Slashdot Mirror
Smartphones Driving Violent Crime Across US
alphadogg writes "Incidents of cellphone theft have been rising for several years and are fast becoming an epidemic. IDG News Service collected data on serious crimes in San Francisco from November to April and recorded 579 thefts of cellphones or tablets, accounting for 41 percent of all serious crime. In just over half the incidents, victims were punched, kicked or otherwise physically intimidated for their phones, and in a quarter of robberies, users were threatened with guns or knives. This isn't just happening in tech-loving San Francisco, either. The picture is similar across the United States. A big reason for such thefts, until recently, is that there had been little to stop someone using a stolen cellphone. Reacting to pressure from law enforcement and regulators, the U.S.'s largest cellphone carriers agreed early last year to establish a database of stolen cellphones."
We should enact more stringent controls for cellphone ownership. These cell nuts going around with their smartphones putting us all in danger. What do you need a 30 app mag for realistically. How am i supposed to be safe when any criminal/cell nut can just pull out their cellphone and thats it, bang, im dead.
And this IS what needs to happen, make no mistake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMEI
Institute a Federal system for killing smartphone users especially those caught using the smartphone while driving a car or pushing a bag-cart in Safeway. The Fed can give cash awards and Healthcare coverage points for the violent level of the killing.
Sorry, cell phone theft is not serious crime. Serious crime is genocide, murder, rape, molesting children, kidnapping, torture, etc.
Steeling the most shiny, but least valuable shit because they just don't understand. They lack knowledge. And if they had it they wouldn't need to resort to steeling it.
I'm not saying this is true in every case, but probably in greater then 70% of them.
Such a stupid situation that could be solved easily.
If the carriers had a service for the owner to remotely brick and unbrick the phone as well as transfer ownership (with the ability to brick) to another person this would be a non-issue.
It's a service that makes owning the phone more valuable to the end-user; yet, it's an externality to the phone companies. Rather than provide the best possible product and services, they do the barest minimum and reap unjustly high profits. They can do this because they operate out of the normal reach of capitalism - the state-sponsored monopoly. With a stranglehold on public property and the blessings of their government lawmakers, they can do pretty-much whatever they want. Capitalism has failed, therefore we need more government regulation.
That should greatly shorten this discussion. Did I miss any memes?
Would they add some sort of hard-coded serial number chip that phones home whenever the device is online? I strongly doubt that such a feature would remain uncracked for very long. At best, it might be something that an observant Craigslist buyer could use to distinguish a hacked device from an unhacked one. I think that's the first realistic goal to aim at. I was close to buying an iPod Touch on Craigslist, but backed out because the situation seemed shady, and I didn't know how to verify whether the device was stolen. I know it's tempting to hope that we can use the phone itself to catch thieves and prevent unauthorized transfers, but I don't think we should ever expect to succeed. Every decent phone thief can just power down a phone right after stealing it, and disable the security in a makeshift Faraday cage workshop. All this will do is to provide a perfect spy tool on legitimate phone owners.
There's no real excuse for punching someone or threatening them with violence when taking their smartphone. I find that I've rarely had to resort to threats of violence and rarer still to violence and always it meant that I screwed up somehow. It's just such a simple matter to swipe the thing when they stupidly leave it on the table or sticking out of their bag and they usually don't even notice it right away. If you're in a crowd and you're feeling a bit cocky you can sometimes just grab it out of their hand and then disappear into the crowd. I know, brazen right? But it just works.
Blame NIGGERS
Out of the pop. of SF whats the percentage? Really? How serious?
Most of these criminals aren't reselling these devices at pawn shops or on Craig's list either. GameStop has made it very easy to take any modern smartphone or tablet into their store fronts for cash. They then take these devices that they got on the cheap and send them out to rural communities and sell them for just a shade under retail. GameStop's uncaring jerk wad management strikes again.
When airplanes started to become more common, the number of crashes took off (no pun intended) simply because there were airplanes to crash.
The annual theft rate for automobiles was a perfect zero...until of course the automobile was invented.
It seems to me that accidents, crimes involving a particular technology, popular fashion item, etc. are naturally going to become a more significant portion of overall crime as they become popular. It reminds me of the sudden uptick in sneaker thefts when Air Jordans became popular.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
It's obvious that people feel that they don't need to be alert to their surroundings. That is madness. This crime wave is basically the result of people making themselves easy targets. I know our world may shriek "blaming the victim", but you really ought to be on guard, it's your responsibility, it's your stuff, it's your life.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
Was that driving while using a smartphone would soon be considered a violent crime across the U.S. Which, honestly, wouldn't be such a bad idea.
