Slashdot Mirror


Death Wish Meets GPS: iPhone Theft Victims Confronting Perps

theodp (442580) writes "Thankfully, no one's gone full-Charles-Bronson yet, but the NY Times reports that victims of smartphone theft are using GPS to take the law into their own hands, paying visits to thieves' homes and demanding the return of their stolen phones. "The emergence of this kind of do-it-yourself justice," writes Ian Lovett, "has stirred worries among law enforcement officials that people are putting themselves in danger, taking disproportionate risks for the sake of an easily replaced item." And while hitting "Find My iPhone" can take you to a thief's doorstep, LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith urges resisting the impulse to do so. "It's just a phone," he said. "it's not worth losing your life over. Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.""

429 of 664 comments (clear)

  1. frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, police have all that stuff. On the other hand, they don't give a shit about your iphone being stolen, and will likely never investigate.

    1. Re:frosty piss by tmosley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. Hand them all the information of a silver platter and they do nothing.

      Police are scum. From personal experience as a victim of more than one instance of theft.

    2. Re:frosty piss by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I remember a time when I had a 2800$ laptop stolen a number of years ago id say around 2003. I knew who did it, I had proof of him bragging about it, and i brought this to the cops who promptly did jack shit about it. In the end I got my laptop back, and some...interest on top. the person who stole it from me? I cant be sure but I highly doubt he stole from anyone again

      long story short, cops these days dont give a flying fuck about helping us with crime, all they care about is keeping the money rolling in

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the other other hand...

      So you've got a thing that says your iPhone is at a particular location.

      What is that thing? Can its data be trusted? Does it truly show your iPhone, or somebody else's, or something else entirely? Is that actually the address, or is it the other address right next door? Be thankful if it's not an apartment building, 'cos then floors get involved - good luck getting a warrant for all of them. Oh, didn't mention warrants yet, did I? Yeah, that's right, even if your 'find my iphone' is just pointing to a location in the middle of nowhere and there's only one person there, cops can't just demand that they empty out all their pockets; I'm sure most people here would tell the cop to either please vacate themselves or take you in if they feel they have enough cause to do so, when the lead is that "somebody's computer says". And all that at the lowly sum of $ka-ching/hour.

      On the other other other hand, you file the report, you file the insurance claim, you walk into an Apple Store, get a new device (those scratches and dents you put into it the other one? gone! it's magic!), get most of your data back off the cloud, and be off and running. You 'win', the thief wins, the cops win, the insurance company wins, and Apple wins.

      Somebody amend wit more hands...

      Note that I'm not saying that cops couldn't do more, and shouldn't do more - hell, if it was as easy for them as it is for the general public to just walk up to someplace and go "you've got this person's iPhone, you best be handing it back now or there'll be trouble", I'd say they should follow up on every stolen phone, tablet, bicycle, etc. Unfortunately it's not - which also leads me to agreeing that it's fine if they warn people about potential consequences, but they can't exactly complain that people are taking matters into their own hands.

    4. Re:frosty piss by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, police have all that stuff. On the other hand, they don't give a shit about your iphone being stolen, and will likely never investigate.

      Exactly. This problem is caused by the complete lack of action by police if the problem isn't drug related. The department knows how they get funds and that's by busting drug offenders. They get to keep a percentage of the spoils as well as bonuses per arrest. Drug arrests are very very easy. Busting a guy that stole a phone could take hours. Can't have that.

    5. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      A friend's iPhone was stolen - Find My iPhone located it... we called the police and they promptly visited the home and had the phone returned to its rightful owner. This was in San Fernando Valley, so perhaps the police are friendlier to such victims than in your area?

    6. Re:frosty piss by Seng · · Score: 1

      No lie... My ex-father-in-law fell prey to one of those "you won the lottery" BS scams, and cashed out about $13k of credit cards before he wised up. Local cops & the FBI wouldn't do a damn thing. "We have things like murders and real crime to track down, so this isn't a high priority."

      A phone is going to get a report written, and forgotten about.

    7. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location.

      As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Most cities are far more interested in making sure the professional sport league has the latest and greatest stadium so they won't move to a city that would. So, blame the city councils that deny adequate funding to city services, not the people who have to decide between catching the perps from a drive-by shooting versus some guy who lost his cellphone.

    8. Re: frosty piss by macinnisrr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's a copout (no pun intended). If you give police the location of your phone, it's probably less than an hour's worth of work for two of them to track it down and get it back. As long as there are two cops on duty, it's simply lazy to not track it down. They don't seem to have any issues with setting speed traps and handing out seatbelt tickets.

    9. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "US police are woefully underfunded"

      Yea? Like schools are underfunded? Do you have any idea how much of my money the state confiscates every year? Not to mention all the traffic fines and confiscated crime booty (cash, cars, guns.. who knows what all else).

      These people have money coming out of their ears, and no doubt could do their job with a lot less.

      Not to mention the police union that secures high pay and fabulous retirement packages. How about all the cops earning time and a half by sitting their fat donut eating asses on the side of a road wherever you see construction in many states, again thank the uniuons.

      They are underfunded? Bull fucking shit asshole. I am underfunded, bacause the statist steals entirely too much of MY MONEY.

      Idiot.

    10. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Tell them there are copyrighted mp3's on the phone. Voila! The SWAT team will be sent in to get your phone.

    11. Re:frosty piss by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      we have a for-profit private prison INDUSTRY in the US.

      anyone who thinks this is a good idea, raise your hand.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    12. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My wife had her purse stolen (with iPhone) in Santa Barbara, California last summer. When we filed the police report (for insurance purposes) we mentioned to the officer her iPhone had the "find my iPhone" app on it. He asked us to check and see if it was still enabled. Sure enough it was and the thief didn't turn off or wipe the iPhone. We gave him the information reported by the phone which said it was only located a few blocks away and the officer said he would follow up on it. The next day he called us and said he recovered the iPhone and my wife's purse.

      I don't know what the police had to do behind the scenes legally or investigatory, but they do actually follow up on these things!

    13. Re:frosty piss by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Oh, didn't mention warrants yet, did I? Yeah, that's right, even if your 'find my iphone' is just pointing to a location in the middle of nowhere and there's only one person there, cops can't just demand that they empty out all their pockets;

      Really? That's news to me.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    14. Re:frosty piss by BTWR · · Score: 1

      A *few* details of what you did? Please???? :)

    15. Re:frosty piss by pete6677 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the United States, Police (and schools for that matter) have huge budgets, but too little of that money makes it to the front lines. Administrators soak most of it up, and any further funding increases go straight to the top. Only the bare minimum flows to the bottom where it's needed most. This is the problem with the "more money for police" and "more money for education" crowd.

    16. Re:frosty piss by pete6677 · · Score: 2

      In the case of your ex-father in law, the police did the right thing. The money would have been untraceable, and they weren't about to waste time on crime that essentially only victimizes the stupid.

    17. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]. Thanks for the union bashing post, but that has no basic in anything real. I live in a non union state, and the same things happen. The guy on the beat is always funding starved to the point where they will not arrest a bum because they know that if a hobo shits in the cruiser, the officers have three hours of desk duty while the car is decontaminated.

      The county north of the city of fail I live in keeps spare cruisers ready to go. That way, there isn't an excuse to not arrest people who need it.

    18. Re:frosty piss by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 4, Funny

      This is why I always keep pirated media and a bittorrent client that I can remotely activate on my phone. If it ever gets stolen, I won't bother the local police, I'll just activate the client and call the FBI.

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    19. Re:frosty piss by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Interesting

      well i went over there and demanded my laptop back and i may or may not have had about 10 people with me at the time. He promptly gave me my laptop back, and he "thanked" me by also giving me his xbox and playstation, his big screen tv and car stereosystem.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    20. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      They can ask, but they can't demand;

      3. You never have to consent to a search of yourself, your belongings, your car or your house. If you do consent to a search, it can affect your rights later in court. If the police say they have a search warrant, ask to see it. If they donâ(TM)t, say âoeI do not consent to this search.â
      Police cannot arrest you simply for refusing to consent to a search. This may not stop the search from happening, but it will protect your rights if you have to go to court.

      - source: your link (well, link from that link).

    21. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the other other other hand, you file the report, you file the insurance claim, you walk into an Apple Store, get a new device, get most of your data back off the cloud, and be off and running.

      In what twisted universe is that "winning"? I get how the thief wins, how apple wins, how the cops win, I even get how the insurance companies win (higher premiums, yet another price to be paid by the victim), I just don't see the winning of the victim.

      Are you deluded?

    22. Re:frosty piss by msauve · · Score: 1

      You 'win', the thief wins, the cops win, the insurance company wins, and Apple wins.

      Might as well break some windows while you're at it.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    23. Re:frosty piss by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      As you quoted:

      This may not stop the search from happening, but it will protect your rights if you have to go to court.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    24. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While I totally appreciate the 'justice' of that arrangement, in a court of law what you did was a far greater offense than the simple theft he committed. Be careful.

