, the signals from getting into the car. It wouldn't need to be that powerfull.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Well... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
      Oh, jamming incoming rather than outgoing? I thought he meant jamming the signal or whatever that the car was sending out of it's location. Jamming GPS is just a silly idea.

      I would hope the car would be clever enough to killswitch itself if you started jamming it. (Not blocking the signals, actively jamming it. Blocking the signals could mean tunnel, but random crap on GPS frequencies only means one thing.)

      Probably not, though.

      And I have to suggest that a GPS jammer that covers the entire car (Hopefully, the thieves do not know where the GPS is, because they could just disable it.) would be findable if you managed to get within a few hundred feet or so. It's not something police are set up to currently do, but it's really not that hard.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  219. Re:Why no one steals MB cars... by Dread_ed · · Score: 1

    Like the BMW and others the MB has a microchip in the key that uses a rolling code system in addition to the physical key to start the car. Stored in the microchip are 2 billion binary codes of fixed length. When you place the key in the ignition the engine management system sends a request for the proper code from the microchip in the key. The microchip then serves up what it thinks is the right code. If the code is correct only then will the EMS send fuel to the engine and power to the starter. To further secure the system, the engine management system then transmits a new code to be used the next time the key is used. So, unless the would be car thief has your key he(or she) is completely out of luck if they are trying to steal your vehicle.

    The first year BMW introduced this system their car thefts went down by 83%. Pretty damned effective if you ask me.

    The great thing about LoJack is that when you call to report your car stolen 90% of recoveries are made within 20 minutes of the call. This means those rotten bastards that stole your car have a good chance of doing some time.

    --
    When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
  220. Re:Why no one steals MB cars... by Xerithane · · Score: 1

    There are 3 types of car theives:

    Those who steal whatever is handy and easily accessible, for joy riding, etc.

    Those who steal civics/camries and chop them

    Those who can steal anything, in a frighteningly short period of time.

    The 17% left over is probably from category #3, which are like the good crackers of the world - you just can't stop them. LoJack has 30 standard spots, and the people who can steal anything know those 30 spots and can check it before it even gets the first signal the car has been stolen. I knew a group of people in the bay area that did this kind of thing for a living. A very good living at that. Not the type of people to make friends with, but they were surprisingly nice. It was mind blowing to see some of the things they could do. The club and other things, they had time tests to see who could get them off faster - all under 10 seconds. Their average rate for break in to drive off: less than 30s. Now I'm sure some flags have been set off - but to clear my involvement, I haven't talked to these people in over 3 years :-)

    --
    Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.