As I write whenever the topic of smartphone muggings come up:
In the 70's, people were held up for their watch and cash (remember cash?). Different decade, different stuff.
I usually just wait till you put it down at your table, or stick it in a back pocket or pocket of your backpack or purse. No way I'm carrying a weapon, I don't need the extra time if I get caught (and I've never been caught). If some dude grabs my arm I just punch him in the face or kick him in the nads, sometimes I'll even throw the phone down on the ground but that's only happened to me twice. Carrying guns to rip smartphones is for losers. (I guess smartphones need smart thieves, like me ;-)
Even a properly blacklisted iPhone 5 is worth well over $200 for parts or for export into an area where blacklisting does not apply. To slow this type of violent crime the police and courts need to treat it more seriously. It is easy to spot an iPhone 5 and you would be hard pressed to find quickly an easier way to steal $200. Few used car radios or even flatscreen TVs are worth that on the hot market.
People who violently steal a cellphone should be put in jail the FIRST TIME for at least a year maybe more. In Maryland that is certainly not the case now. If you do not use a gun in the crime you probably won't go to jail even when caught with good evidence. The police also loath to investigate where a stolen phone is from GPS tracking information. They should do this at least in some conditions such as a well documented theft.
I just love how people who constantly complain about how buggy and unreliable everything is--and justifiably so, by and large--imagine that there's no way to activate a booby trap by mischance or hostility.
What part of "A well regulated militia" do you not understand?
Shouldn't the article title be "BLACKS driving violent crime across U.S."???
Or did they miss that part of the police reports?
With the proper inexpensive tracking tools, police could track down cell phones that have been stolen. This would lead them to people who probably have committed more than one crime as well.
God spoke to me
problem solved
The ability to deny service to a blacklisted device already is part of the GSM standard and the central registry needed to get this working:
http://www.gsma.com/technicalprojects/fraud-security/imei-database
Now it is only a matter of getting the carriers to actually use this list to deny service. In most SGSN, all it takes is changing a config flag.
Yes, that hard!
Don't go around with your smartphone glued to your ear all day. Don't advertise that you have a smartphone. Don't use it in areas where you are alone or in high crime areas. Don't wear it in a holster on your belt, keep it hidden when not in use. If iJunk is what is stolen most, avoid it like the plague that it is! Get a better and less expensive Android phone.
Better yet, get a "dumb" phone that only makes calls and does texts. NO ONE "needs" a smartphone! You may want one, like having one, but it is not necessary.
As for tablets, avoid the vastly overpriced iCrap, and get something better and less expensive. Same as with a smartphone, be carefill where you use a tablet, and how you carry it. If they don't know you have it, they won't try to steal it.
Well, duh!
It is a device that costs $200 upwards, small and a lot of people are carrying. The amount of cash one holds is usually meager and credit/debit cards are worthless because they can be rendered useless with one phone-call (someone pointed out above that it would be a good idea to have that bricking option for phones too). Expensive watches would be a good alternative for theft, but youngsters don't wear them, since they have a smartphone to tell the time with. The smartphone is the new Rolex.
Your methods sound plausible, but if you're really so smart, why not just get a job where you get reliable money and cause less distress to innocent people and less danger to yourself? The theft itself is not the only risky part of the operation. How do you know that your buyers won't turn you in for a lighter sentence?
Your methods sound plausible, but if you're really so smart, why not just get a job where you get reliable money and cause less distress to innocent people and less danger to yourself? The theft itself is not the only risky part of the operation. How do you know that your buyers won't turn you in for a lighter sentence?
lighter sentence for having bought a stolen phone? huh? one of the reasons this type of crime is popular is that the cops don't care at all about phone thefts. they don't investigate them. If they did, they would with simple effort have caught everyone who stole more than 5 phones in their career and most first timers as well.
What took them so long for this database anyways? sheesh. It's not so much a serious crime as it is a crime. Smartphones nowadays can be used to manage your life with all the information you can set into it. Of course, for some, it's a great delivery system for Angry Birds and Temple Run... nevertheless, there should have been a DB a long time ago.
No, he has a point actually. I don't resell them direct (though I do jailbreak and reconfigure as necessary, hey, I'm posting here ain't I?) because I hate to deal with the public and sales sucks. I have a couple of middlemen I deal with that saves me the hassle and one of those guys could burn me a lot more than any random one time buyer. The idea certainly gives me pause but hey, the money's good now. OTOH, when I'm done with this degree and in all likelihood move away from this target rich urban environment when I get a decent job it'll be behind me and hopefully that won't happen.