    25. Re:frosty piss by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The insurance company loses the cost of an iPhone, and bumps up your premium in response. The theif is hopefully screwed by having the phone locked and banned from all networks.

      It's worth reporting to the cops just to screw up their crime stats. Might make them care a tiny little bit.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    26. Re:frosty piss by aurizon · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location.

      As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Most cities are far more interested in making sure the professional sport league has the latest and greatest stadium so they won't move to a city that would. So, blame the city councils that deny adequate funding to city services, not the people who have to decide between catching the perps from a drive-by shooting versus some guy who lost his cellphone.

      Police forces have become infected by unionism combined with lawyerism. The unionism has ramped uo wages by 5-6% (with inflation included at 3%) for the past 40 years. Now in Toronto most police collect over $100,000 wages and benefits, some as much as $150,000.
      The lawyerism has also increased the documentary load on officers as well as the evidentiary load to the point that the number of cases handled per officer has declined at about 3-4% per year.
      Too few police, paid too much, too little time = "Case Triage" - a strong need to cull the caseload by tossing cases. They also must try to look as if they are working hard, so they go after a lof ow "low hanging fruit", parking tickets, stop signs, red lights and the like that are low risk compared to facing armed crack dealers - that might hurt...

    27. Re:frosty piss by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      If the police have a warrant to search you, they do not need your consent. At that point, they CAN demand.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    28. Re:frosty piss by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you file the insurance claim

      No you don't, because your insurance deductible is higher than the cost of the phone. That $500 loss is real and uncompensated.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    29. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      Except that the phone is not broken, it's redistributed.

      Yes, I know, there's still whatever productivity that the original owner of the phone would have had that is lost, or maybe sales of $1.99 games, etc.

      I'm not saying I agree with the stance - but that is how many people view it. Same way I'm not a fan of throw-away electronics, but I can hardly blame people for throwing them out when it's cheaper to do so and get a new gadget than it is to (try to) repair the old one.

    30. Re:frosty piss by xevioso · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, part of the point of the justice system is to force a person to pay a penalty so that they will think twice about doing it again. By "stealing" from the other guy, it's quite possible that person may have had an epiphany, such that he might have been less likely to do it in the future. The high recidivism rates among perps who commit petty larceny means that the current system isn't working well.

    31. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      As I quoted:

      will protect your rights if you have to go to court

      Which is where the "they can't just demand" bit comes in.

    32. Re:frosty piss by joelgrimes · · Score: 1

      Tell them it's got all your child porn on it and they'll sure as hell go find it.

    33. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      You mean exactly like it says in the quote?

      If the police say they have a search warrant, ask to see it. If they don't, say "I do not consent to this search."

    34. Re:frosty piss by xevioso · · Score: 2

      Right, and in fact this scenario happens all the time. There's a ton of people here bashing cops, but in the real world, iPhones do get returned if the cops are able to locate the perp. As far as statiistics go, we don't really know what percentages of iPhone thefts reports go unsolved, and it probably varies widely in certain areas.

    35. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      That's one heck of a crappy insurance for electronics items (unless you're counting it as part of the home contents insurance (or similar constructs) and thinking "if people be thievin', they likely be thievin' the lot")

    36. Re:frosty piss by xevioso · · Score: 1

      It's hilarious to see all the cop bashing posts here, and they all seem to ignore stories like yours. Stories like your are in an alternate universe for them, where all or most cops are bad, and even when they do help out its a fluke or you were hallucinating. I'm glad I don't live in their universe.

    37. Re:frosty piss by Wootery · · Score: 1

      What is that thing? Can its data be trusted? Does it truly show your iPhone, or somebody else's, or something else entirely? Is that actually the address, or is it the other address right next door? Be thankful if it's not an apartment building, 'cos then floors get involved - good luck getting a warrant for all of them.

      Fortunately though, it's a phone. Odds are it's not going to be kept at home permanently. I'm sure with the uniqueness of a person's movements, it shouldn't be a problem to figure out the only car that took this route is the one with the iPhone in it.

      Probable cause? I expect so, but I'm no lawyer.

    38. Re:frosty piss by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      to be clear, there was no violence or force. you could argue intimidation, but he handed it over, i didnt steal it from him If the cops wont get me restitution when deserved, I will

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    39. Re:frosty piss by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And all that at the lowly sum of $ka-ching/hour.

      I don't really buy the whole cost of enforcement argument.

      Enforcing the law almost always costs more than the actual crimes do when looked at in isolation. However, enforcing the law is still important, because it can prevent crime.

      If everybody knows that you can rob somebody in broad daylight and nobody will do anything about it, then society will rapidly devolve into crime and vigilantism. On the other hand, if everybody knew that even stealing a piece of candy from a store would result in a near-certainty of arrest, then you'd see almost all crime go away. People commit crimes because they perceive the reward as being greater than the risk.

      So, by spending $8k to recover a $500 phone and make the life of the guy who stole it miserable can go a long way to preventing phone theft. Do that thoroughly enough, and suddenly you don't find yourself having to spend all that much money on enforcement because people stop breaking the law.

      Of course, for phones there is a simpler and cheaper technological solution and that is IMEI blacklisting. However, the argument still stands for other forms of petty crime. If I were in charge and somebody reported their radio stolen from their car, I'd dust the car for prints, check camera footage, and when I track down the teenager who stole the phone they'd be showing up at a labor camp for 6 hours a day for two years, while attending classes to learn something productive for another 4 hours a day, and then they'd be sent home with a monitoring anklet and an MRE in payment for their labor. Sure, it would cost more than just letting them play loose on the street, but taxpayers would save money on repairs, and maybe society would benefit from more skilled laborers and fewer leaches.

    40. Re:frosty piss by ewieling · · Score: 1

      No, I don't know how much you pay in federal income tax. Why don't you tell us what percentage you pay in federal income taxes?

      Would you prefer we go back to the federal income tax rates we had in the 1950's - 1970's?

      --
      I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
    41. Re:frosty piss by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Or, y'know, a guy smoking a joint or someone exceeding the speed limit in a safe manner.

    42. Re:frosty piss by aliquis · · Score: 1

      You miss what this really mean / he's suggesting without knowing so:

      We have backup, guns, radio, jackets â" all that stuff civilians don't have.

      So in other words: Bring backup, guns, radio and jackets. Don't go unprotected!

    43. Re:frosty piss by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      long story short, cops a decade ago didn't give a flying fuck about helping us with crime, all they cared about is keeping the money rolling in

      FTFY

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    44. Re:frosty piss by aliquis · · Score: 1

      When up against the RIAA and MPAA:

      - I'm sorry but my phone had been stolen and was filled with junk when I took it back.

    45. Re:frosty piss by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you have any idea where most of that money goes? Military, keeping old people alive (which, assuming you don't have the balls to start killing ppl at age 60 is a good thing) and corporate welfare.

      Why don't you stop worrying about the state taking all your money and start asking why your wages have been in decline for 30 ever-lovin' years. Why don't you ask why it is your worse off than your parents? Why don't you ask why income inequality is at levels not seen since the 1920s?

      Why? Because it's super easy to look at your withholding and see that. Heck, you can also lump your health insurance and any Uniform allowance into that too (most Americans do) and blame the gov't. What you can't see ( unless you go looking for it ) is where all the wealth in this country is really going. You can't see who's really robbing you blind...

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    46. Re:frosty piss by D'Sphitz · · Score: 1

      Do you really expect them to drop everything to find your precious phone when they have dogs to shoot and minorities to frisk?

    47. Re:frosty piss by narcc · · Score: 2

      Because they're too lazy to retrieve your phone from a known thief? Because law-abiding citizens are terrified when they're around? How about the never-ending stream of stories detailing horrific violence, cover-ups, and other abuse?

      We should be outraged that any public money goes to fund that street-gang. How are you okay with paying those thugs 100k a year?

    48. Re:frosty piss by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      long story short, starting over a decade ago, cops didn't give a flying fuck about helping us with crime, all they cared about is keeping the money rolling in FTFY.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    49. Re: frosty piss by mysidia · · Score: 1

      They don't seem to have any issues with setting speed traps and handing out seatbelt tickets.

      Because there is more manpower hired to do road patrol than to do theft recovery.

      Also, giving out tickets generates more revenue for the locality, and allocation of officer manpower is all about the $$$.

    50. Re:frosty piss by PPH · · Score: 1

      the thief wins,

      And this is why the cops need to act. If the thief wins, maybe next time, he'll kill someone for their phone (happened recently in Seattle).

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    51. Re:frosty piss by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Except criminals of all stripes escalate over time.

      By catching a simple phone thief today, you might prevent a violent assault to steal a phone three months from now. Or even keep the phone thief from being shot and some person spending 25k and two years of their shattered lives defending themselves after killing the thief.

      Better to nip it in the bud.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    52. Re:frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So when you report the guy, say your phone's camera took a picture and that it "showed what appeared to be drug paraphernalia". Guarantee there'll be a SWAT team kicking in his door and shooting his dog 5 minutes later.

    53. Re: frosty piss by macinnisrr · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. Which is a travesty in itself.

    54. Re:frosty piss by mysidia · · Score: 1

      The insurance company loses the cost of an iPhone, and bumps up your premium in response.

      What we need is mandatory coverage "of additional risk cost" for future insurance, to be considered part of the loss, by the state.

      So that as long as the insurance was in force at the time of theft, the insurance company has to also pay for any increase in the premiums required to maintain ongoing insurance attributable to increased loss risk estimation due to the theft. (Insurance against insurance rate jacking)

    55. Re:frosty piss by sjames · · Score: 1

      Underfunded? They have paramilitary gear. Some depts have armored transports. They could wage war against some small countries and win. Perhaps if they would spend wisely and not send the swat team around for minor drug busts, they could afford to do a little protecting and serving.

      They need to accept that if they can't or won't go get a stolen cellphone when the owner has GPS coordinates for it, the owner WILL go get it. It's only a matter of time until there is a serious incident. Once that happens, don't expect people to just write off their phones from then on, expect them to go armed. Not "Death Wish", more like St. Valentine's Day.

      So I suggest they go get the phones. They'll probably solve a lot of other crimes in the process. At least some of the phones will have been stolen by career criminals.

    56. Re: frosty piss by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Muggings. The GPS on the phone is a GPS to a violent criminal. We are not talking about shoplifting here. We are talking about one person threatinging or doing bodily harm to another. Other than that you are right.

      Because there is more manpower hired to do road patrol than to do arrests of violent criminals who have been identified and are holding GPS evidence of their crime.

      We need to stop refering to it as the theft of a phone, and describe it with the more accurate turm of violent robbery. As armed robbery when it warrants.

    57. Re:frosty piss by impos · · Score: 1

      Nice retirement plans... I got shit. excellent medical care... I got shit. Fuck your unions.

      Somebody jealous much?

    58. Re: frosty piss by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      How did you get that location? Did you break any laws to get it? How does the cop know? Is there a chain of custody for that information? Are they indemnified if they act on your info, which turns out to be wrong because your iPhone's GPS went on the fritz?

      You have to accept that we dont live in a simple world. It's "simple" to go down and get your phone, its a lot more complicated to get a judge to agree that the info you have is worth A) his time and B) a warrant.

    59. Re:frosty piss by sjames · · Score: 2

      They dial the number which the phone company verifies is the complainant's number, listen for the ring. There's the exact location and probable cause in one neat package.

      They'll probably solve a lot more crimes at the same time. If you want to find thieves, go to where all the stolen goods are.

    60. Re:frosty piss by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Glad to hear it! It might be your area vs metropolitan areas.

      The police in my town are actually scared of criminals and won't go into bad areas with only one cruiser and the second anything actually happens one or more cruisers sprint over as well. I drive by an area a few miles from my house and you see what looks like a routine ticket stop and there are three cruisers with lights on.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    61. Re: frosty piss by GNious · · Score: 1

      The issue is that the person having your stolen iPhone might be in possession of other stolen or illicit goods - that would result in more paperwork, possibly arrests, investigation ... Aw, is just too much hassle!

    62. Re:frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Knowing some police offers personally, I can say with some certainty that they're not all "scum". That said, they work within a budget and have to prioritize. Someone losing a phone isn't exactly a "sev one" issue.

    63. Re: frosty piss by keytohwy · · Score: 1

      Ten cops show up. Like the CHIEF of police in Berkeley did... http://www.berkeleyside.com/20...

    64. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Tickets are a big source of their funding. Speeding related traffic stops more of a fund-raising activity than law enforcement.

    65. Re:frosty piss by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Which division? West Valley, Devonshire, Foothill, or Van Nuys?

      Just so I'll know if it ever happens to me.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    66. Re: frosty piss by macinnisrr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Absolutely. Which is offensive. No wonder people "hate cops". They're always there to enforce nickel and dime laws, but get your bicycle stolen and kiss it goodbye. The only thing they'll do in 90% of property theft cases is punch the serial number (if you wrote it down) of the stolen item into a database that pawn shops run through whenever an item is pawned. Every criminal knows this, so most of the time the items are never found. No investigation, no police work period. This goes for items as large and expensive as vehicles too. Even cars aren't found unless a plate gets run for an unrelated issue (speeding, abandonment, etc.). And yet, if a cop catches me pissing in the street, that's a worthwhile time waste for the entire justice system.

    67. Re:frosty piss by newcastlejon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He promptly gave me my laptop back, and he "thanked" me by also giving me someone else's xbox and playstation, big screen tv and car stereosystem.

      FTFY

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    68. Re:frosty piss by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      possible, his family comes from money, he stole because he could not because he needed to

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    69. Re: frosty piss by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My wife had her purse stolen last year by a student. We sat down in her principal's office, located it, and the police officer recognized the address immediately. 20 minutes later. The perp was telling the office where the rest of the contents of the purse had been dumped. In this case, the alternative was to go back to jail, which the kids did anyways. Parole violation.

      But the office let slip that the department already knew how to locate iPhones even without the owner's knowledge. Perhaps we could hold the trial on chain of evidence right after the drug case where the police tracked everyone by their phones. Though in hindsight the police do make a habit of having it both ways.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    70. Re: frosty piss by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Every industry is either profit making or short lived.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    71. Re:frosty piss by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      As I quoted:

      will protect your rights if you have to go to court

      Which is where the "they can't just demand" bit comes in.

      And that worked so well too:

      In 2002, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 97,296 times.
      In 2003, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 160,851 times.
      In 2004, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 313,523 times.
      In 2005, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 398,191 times.
      In 2006, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 506,491 times.
      In 2007, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 472,096 times.
      In 2008, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 540,302 times.
      In 2009, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 581,168 times.
      In 2010, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 601,285 times.
      In 2011, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 685,724 times.
      In 2012, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 532,911 times
      In 2013, New Yorkers were stopped by the police 191,558 times.

      Please.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    72. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      You can be "stopped by" all the time. ( Not that I agree that they should be allowed to do that, but such is the law - get the law changed. ) Being stopped by doesn't mean being searched. And searched doesn't necessarily mean searched without consent. etc.

    73. Re: frosty piss by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      well then there's the whole due process thing and actually doing their jobs.. vs arresting someone based on a single claim of "HEY THAT GUY HE STOLE MY PHONE". just because you say your stole phone is at x location, doesn't mean it's really your phone to begin with.

    74. Re:frosty piss by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      It's not wrong to retrieve stolen property.

    75. Re: frosty piss by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      you mean preying on passing motorists is not a public safety issue???

    76. Re:frosty piss by narcc · · Score: 1

      While I totally appreciate the 'justice' of that arrangement, in a court of law what you did was a far greater offense than the simple theft he committed. Be careful.

      I wouldn't worry about it. It's pretty obvious that the cops won't care enough to do anything about it.

      Which is fine by me. Lazy cops hanging out at the station or the donut shop aren't shooting innocent people and dogs and aren't harassing law-abiding citizens.

    77. Re:frosty piss by triso · · Score: 1

      Up here in Canada they frisk the dogs and shoot the minorities.

    78. Re: frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      False dichotomy: prisons could be run directly by the government, then they wouldn't have to make a profit. The guards would still be making money off of more prisoners, so you might have guards union acting similar to the current prison lobby (actually the guards would probably be pretty strongly in favor of locking of non-violent offenders instead of violent ones...), but such a group would hopefully have less power than one that is directly paid per prisoner.

    79. Re:frosty piss by Bengie · · Score: 2

      iPhones are worth as much as the minimum property value damage during a vehicular accident that requires a police officer. Someone love taps my car, and I have to wait around for a police officer, otherwise I could also get in trouble, but someone steals a phone and police don't care? Phone theft should be treated at least as important as a hit-and-run with a vehicle that involves $700+ worth of damage.