The primary cause of most cell-phone (and other) thefts (violent or otherwise) is that in the US lots of people have to worry about where their next meal is coming from.
And some people simply cannot get a job to fix that. A combination of lack of skills or acuity, neutral traits that companies discriminate against, and general lack of work make it really difficult for some people to find a job. Almost nobody considers themselves a criminal - even criminals generally don't think of themselves as bad. But you have to eat. (Or fuel your drug addiction, another area which the US is handling spectacularly badly.)
Disclaimer: I'm saying this as a highly skilled programmer who somehow isn't able to find a job. Employers always say in interview feedback that I come across as skilled and intelligent, but there's always someone else or an excuse not to hire me. I'm a good and moral person, but if I had been in the same situation in the US I wouldn't have the government benefits that I have now. You can beg, but Americans aren't known for their generosity, at least not among US beggars. So a life crime it would be. After all, you've got to fill your stomach and necessity justifies everything. Think about it. The lady you just shot to get her wallet is part of a society that doesn't provide universal unemployment benefits. All Americans are partly guilty for most US muggings.
Apologies if I overlooked a Comment. With that said, I'm surprised nobody has brought up Cell thefts and Password Authentications. With Phone theft on the rise, It's logical that Authentication via Cell Phone isn't as secure as it's made out to me. Heck, Google is damn near forcing people to add a #, hows me? I don't even own a Phone so how the heck am I suppose to access GMail.
If they want me to add a Cell, then maybe they need to buy and keep up the payments on a Phone for me. I seriously dislike being forced to do things I feel are not in my best interest, both financially and mentally. Forcing, isn't that what Slavery was about?.
You missed several noteworthy memes. You missed the fact that companies work for profit, not the best interests of their customers. In this case, they sell insurance plans which generate profits for them and the 3rd parties that underwrite the contracts. If you don't have insurance for your phone when you are mugged, you will have to buy one at replacement price, i.e. full retail. If you determine that you don't really want to afford the retail replacement price, you're the hook for their 2 year contractual obligation, and if the customer is the a business the expense is a tax right-off.
Muggers are potentially adding > $2.8M to the national economy by requiring Smartphone users to buy additional equipment alone. Additionally, they are making it possible for people to buy equipment they might not otherwise afford and therefore become cell service customers. Of course there's no telling just how many stolen smart phones are sold back to others who were the victims of theft, so it's hard to say how many additional service contracts are initiated out of similar circumstance.
If you accept even partial validity for these back-o-the-napkin calculations, there's absolutely no incentive for a cynical industry executive to stand in the way of the additional profits by protecting the consumer.
If April was a typical month in San Francisco:
579 'serious' crimes in April / .41 = 1412 'cellphone muggings' (Mugging is violent. And in CA any theft > $400 is Grand Theft. I'd say that qualifies as serious.)
1412 * 12 = 16,946 serious crimes annually (I assume this represents reported crimes entered into some incomplete database, somewhere.)
(16,946) * .41 = 6,948 (Assuming April was an average month and a Smartphone retails at $400, then 7000 * 400 = $2,800,000)
Oh, and you completely missed the fact that neither the FCC nor the so-called Consumer Protection Agency discusses or interests themselves such discussion. They really just don't care.
Smartphones AREN'T driving violent crime. CRIMINALS are. Unfortunately, the voters of CALIFORNIA LOVE CRIMINALS.
Smartphones Driving Violent Crime Across US
Are they? Are they really? Or is it just quicker, easier, and more productive for a mugger to demand your phone instead of your wallet these days?
Or is there a whole generation of kids who would otherwise never have thought to turn to crime except that all those phones are soooo shiny...
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I thought Google was only driving cars.
www.gaiageek.com
...to stick with my (antique?) flip phone.
Besides, a big slab of glass and plastic looks much less cool than the flipper when you want to call "beam me up, Scotty."
(Okay, granted, even the latter isn't cool anymore, but...)
-- Alastair
If the carriers only had a way to track each individual device so they could be individually billed. And if these devices were only smart enough to track their current GPS position and get directions to go somewhere.
But the carriers are more interested in spying on us for the government and not in stopping theft of devices.
I mean how long would it take to correct this problem, by bricking the devices that were involved in a crime, as soon as the police report was filed & turned in. seriously even with out tracking the criminals down, simply bricking the device would destroy the resale value.