    80. Re:frosty piss by itwasgreektome · · Score: 2

      Ignorant. "Police are scum." Way to mark them with one stroke of the brush. When you track your iphone to a "location" you're not handing the information to them on a silver platter. When it "pinpoints" your iphone it gives an area good to within several houses. If your iphone tracks to 123 ABC Street, your iphone might just be at 117 ABC Street, or behind that house at 123 DEF street. You're giving the iphone location isn't as good as giving the perp on a platter. Now, let me set your straight- Police love these cases in that IF they can find your iphone, they solve a case, and often solve several other cases as well. But it's not that easy- it's only easy for the police if you track your iphone to a park and there's only one person in the park. Do you think the public is really going to tolerate a police officer stopping 10 people in a park? They can't do that and get away with it for fear of public outcry- it's not good enough to go in court! Now, picture one of your common iphone thieves- he lives in a tightly packed apartment complex- your "phone location" could refer to several different apartments on that floor, or any of the ten floors! Iphone doesn't give which floor it's on. And there's many people in each apartment. So know you're talking about searching tens of rooms with hundreds of people. The police can't expend that kind of energy on property loss, it's not a money issue- it's a time issue- this is because there are a ton of crimes occurring every couple minutes and they have to respond to the most pressing ones. Now, when your phone is stolen from you by a person- that's a HOT call, lots of units will respond quick, because of a ROBBERY in progress. Usually, though, it's too late and the person is gone. Days later when you track your phone it's now a property crime response, not a violent crime response (as your original robbery was). You're ignorant to paint them with a "scum" brush. You don't know what you're talking about. They're busy. They would love to help. They know how much it sucks to have a several hundred dollar phone stolen. But often their hands are tied. It's the bad guy whose the scum.

    81. Re:frosty piss by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      You can be "stopped by" all the time. ( Not that I agree that they should be allowed to do that, but such is the law - get the law changed. ) Being stopped by doesn't mean being searched. And searched doesn't necessarily mean searched without consent. etc.

      You obviously don't know what you're talking about, friend.

      I never said it was legal or constitutional. Police abuse is rampant, and people's rights are being violated. You can blather on about refusing a search if you want, but if you find yourself getting stopped/frisked, good luck with that.

      Check this out as well.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    82. Re: frosty piss by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Police in the US often have very, very local funding sources: Asset seizures and fines go into the police budget. That creates a strong incentive to prosecute crimes that are cheap to catch and lucrative in income - with speeding being at the very top of that. Low- and mid-level drugs crime is also popular because it often leads to vehicle and property seizures.

    83. Re:frosty piss by NoKaOi · · Score: 2

      I think iPhones are treated like bicycles -- something that there just are not the resources for, even if the purported thief is nailed down to a location...As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded.

      Even if that's true, is very short sighted. If you report your phone stolen, then they have to devote resources to filling out that report. If they start busting phone thieves it's extra work upfront, but there will be fewer future reports to fill out both because you bust the thief who is going to keep stealing, and because you discourage others. Oh yeah, and then there's the fact that it's their job to enforce the law.

      When I had my phone stolen, I did all the legwork (it was quite a bit more involved than Find My Phone, but again I did it all for them) so that they could have busted the thief not only for theft but also for credit card fraud, all they had to do was fill out Verizon's law enforcement request to get his identity and home address. It would have taken less time than giving me excuses, but then they would have had to go arrest the thief and I guess that's too much paperwork for them. Additionally, all signs pointed to a professional, experienced thief, thus showing that the Maui Police Department* doesn't really care about the law or serving and protecting citizens. If you can't enforce a law then there's no point in even having that law. I think most people would agree that theft shouldn't be made legal.

      *There are cops in the department who are good people, but the department as a whole doesn't seem to have the culture in place to straighten out or get rid of the bad apples, which is ultimately the higher-ups' responsibility, which is why I point to the department as the problem.

    84. Re:frosty piss by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      It's amusing how this went from "they can't demand" in terms of a legal viewpoint to 'sure they can, they just rough you up a little if you decline and that's if you're lucky'.

      You're right, then. They can demand it in that sense.

      I, a common citizen, can also demand that you give me the keys to your car, as long as I have leverage over you. I never said that it would be legal for me to do so, but hey.. what's a little rampant abuse between friends? :)

    85. Re: frosty piss by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Dichotomy? Just an observation. Either way I'm still paying for it. Staff is still being paid. Administrators are still defending their domains. Indistinguishable. Bad behavior, abuse, incompetence are not the exclusive domain of private industry. The government may is may not do it better, but that was never the point.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    86. Re:frosty piss by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      Two things:

      Police are not paid from Federal taxes. State and local taxes pay for the police.

      Back in the 50's to 70's, the middle class, at least, tended to pay MORE in federal taxes than now. And the wealthy had more than enough tax loopholes so that they tended to pay LESS than they do now.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    87. Re: frosty piss by jopsen · · Score: 1

      actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Murders, attempted murders and copyright violators; don't forget the last one...

      Joke a side, it's a shame, and not only the case for US police officers. Even well-founded police departments in Europe won't go for iPhones or computers. Mostly, because they have already been sold, so you won't catch the thief, just the idiot who bought a cheap iPhone, laptop or whatever.

      Otherwise,it would be a great way to catch people early in their criminal career, where juvenile detention might actually change them. I'm not suggesting that this would work in the US where prisons are all about punishment, but there places where the term "correctional facility" isn't fully compromised.

    88. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      It's not especially offensive to me. Get rid of traffic fines and my taxes go up, and there may or may not be more cops devoted to investigating stolen phones. If it helps, think of traffic cops as wholly separate from "crime-fighting cops". Think of them more as tax collectors for the city or county. How would eliminating a bunch of city tax collectors (and the tax revenue they collect) result in more cops devoted to investigating phone thieves?

    89. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the danger posed by speeders is overblown, yes. That said, the current status quo is an equilibrium reached in the presence of traffic cops. Remove them entirely, i.e. don't enforce speed limits at all, and the new equilibrium might be meaningfully less safe than the current one.

    90. Re: frosty piss by Damarkus13 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Are most phones taken by force? I know at least a dozen people who have had phones stolen, but not one was taken forcefully.

      Not to mention, they will need a warrant force entry and seize the phone. Combined with the fact that they will probably only be able charge the perp with possession stolen property, it the whole exercise a rather expensive proposition.

    91. Re:frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Individual incidents aren't a big deal. The kind of stuff you'd see if there was no enforcement at all would be. You add a little enforcement and people respond by reducing the severity of their infractions. If you're already devoted some manpower to policing traffic stuff and one of your guys sees someone do something that, while minor, is still an infraction, you might as well have him cite it. Not like it costs the department (or taxpayer) any more. If you don't like people being cited for not fully stopping at a stop sign, parking past the limit or skateboarding then your primary problem is with the laws that make these things citable offenses and not the cops per se, who are only enforcing the laws as they exist on the books.

    92. Re: frosty piss by Belial6 · · Score: 2

      According to the reports we are reading here, yes, many are taken by force. They likely don't need a warrent due to the GPS transmitting giving them probably cause. Even if they do need a warrant, that isn't a big deal.

    93. Re: frosty piss by Githaron · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think all funds generated through traffic tickets should go to an untouchable fund. Once a year citizens of the jurisdiction have the options of submitting a charity in which they would like the funds to go. Once the submissions are counted, the fund is split amoung the submitted charities based on the percentage split of the submissions, That way government jurisdictions can't use traffic violations as a means of funding.

    94. Re: frosty piss by luckymutt · · Score: 1

      I would imagine they would not need a warrant, since the rightful owner is giving permission.

    95. Re:frosty piss by MakerDusk · · Score: 1

      I can say that is not true in my city: banks are not engineered, lights are random, and there was no thought put into traffic flow. Welcome to everywhere other than a large, fairly new city.

    96. Re: frosty piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Pfff. If it were up to me, I would track down the phone, surveil the place for a while to make sure of the target, then go get my property.

      If they used or threatened force to get it, return the favor. Leave no witnesses. Violence is the only things thugs respect. You cannot reason with them.

      Steal it from me and the aftermath will probably make the news. Don't want non-LE types doing such things ? Then do your fucking job or don't complain when I do it for you.

    97. Re:frosty piss by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

      I had an epiphany while reading your post. The solution is to make it legal to steal phones. Everybody wins!

      --
      Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    98. Re: frosty piss by Marful · · Score: 1

      But what makes the state more money?

      Finding your stolen phone and arresting the perp, or writing 6 tickets in the span of an hour?

      Modern policing has NOTHING to do with protecting society. It is all about revenue generation and enforcing the status quo so the populace doesn't get out of line.

    99. Re:frosty piss by puto · · Score: 1

      I work for one of the largest cell carriers in the US as a tech manager. So when I am not managing my troops, I am taking escalated calls from angry customers who just have to speak to a manager. 99.9 percent of my stolen "you need to find my iphone calls" are people who have left it in a bar, in a cafe, in a cab, in starbucks, etc, so they consider it stolen... And when I ask if they had the find my iphone app, they say "arent you supposed to do that".

      --
      The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
    100. Re:frosty piss by giorgist · · Score: 1

      Chill guys, the Police can do whatever you ask. All you have to do is pay more taxes. If you want them to retrieve your stolen ipod worth $30 at a cost of $1000 per retrieval, just pay an extra 10-20% of your income a year. It is that simple. In fact if you pay more taxes you don't need door locks either. The police can police your house. You don't need insurance for your car either, the government can step in and pay for accidents as a service to the people. This is not unreasonable, as a people we have to decide where the government stops and we take responsibility, what is the most efficient way to achieve a goal.

    101. Re:frosty piss by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Straight, empty interstate on a sunny day. Though there are many other examples that could be trotted out.

    102. Re: frosty piss by michelcolman · · Score: 1

      I remember a study not long ago that compared the smoothness of traffic in different simulated scenarios. The worst was when nobody followed the rules, that resulted in total choas and mayhem. A much better scenario was when everybody followed the rules. But somewhat suprisingly, the best results were achieved when most people followed the rules but a significant fraction did not! The rule breakers helped fill in gaps and actually caused traffic to flow more smoothly.

    103. Re: frosty piss by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      If you give police the location of your phone, it's probably less than an hour's worth of work for two of them to track it down and get it back.

      See Plumpergeddon for an example. He not only had the exact location, he had ongoing daily photographs of the thief. Hundreds of them. He had screen shots of him apparently perpetrating fraud. Cops never cared at all.

    104. Re: frosty piss by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      Okay, but there is some correlation between "person who mugs people for their smartphones" and "drug user with confiscatable stuff". I found a guy who stole my bike once, got a campus cop to get an actual cop to go with me to take it back (to her credit, the campus cop was super nice about it), real cop knocked at the guy's door, guy opens door while smoking a joint, I see an arrest being made, and I'm told that to get my bike back I'd have to buy it back at auction, at which I flipped out both of those people and walked home.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    105. Re: frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 2

      So I can tell the police that my phone is in your house, and that gives them the right to break in at 6am and point guns at you?

      I mean, it's my phone and I did give them permission.

      I'd rather they had to get a search warrant.

    106. Re:frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 1

      But still the public protests that just because they are in a blind rage and attacking people that they should not be stunned.

      If police use of stun guns was always proportionate and appropriate there would be few complaints. There are too many youtube videos of police using their stun guns against people that aren't acting violently.

      Declining to perform an act requested from a police officer rarely justifies use of force.

    107. Re: frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 2

      A publicly owned and run prison service would be continually seeking to reduce cost, which would mean pressure to reduce crime, reduce recidivism and find more effective means of addressing criminal behaviour than locking somebody up for decades.

      A privately owned prison wants more people in prison so lobbies for more laws, stronger punishments and doesn't have any incentive to prevent recidivism.

      So you're paying for two very different things. One is justice, the other is the intentional destruction of society to boost corporate profits.

    108. Re:frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile another 300 people are taken in by the same scam, and some criminal gang are giggling at the amount they're raking in.

      Organised crime was never about single big payoffs, and just what the fuck makes the value of a crime relevant anyway?

      The money would have been traceable through most if not all of its life. Tracking $13k leads you to the other $8m that's been stolen too.

    109. Re: frosty piss by _Spirit · · Score: 1

      Is it? Look at how many people are killed in traffic vs. how many people are murdered. In the US both numbers are ridiculously high compared to some other developed countries but the first number is a multitude higher just about everywhere.

      Speed is one of the major contributors to road death, there are plenty of statistics to support that. So what you are saying is that it's somehow more acceptable to kill someone by speeding than it is kill them by other means?

      --

      beauty is only a light switch away

    110. Re: frosty piss by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      That's probably easily determined. If you have a tracker app that's showing your phone at X location, it's probably yours. Otherwise, if it's someone else's, how did you get access to their phone to install the tracker?

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    111. Re: frosty piss by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Few government agencies actively work to reduce their roles.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    112. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      I think your stats are wrong. From wiki, here's a comparison of traffic fatality rates by country. Sort on the column "per 1 billion vehicle-km". The U.S. rate is 8.5. Among wealthy countries, South Korea, Belgium, New Zealand and Austria have higher rates. Canada is lower, but very close. The lowest rate is Sweden at 3.2, which is around 40% the U.S. rate. Now here is a comparison of countries by murder rate. No wealthy country has a higher rate than the U.S., in which murders are committed at a rate of 4.8 per 100k population. The lowest rate among U.S. peers is Japan at 0.3.

    113. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Oh, and by the way, I very much suspect that the high rate of traffic fatalities in the U.S. is due to a higher incidence of drunk driving.

    114. Re:frosty piss by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      of course not, he knew he fucked up

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    115. Re:frosty piss by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Some depts have armored transports.

      You know, they're getting these from the government for nothing, right? Retired military gear that we're paying money to store gets sent out to police and firefighters for the cost of transport and they pay for training and paint.

      Perhaps if they would spend wisely and not send the swat team around for minor drug busts, they could afford to do a little protecting and serving.

      Why does it cost more to send SWAT when nothing happens? They're not using up consumables, fuel and burritos aside. That's just bullshit. Pay them more when they get shot at. Or shot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    116. Re:frosty piss by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Traffic light timing, traffic flow, banks on turns are all calculated based upon the presumption that people will be going roughly the speed limit.

      HA! HA! HA!

      No. I mean, you hope. But not really. The speed limits are based on standards until someone gets run over or dies in a fireball, then they diddle them.

      Then again, let's pretend like the laws of physics don't make collisions more dangerous at speed and braking time doesn't increase either.

      Yeah, that's what the standards are based on. Divided or not, how many lanes, how much separation, blah blah blah. Then they raise the limits if people clamor, or lower them if people die.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    117. Re: frosty piss by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      A publicly owned and run prison service would be continually seeking to reduce cost

      Even when government run, it is desirable that prisons do "business". I.e. make the prisoners do some work, and earn their food , shelter and even incarceration. Reasons :

      1. Keeps motivation for capital punishment down. So that public doesn't scream why should this murderer be kept alive on my money?

      2. In doing nothing at all, prisoners will be unable to cope up with post-release life. Prison - management is not enough work - cooking, cleaning, prison stuff repair doesn't add up to enough work to keep all prisoners busy.

      3. It's simply good money-management. There are people who can't be freed, need to be made to work, and need to be fed. Rather than giving them money to dig pits and fill them back, make them work which can be sold for money.

      So there is not just the reduce cost dynamic going on here, but also increase income. Also the fact that government itself doing business is a taboo in the US.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    118. Re: frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 1

      My issue isn't with reducing costs, or with finding prisoners productive activities. My issue is treating a prison as a revenue generating business.

      That rewards the wrong behaviours by the people running the prison.

    119. Re:frosty piss by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Morally, no. Legally, yeah it's still wrong. There are pretty strict laws against vigilantism. At its simplest, you've got the principal of "innocence until proven guilty" to contend with- you THINK he did it, in fact you think you KNOW he did it, but no court has been persuaded of that fact. You're pretty damned sure that the laptop you took is yours (pretty bloody damned sure- they're easily identifiable items)- but unless you've persuaded a court that it's yours, you're still in the wrong.

      It sucks, but it's life.

    120. Re: frosty piss by afidel · · Score: 1

      Get rid of traffic fines and my taxes go up

      Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: 'I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization"

      Having armed thugs hitting up random citizens for funding is the antithesis of civilization.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    121. Re:frosty piss by MondoGordo · · Score: 1

      How exactly does the Insurance company "win"?

    122. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      Rates are per miles driven.

    123. Re:frosty piss by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Now in Toronto most police collect over $100,000 wages and benefits, some as much as $150,000.

      That's simply a lie. Only one third of police in Toronto made over 100k. How you get "most" from "one third", I'm not sure, but there does appear to be some kind of error in your analysis. Moreover, most of those who make over 100k do so by working extra jobs; ie. providing security for corporations and events, on their off time.

    124. Re: frosty piss by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Yes. My point is that revenue generation is necessary.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    125. Re: frosty piss by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I disagree. It's possible to find productive work for prisoners without creating a revenue generating business.

      Even where revenue is generated, it should be that: revenue. Not profit.

      Where prisoners' work is generating revenues, I want them recompensed for it. Otherwise it's slave labour, and again incentivises negative behaviours from those that gain from that labour.

      I guess I'm just very aware that there are people out there willing to benefit from the misery of others. Some of them are criminals and go to prison for that. Others want to prey on them. Neither is acceptable.

    126. Re: frosty piss by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      also the liabilities rule in the US are much more lenient than say.. Germany. (it's also much easier to get a license -- and more mandatory)

    127. Re:frosty piss by aurizon · · Score: 1

      Not a lie, the benefits bring the average over the $100K. That paid duty is as police officers, at police officer paid duty wage rates = far higher than security types make.
      The time will come when the various unions are brought back to earth in their inflated wages. 40-50 years of getting 2-3% real wage increases AND getting an inflation indexed increase has made all city/state/federal unions get far ahead of the ordinary worker, and they are parasitic on the workers. Governments make nothing = parasitic.
      And yet the common worker pays this.

      The UAW/CAW and other manufacturing unions have killed off most manufacturing jobs. These unions feel that state/city/federal unions = immune to greed.
      We are getting to the point where the unions are killing us all.

      So we all unionize, and we all get the same wages - right?