The modern world is complicated. You don't notice just how complicated it is because your brain is well-adapted to it. You are plenty intelligent enough to manage the level of complexity necessary for a prosperous middle-class life, so much so that you don't even realize just how much stuff you have to know and figure out in order to live well. You are beyond this level of complexity, and could probably handle even more.
However, there is a large segment of the population that are not so intelligent, and never will be. A combination of bad genetics and bad upbringing have limited their mental capacity. Long ago, when basically everyone was a farmer, this was not a problem...farming back then wasn't so complicated and pretty much anyone could handle it. But today it is a different story.
We have created, and are continuing to create, a world that makes flourishing (as opposed to barely surviving) too intellectually challenging for most people.
Those who get the short end of this stick do not think like you. They can't. They will never be able to make and run a successful business like you can, nor will they even be able to get a mental handle on what their legitimate options really are. They may attempt to work no-brain jobs, and the few of them that manage to keep such jobs will live a sub-poverty-level existence while surrounded by completely unobtainable symbols of wealth. Eventually, envy and frustration (or surprising desperate circumstances) will get the better of them and they will resort to the one thing they can figure out how to do: mugging you.
That is the reality, and posting career-counseling on blogs that are typically not even read by these people won't change that a bit.
Here is how this will play out, over the next several decades:
This problem will continue to get worse, resulting in more tax money spent on law enforcement, more of the maladjusts winding up in prisons (and there will be plenty, because we will build them). There, their needs will be completely met by your tax dollars, but they will be denied opportunities to breed, which is the only factor that will keep the problem from exploding into a bloody revolution.
Eventually, over the long haul, this self-selection will drive humanity as a whole to evolve more intelligence, which is a good thing. But the selection process is going to be expensive and is really going to suck for those who don't make the cut.
It is a widely-known fact that Grok did not invent the wheel. The inventor's name was "Wheel."
The definitive documentary on this subject can be found here.
I had this happen to me. Individual demanded my phone and threatened me with a knife if I didn't give it to him. He changed his mind when I drew my glock instead. He did have the presence of mind to run rather than try anything though.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
How about an exploding dye pack. See someone looking like Carrot Top, call the cops.
I come here for the love
They're the root of all EEEEVILLLLLLL, this article says soooo, sooo it must be trueee
Okay, got that off my chest.
Apple just needs to lower the price (so do all the other manufacturers, but let's face it, I hate Apple, always have, always will - because they're a bunch of hoodlums running amok, stealing everyone else's ideas and designs, slapping them together and claiming it's something new and unique).
The people who mug, rob, beat, hold up (with guns or knives) people carring smartphones are easily categorized. As being "diverse" -- that is non-White, non-Asian people, overwhelmingly men, overwhelmingly Black, with Latino men making up the rest.
That's it. Apple Fanbois, nerdy WoW players, White guys, Asian guys, almost completely absent from this. The word you are looking for is "Black."
Tokyo is filled with Smartphone using pedestrians, oblivious and so on. Because crime is low in non-diverse, very conformist Tokyo. "Diversity" (which equals lots of Blacks and Hispanics) means lots and lots and lots of crime. Ugly, physical crime aimed as much as domination and humiliation and beatings as much as quick cash. Its easier and safer (no witnesses, no assault charges) to steal stuff out of parked cars, unattended bags, etc. Even a low level thug knows that much. Nope, the street thugs get a rise out of beating and robbing White/Asian victims who work for a living and enjoy higher status but don't have the physical street power to kill someone.
A normal, sane society would lock up thugs, even if they are overwhelmingly Black, and secondarily Hispanic, regardless of the political costs to urban machines who rely on their relatives votes.
The problem is not the smartphones. It is not the oblivious users. It is the Black and Hispanic thuggery that makes American urban areas a mini-hell, for the most part (outside NYC, Portland, Seattle, SF, and Boston). I'll bet anyone that over 95% of the street robberies are done by Black and Hipsanics. Any takers?
Samsung Galaxy S4s will ship with Computrace theft-recovery software built-in -
http://security.cbronline.com/news/samsung-to-use-absolute-software-anti-theft-technology-in-galaxy-devices-040413
how about simply blacklisting the imei or serial number of the stolen phones??? duhhhh
Suppose I own a museum and seek to make money by charging admission.
If seeing the museum has a certain importance to people - people must see the museum once in their lives, for instance - then I maximize my profit by raising prices as high as the situation will bear. To the limit that people need to see the museum, I can extract the most money.