      Unions do not want that, as happened in Australia. Unions want to live off the back of others

    128. Re: frosty piss by gregorthebigmac · · Score: 1

      It doesn't work like that. If I steal your phone, and bring it back to MY house, the cops can't search it just because YOUR phone is in it. They need to get a warrant to search my house, because under the 4th amendment, I have the right to refuse to allow my house to be searched unless they have probable cause that illegal activity is/has taken place in my house. So yes, a warrant is still necessary, even with GPS data. It just makes the warrant easier to obtain (hypothetically) if you show them GPS data.

    129. Re: frosty piss by buddyglass · · Score: 1

      I.e. Way more teenage drivers in the U.S., who are significantly more likely to be involved in fatal accidents.

    130. Re: frosty piss by aaronb1138 · · Score: 1

      I've advocated numerous times to dump all the money into a statewide fund and Robin Hood it out to counties / cities based on population or some similar criteria. It would devastate the small town speed traps and reduce enforcement to a more reasonable uniformity based around safety rather than revenue generation. This solution is based on the particular size and scale of Texas though, so I could see this backfiring and operating in the opposite manner in population / geographically small states where police forces band together to step up unreasonable levels of enforcement.

    131. Re:frosty piss by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      What the law literally says doesn't really matter in a case like this. Even if the police would ask the prosecutor to bring charges against you (which they wouldn't) there's no jury on the earth dumb enough to to take the letter of the law more seriously than their own sense of justice. And even if there were, there are few criminals bold enough to report a crime like this to the police, since they'd likely face jail time as a result of it.

    132. Re: frosty piss by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The problem with comparing the murder rate of the US to other "wealthy countries" is that most of the murders in the US are committed by non-wealthy people, against other non-wealthy people. To be blunt, most murders are done by criminals in the ghetto, against other criminals, usually involved in the drug trade. A very significant portion of the US population lives this way, and it's very comparable to third-world conditions in places like El Salvador, where 1 in 9 men will be murdered in his lifetime. Those other wealthy countries don't have large underclasses of violent people living in third-world conditions, and instead they're far smaller (population-wise) and more homogenous.

    133. Re: frosty piss by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Agreed, except for finding productive work for prisoners without generating revenue. It should also help the prisoners who know nothing except crime - I see it as a crude "job experience".

      Prisoners do get their "savings" from working in prison in my country, and that's a good idea too. Not sure if it happens in the US.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    134. Re:frosty piss by sjames · · Score: 1

      Those helos SWAT likes to use cost $50/minute to keep in the air (that was in the '90s. I'm sure it's more now). The armored vehicles use a LOT of fuel. They hire more SWAT with more expensive equipment and training to maintain availability because they keep them busy on calls that a detective and a couple patrolmen used to handle.

    135. Re: frosty piss by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Except the system is in an infinite recursion of: Can't afford more cops => Issue more traffic tickets to pay for more cops => Need more cops to catch more traffic violations.

    136. Re: frosty piss by aestrivex · · Score: 1

      Probably for the sake of efficiency. Let's say that magically we all agreed that traffic cops are basically tax collectors who in maybe 20% of cases levy fines and/or arrests towards jerks who are endangering others by driving unsafely (or arguably, people who are unreasonably obstructing traffic and/or otherwise being jerks despite driving safely) and in 80% of cases are collecting taxes from a random sample of essentially law-abiding drivers (these percentages are highly inexact). If we relegated the latter duty to the city in the form of increased taxation, in theory we might realize these two benefits:

      • Progressive taxation rather than taxation by random sampling
      • Better use of police time for persons trained as police, and city officials' time for people trained as tax collectors

      Now, naturally this is unrealistic, because it would require raising taxes, which it seems like no politician ever is willing to do in spite of the country being bankrupt. But in theory we might realize these efficiencies.

    137. Re: frosty piss by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      covering costs, maybe.

      turning a profit? NEVER. no fucking way. its not what anyone would have wanted when this country was being 'designed'.

      adding profit to law enforcement (of ANY kind!) is bad. look at our forfeiture laws. LE's make serious money stealing from citizens. they have legal theft now, in case you didn't hear, and sending someone to prison with the goal of making that 'prison company' profit makes me sick to my stomach. its not what the US was ever about and its a perversion if there ever was one.

      this is why we don't see any real diff between criminals and law enforcement, these days. both are thugs, but one class of them wear badges. beyond that, I see little real difference anymore. they are both gangs and are both totally untrustworthy and out of control.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    138. Re:frosty piss by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      It's a problem of scale. The same people who respond to babies beaten to death by their parents are just naturally going to be less concerned about any of the two dozen iPhones stolen today.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    139. Re:frosty piss by fafalone · · Score: 1

      They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded.

      You mean only drug offenses right? Because enforcing that is what brings money back into the department through asset forfeiture and Byrne grants (and undeclared cash into officers pockets). Other stuff costs money, and is hard. In the world of arrest quotas, low-level drug offenses are easy stat boosters. Murder/attempted isn't typically investigated unless it involves a rich (and usually white) victim.

    140. Re: frosty piss by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Yes, covering costs needs revenue generation. Which the GP poster doesn't like.

      Maybe? How else can you cover costs?

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    141. Re: frosty piss by fafalone · · Score: 1

      For speeding the 'status quo' is too far in the enforcement direction. Almost no one is advocating stopping any and all speed enforcement, but the way it's set up now has nothing to do with safety. It's all about generating revenue. Cops hide around blind corners to catch people going 5mph over on an nearly empty interstate. This 'equilibrium' is not acceptable.

    142. Re:frosty piss by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I recently had a bad tenant do $15,000 worth of damage and theft. And I found some of my property at their inlaws' place down the road. (Heavy stuff, and stacked up neat, so it didn't just blow there by accident.) Los Angeles County sheriff dept. wouldn't even take a report -- told me if I didn't actually WITNESS the theft, it wasn't theft, even tho the evidence was trashed all over the yard for anyone to see. Told me if the perps faked a receipt for my stuff that I found at the inlaws' place, that was proof the perps owned it. Told me I could try stealing my stuff back (in so many words!!) but there was nothing they could do.

      Yeah, REAL useful. I can see now why some folks turn to vigilantism to recover their property.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    143. Re: frosty piss by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Having been mugged and/or robbed in various cities in various states, I can tell you that the usual situation is that the law is less interested in the "violent" part than in the "theft" part. The cops, while sympathetic to my being assaulted, always tell me that, since I had managed to defend myself and nothing was actually stolen, that was just misdemeanor assault, and would be plea bargained to nothing if they ever caught the guy. Whereas a nonviolent robbery (violence was threatened, of course, but the guy didn't actually jump me from behind) where I was content to give the guy my $20 cash, was a felony and would be at least investigated, although probably again they wouldn't catch him. As the victim, still seems backassward to me.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    144. Re:frosty piss by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Now that you mention it, I'm thinkin' that old-fashioned 'local law enforcement', aka the mob, might be cheaper... and possibly more fair.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    145. Re: frosty piss by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Excellent Point. The cops cOuld easily end up spending most of their time busting down doors of couples who had bad breakups.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    146. Re:frosty piss by Reziac · · Score: 1

      As I mention above, $15,000 worth of damage and theft by a bad tenant wasn't worth even taking a report, but when I told 'em the bad tenant was growing pot in the back yard (cuz by now it was clear the only route I had left was revenge) they said they'd get narcotics right on it.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    147. Re: frosty piss by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      As someone whose bicycle supply, among other items, was largely supplied by police auctions, I always wondered how it was that none of all that confiscated stuff being auctioned off could be returned to the proper owner. If the owner didn't report the item stolen, how was it confiscated? And if it was, don't they bother calling up to mention that they found your bike/stereo/computer/motorcycle/jewelry etc?

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    148. Re:frosty piss by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Of course if you just get punched like in that "knockout" game, they don't even bother sending a car. If you really insist, they'll tell you they are, but they won't.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    149. Re:frosty piss by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Not a lie, the benefits bring the average over the $100K.

      Another lie - the one third figure is with benefits included. The base-pay of a constable starts at 63k and tops out at around 90k.

      http://www.torontopolice.on.ca...

      http://news.nationalpost.com/2...

    150. Re:frosty piss by aurizon · · Score: 1

      “As at January 1, 2014, the upper end of the salary range for Police Constables increased to $98,783 (including retention pay), as a result of the 2011 to 2014 collective agreement increases,” it states. Premium pay is the result of court attendance, overtime, and call backs for various reasons. The force says it has reduced premium pay of the last few years, but some is unavoidable. Collective agreements are fixed by the board, police spokesman Mark Pugash noted.

      and then add to that, on top of the base

              Family Health Care Plan,
              Family Dental Plan,
              Vision/Hearing Care,
              Pay Direct Pharmaceutical Card,
              Life Insurance,
              Paid Vacation,
              On-site fitness facilities,
              Access to the Employee Credit Union,
              Pension Plan (OMERS),
              Education Reimbursement (up to 50% tuition reimbursement for job related courses),
              Employee and Family Assistance Program,
              Parental/Maternity Leave.

    151. Re:frosty piss by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Yes, police have all that stuff. On the other hand, they don't give a shit about your iphone being stolen, and will likely never investigate.

      The crime $ is not trivial, but the number of thefts per day is more than a half dozen officers can handle. I would spray the thief with permanent red die, the way banks protected $$$
      And have witnesses along

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    152. Re:frosty piss by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. ...

      Man do they have you snowed. They have plenty of money. Read the budget sometime. Probably get you really, really pissed. Doesn't matter which one, city/county/state budgets.

    153. Re:frosty piss by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      The money was almost certainly sent via Western Union, gift cards, or some other non-electronic-trail means. Good luck tracing that.

    154. Re: frosty piss by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      We already have a solution to this. Speed cameras, both fixed and mobile (run by private contractors) keep motorists on their toes. No cops required. And Police here already have mobile radar and number plate recognition built-into their cars which can alert a cop to a traffic offender without them needing to dedicate any time or resources to it. They continue doing regular cop work and being visible in the community and only need to be distracted with traffic duty only when the need arises.

    155. Re: frosty piss by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      That's what the govt already does. You pay taxes and fines, and they decide on who needs it the most. You in turn get to decide who they are by voting. Introducing some privately run "charity" into the equation is just opening it up to confusion and corruption.

    156. Re:frosty piss by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I always see people complaining about tax but have never seen anyone suggest what the appropriate amount of tax should be? How much money do you think is the correct amount of tax to pay?

    157. Re:frosty piss by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Why don't you stop worrying about the state taking all your money and start asking why your wages have been in decline for 30 ever-lovin' years. Why don't you ask why it is your worse off than your parents? Why don't you ask why income inequality is at levels not seen since the 1920s?

      Are we worse off than our parents? I mean sure house prices might have been relatively cheaper, and unskilled work more available, but given the choice of living in the 50's-70's or now I choose now every time. I also have some bad news for you. Stop comparing now to the "golden years" of the 50's-70's. That period was an anomaly in history caused by the two largest wars ever fought and the largest financial crisis ever. Three of the most calamitous events in human history all with 3 decades of each other, it's no wonder that immediately after there was a period of unnatural equilibrium that is now passing. Get used to the real good old days of rich people owning everything and poor people getting dick, because that is the real natural state of things, and we are simply in the process of heading back there.

    158. Re: frosty piss by Githaron · · Score: 1

      The points was to split the entity that is issuing tickets from the entity that is benefitting from them. Right now, they are, more or less, one and the same.

    159. Re: frosty piss by Githaron · · Score: 1

      Also, since the entity that is issuing the tickets also has no say on whom that funds are allocated to, there is a much smaller chance of corruption. Unfortunately, where money is involved. There is always a chance of corruption. I suppose the government could lie on how much ticket revenue they bring in.

    160. Re:frosty piss by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      That's great - you're clearly capable of comprehending the sources I link to. Now as soon as you actually come up with some statistics to back our original assertion, we can start to take you seriously.

    161. Re:frosty piss by aurizon · · Score: 1

      That's great - you're clearly capable of comprehending the sources I link to. Now as soon as you actually come up with some statistics to back our original assertion, we can start to take you seriously.

      It looks as if you are part of the problem, not part of the solution - anyone agree?

    162. Re:frosty piss by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Well, overuse of helis I get, that's definitely endemic. Presumably they'll solve this problem by weaponizing drones ;)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    163. Re: frosty piss by Kijori · · Score: 1

      I think you've missed the point - he's not talking about prison labour, he's talking about generating revenue by locking up more prisoners because they get paid per-prisoner by the state.

    164. Re: frosty piss by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's different where you live, but in the handful of countries/states I've lived in (none of which are in the US), police tickets go into consolidated revenue, ie The Treasury, which is a completely different agency managed an run by completely different people from the Enforcement agencies.

    165. Re: frosty piss by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      And I'm talking about the necessity of generating revenue using prison labour.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    166. Re:frosty piss by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      > What is that thing? Can its data be trusted?

      It does not have to be. With the phone number and data provided by the victim, there is enough _evidence_ to get a warrant and for any remotely competent police IT department to retrieve such data. There just isn't deemed to be enough return on the investment of the time getting the warrant, recovering the phone, and establishing ownership for an arrest and conviction. Since US jails are overwhelmed with low income drug offenders, the chances of modest personal crime like this leading to actual jail time are quite low.

      It is, indeed, a problem.

    167. Re:frosty piss by stenvar · · Score: 1

      As a devil's advocate, US police are woefully underfunded

      US police receive far more money than police forces elsewhere.

      They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded.

      The "items" needed to process the other stuff are simply people. And when each US police officer receives several times (literally) the salary of an equivalent police officer abroad, then we end up with much less bang for the buck. But in my experience, these kinds of thefts and crimes are actually more frequent in Europe and no more effectively investigated than in the US. Tourist locations in Europe are a hotbed for theft and other crimes, but even smaller cities are affected.

      Besides, this kind of policing is a local matter; in many communities, iPhone thefts simply aren't a problem. In places like San Francisco and New York City, they are a result of the social problems and conflicts those cities are creating for themselves. Here, I can leave my bike outside unlocked or lose my phone and I'll get it back.

    168. Re: frosty piss by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Both murder rates and traffic fatalities are influenced a great deal more by factors completely beyond our control than by policing and laws. So, the kinds of comparisons you are making are meaningless.

    169. Re: frosty piss by stenvar · · Score: 1

      That's the way it works in many places. It sounds good, but ends up creating a different set of corrupt institutions. I think a general tax refund might be a better choice. Also, relying more on community service and less on fines would not only reduce this problem, it's also tends to be a more uniform punishment (given that fines are meaningless to wealthy people).

  2. Police often wont take care of it... by Kenja · · Score: 1

    because as he said, it's just a phone. Not that confronting the perpetrator is a great idea, but don't expect the full CSI treatment when you report the theft.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by bitt3n · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not that confronting the perpetrator is a great idea, but don't expect the full CSI treatment when you report the theft.

      Actually, confronting the perp is the best way to get the full CSI treatment. If you're lucky, they might even pull up your dental records to conclusively ID your remains.

    2. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      a phone is valued at over 600 for most smartphones these days. its not "just a phone" Thats grand larceny in a number of places, a felony

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      its also not likely you'll ever see that creedence tape again, either.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Harder, not impossible.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    5. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by RicktheBrick · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I am sure that every thief would risk life in prison or even death over a phone. Than there is my case. I was walking in a park and happen to notice a phone on the trail. It was in three parts(phone, battery, and cover). It was wet so I took it home and used a hair dryer to dry in out. After I put it back to together, it worked. It did not have any identification on it so I called the numbers in the contact list. One of the contacts did call the owner who did call me. I answered on their phone and after finding out where they lived I drove over there and gave them back their phone. I did not get any reward of any kind so I did all of this out of the kindness of my heart. In the vast majority of the cases, I would think they would end peacefully but is it worth the risk even if it is one out of a thousand cases that end up bad?

    6. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      If you're lucky, they might even pull up your dental records to conclusively ID your remains.

      Wishful thinking i'm afraid.

      The remains will never be found in the tomb beneath the perp's basement.

    7. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      No, it was a robbery. It was someone stopping you and either committing a violent act against you, or threatening to believably enough that you would hand over $500 worth of your personal property.

    8. Re:Police often wont take care of it... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      its also not likely you'll ever see that creedence tape again, either.

      Do not fuck a stranger in the ass.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  3. What the police have by Webs+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have."

    They forgot to list apathy.

    --

    "Even for Slashdot, that was a very obscure reference!" - Anonymous Coward

    1. Re:What the police have by governorx · · Score: 1

      My favourite part: "Just a phone.." That can cost nearly a thousand bucks to replace. This should be worth the 5-10 minutes of time for the police to salvage with known GPS coordinates. The problem here is that law abiding citizens get victimized twice: First by the thief. Then by law enforcement that doesn't take the steps protect the property of those same citizens.

    2. Re:What the police have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just tell them there's a dog there they can shoot. That'll get them moving.

    3. Re:What the police have by spd_rcr · · Score: 2

      More than the cost of the phone, is the personal identity smart-phones carry. That could include credit card info, id's, passwords and logins, personal photos, and the list goes on...

      Property thefts just don't matter to police, unless you're Apple and lose a prototype at the bar, in which case they'll send a SWAT team to storm the perp's home.