Suppose instead the government fixes the museum ticket price but says nothing about how many people see the museum per day. Since I cannot raise prices I must sell more tickets to maximize profit. I am encouraged to structure operations so that the most people see the museum - opening the museum 24 hours a day, for instance. Over time I am encouraged to allow ever more people access to the museum - structural changes to the building or parking lot, touring the museum to large cities, and so on.
In the first case, economics based on a limited resource resulted in higher prices and less overall service.
In the second case, economics based on access resulted in more people having access.
In certain cases the government should regulate a fixed resource to maximize the usage or maximize the benefits to society instead of maximizing the individual profit. In the current telecommunications situation, we are not maximizing the utility of the resource as compared to other countries such as Europe and Japan.
We're seeing this in the healthcare industry as well. Health care is bewilderingly complex, but consider a slice of the issue for comparison: getting a diagnosis from a doctor's visit. If the government regulated doctor visits to a fixed price, and specified that future visits for the same ailment were covered under the original fee, then doctors would make the most money when they get the diagnosis right on the first visit. The economics would favor access, satisfaction, and customer service instead of "try this and see" with followup visits.
Sadly, the political structure in this country is thoroughly corrupt, so suggesting regulation is pointless. There are windmills for jousting in abundance, and life's too short to spend it on quixotic quests.
If people are being harmed by way of a cellphone then I would like to start a petition to make it illegal to own a cellphone unless:
A) locked with a safety strap or similar device so it cannot be operated except by the intended owner
B) require retinal scanning or fingerprint recognition so it can only be operated by the owner.
C) SD capacity should be limited to 4 gigabytes. Anything larger than that is clearly a sign that something illegal is afoot. Nobody needs more than 4 gig to practice with a cellphone unless they are law enforcement.
D) Background checks should be required when purchasing a cellphone so the MEID can be recorded along with the person's name and address.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
The cell phone companies have the ability to disable service for any phone permanently. They already do this in most of Europe and has almost eliminated cell phone thefts. The American companies resist doing this common sense action because they can still make money from stolen phones.
-- Will program for bandwidth
All smart phones need to be sold with a fire arm to protect it from theft.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
The thief should just sign up a 2 year contract, then not pay for it.
Maybe just report your phone was stolen by Chechen rebels terrorists, DHS will find it in 5mins.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Those mad undesirables can go to battle, and become bullet catchers.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
A number of smartphone providers have been talking about adding fingerprint readers to phones to make the security stronger. Over 40% of serious crime involves smart devices and half of those crimes are violent in some way, many at knife-point. Does anyone else worry that it won't take long for muggers to work out that if they take the phone they need to take your index finger too?
If intelligent life is too complex to evolve on its own, who designed God?
Before the smartphone became the "in-thang" for the ghetto boyz, it was fat gold chains, brand-name sport shoes, and jackets that were the rage
People were robbed and sometimes killed over a pair of shoes back then
I still do not understand why they need to go for the "fist-in-yer-faze" routine when Al Sharpton could have asked Apple Inc to give them ghetto boyz free iPhones
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
We use GSM phones which have an IMEI number.
In the case your phone is stolen or missing, the Network operator then submits the phones IMEI to a national database, which essentially makes it unusable on any network nationwide.
In Europe, when a phone is reported stolen, it is deactivated. Their 'mobile' crime wave stopped when they did this. If such a scheme were adopted in the US, our 'crime wave' would stop too.
would smartphones be driving with violent crime in cars, so they can get to the other coast.
In NSA America social networks join you!
Nähhh, I'm pretty sure that you'll remain addicted and that it will sooner or later be your undoing.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Gee willikers! My name is disingenuous Josh, I never think about the basics of selling my wares. As far as I'm concerned, if people are stealing the items that I'm selling that's good, because it's free advertising! I never thought that when I first sold my phones that have obvious capability of being tracked that my customers would expect that degree of competence! Nah, instead of doing that I'm just going to sit on my butt and continue to force those unfortunate costumers the same rates even when they don't even have the phone. It's only fair that we're getting rewarded for providing terrible service.
Don't worry folks, the manufacturers have this in hand. By next year the accepted minimum screen size for a flagship phone will be 17", and cellphone thefts will be rendered impractical because by the time your poor thief has backed up his pick-up truck and got his accomplices to help him heave your phone into the back, the cops will have arrived...
This above is why concealed carry should be legal everywhere.
And yes, I am advocating shooting those who steal phones.