      --
      - tensions in our lives that are attacking our minds, unite themselves together to make our consciousness blind - op'ivy
    4. Re:What the police have by smash · · Score: 1

      So password protect your phone and if you are using "find my iphone" you have the ability to do remote wipe. If you haven't backed the info up on a regular basis you are an idiot who doesn't give a fuck about their data, because it could just as easily have been lost if you were to damage the phone accidentally.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    5. Re:What the police have by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 5, Informative

      A few years ago, I had a car stolen right out of my gated/locked driveway in NJ (cue the Jersey jokes). It wasn't an expensive car, but still worth about US$10k. When I reported it stolen and informed the police where they could ask for surveillance video that would likely show the crime and culprit, they treated me like a nuisance and never investigated the crime. I know they never investigated because the owner of the surveillance cam was never even contacted, even when I followed up with the cops a couple of times. The insurance company just paid out immediately and the adjuster said the odds of ever seeing the car again when stolen from northern NJ was almost zero.

      So I can only chuckle when I'm told that the cops will show even a cursory interest in helping someone recover a phone, even if the EXACT location is known.

    6. Re:What the police have by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Add to it the fact that someone stealing don't do it for the first time. The ignorance by the police to take care of criminals on that level just makes them grow bolder or more desperate for higher rewards.

      Take someone hard for first case of petty theft and that person might realize that it was a very bad decision, but 10 muggings without being confronted is just bad and caused by cop ignorance because it will just be a cumbersome report to write which takes longer to perform than the jail time of the mugger.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    7. Re:What the police have by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      They forgot to list apathy.

      They probably just couldn't be bothered.

    8. Re:What the police have by tragedy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I remember when my car was stolen right out of a mall parking lot quite a while back now. I met the police in the mall security office. They literally laughed in my face about the whole thing while taking the report. They also obviously weren't bothered with checking surveillance video since they were in the security office at the time and didn't even ask mall security about it.
      My car was later found abandoned on the side of the road with the battery dead (it turned out I had a failing alternator, which may have saved me the whole car). After it was found, the officer following up was very interested in questioning _me_ about why there was a scale in the trunk (it was a broken one from the bakery I was working in at the time).

    9. Re:What the police have by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I have have guns, and Backup and a radio and my "Jacket" is rated higher than most PD's are.

      You're not the recipient of that particular statement.

      In case you went to recover an iphone dressed up with a jacket, and guns blazing...

      The police would be interested in that alright, and as unfair as it would seem... you would be their target.

      The perp could also use their own gun and possibly claim self-defense, after seeing a citizen approaching their property fully armed with jackets.

    10. Re:What the police have by fche · · Score: 1

      Being approached by someone "fully armed with jackets" is not reason to claim self-defence -- lest you suppose perps would lawfully start blasting when police come by.

    11. Re:What the police have by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Being approached by someone "fully armed with jackets" is not reason to claim self-defence

      Someone seen setting foot on your property with jackets and gun in hand, is plenty of reason to shoot immediately, before they get their shot in, as the intention is obvious.

      The only reason for anyone to carry a gun up to my front door is to threaten my life.

      Now if they are seen carrying clear markings showing that they are police, and their weapons are holstered, and those markings are believable, then it's not self-defense, because it is routine for the police to be dressed in that manner.

      But if I don't believe they are actually police, and they act in a manner that shows they intend to threaten my life, then shooting them will be self-defense.

      Same as if you are at my door, with a jacket on and weapons brandished.

    12. Re:What the police have by fche · · Score: 1

      (Earlier, you didn't say anything about brandishing weapons.)

    13. Re:What the police have by ruir · · Score: 1

      They equate scale possession with being a drug dealer...

    14. Re:What the police have by Existential+Wombat · · Score: 1

      They forgot to list apathy.

      They could’t be bothered.

    15. Re:What the police have by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Friend had his truck stolen out of his driveway (value around $12,000). Cops weren't interested. He found his truck. Cops told him unless the truck was involved in committing another crime, there was nothing they could do. They weren't amused when he told them that Grand Theft Auto was supposed to BE a crime...

      This was Los Angeles County, where upthread somewhere I complain of my own similar experience.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  4. Then do something about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The reason people are taking this action is because law enforcement deprioritizes this kind of theft. Even thought you know exactly where the criminal is, law enforcement simply won't do anything because it's such a petty crime. Besides, they are busy busting actual criminals like drug addicts and speeders. However, the victims don't see it as a petty crime and since law enforcement won't do their jobs they do the job themselves. LAPD Cmdr. Smith, you say "Let police officers take care of it." I say, "Fine then, do your job since it's half done for you."

  5. You mean "let the police blow it off" by ChrisKnight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A friend of mine was recently mugged, on the doorstep of her home. While the police were in her house asking questions she pulled up the current location of her phone on her laptop. The police did not care. Did. Not. Care. For an hour her phone drifted around a park that was a known after-hours teenager hangout, while the officer asked inane questions. She fumed for weeks. Getting mugged was bad enough, but feeling like the police didn't really care, that all they wanted to do was get the report filled out, made her feel truly helpless.

    If the police are unwilling to react to these thefts because they are low priority for them, they have to expect that citizens will have to take it into their own hands. People don't like someone else telling them their problems are trivial. People don't like feeling helpless. They need to believe that there is always something they can do.

    --
    -- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
    1. Re:You mean "let the police blow it off" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      In a 'normal' country you first would politely point out to the police men that you will sue them, and if they they don't react on that you actually do sue them. My dictionary tells me that is called 'failure to act', not sure if it is the right term.
      Police officers don't like to have a 'failure to act' accusion in their personal records/files. (Well, I have personally very good experiences with the police, the few times I needed them they reacted promptly and extremly professional)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re: You mean "let the police blow it off" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's always the option of her telling them to leave so she can handle this herself. I was in a situation years ago where a family friend disappeared for about two weeks. She was on really bad drugs and the police were powerless to do much since she was 22.

      I went with a few friends to get her and was pulled over for going the wrong way on a one way. I didn't know the area. After the third squad car arrived, I asked that they hurry up with their paperwork so I could take care of the situation. I explained what I was about to do. The tone of the situation changed dramatically. I didn't realize it at the time, but once the police become aware of a possible obedience situation they can be liable for not acting. I followed the squad cars to the apartment where we were met with four other police cars who had the building covered in spotlights. On a Monday morning at 2AM, I was able to get my friend out of the complex and back home so they could go to treatment. I guess I was lucky they didn't detain me, but when the expectation is there to be docile, the police won't act.

    3. Re:You mean "let the police blow it off" by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Under the current public duty doctrine (duty to all, duty to no-one); failure to act is not an actionable offense

      Courts typically find that no duty has been established and deny recovery for “injuries caused by the failure of police personnel to respond to requests for assistance, the failure to investigate properly, or the failure to investigate at all, where the police had not induced reliance on a promise, express or implied, that they would provide protection.”16For example, a plaintiff was unable to establish a duty on behalf of police when police failed to respond to a plea for assistance forty-five minutes before a homicide.17

    4. Re: You mean "let the police blow it off" by Sabriel · · Score: 1

      What does "possible obedience situation" mean?

  6. If the police would go this wouldn't happen by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the victims didn't try the police first. But my experience with the police and small property thefts is that they don't feel it is worth their time.

    When My vehicle was broken into a few years ago- fingerprints visible all over the window that had been pried open - they didn't even bother to take fingerprints. Clearly minor crimes are not on their priority list.

    What should happen is you tell the police you have this program; show them some proof you own the phone; and they go retrieve the phone with the attitude that it is *probably* your phone but not definitely your phone until they hear the side of the people with the phone or see how those people react.

    We also need to update our felony amounts. Stealing a phone really only warrants jail time- not prison time. The felony amounts are set too low and make a lot of crimes felonies that would not have been 50 years ago.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    1. Re:If the police would go this wouldn't happen by teslabox · · Score: 1

      In Arizona, prison is much less harsh than the county jail. In some counties, jail is supposed to traumatize people so they won't want to come back. Prisons have to warehouse people for longer periods of time, so they can be hicer places to stay.

  7. police cannot do anything by uslurper · · Score: 1, Informative

    Police cannot do anything.
    They need a warrant to enter a home and they cannot get one.

    --
    oldhack: "Security is a waste of money until shit hits the fan. 5 minutes later, it becomes waste of money again. "
    1. Re:police cannot do anything by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      They don't need a warrant to show up on someone's doorstep and knock, and talk to the people inside.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:police cannot do anything by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      They need a warrant to enter a home and they cannot get one.

      Of course they can get a warrant. A cellphone broadcasting its position together with the owner's statement that it is their phone is enough to establish reasonable suspicion. You statement would be true if it were: They need a warrant to enter a home and they cannot be bothered to get one

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  8. Uhm... iPhones aren't that valuable! by The+New+Guy+2.0 · · Score: 1

    Didn't anybody forget that all subscription service devices need their subscription fee paid in order for the thing to work? iPhone's "teardown parts price" is not that high... what they're really making money on is the subsidy from the carriers, and the service agreements. Stolen iPhone will 1. Not work for the thieves, and 2. Work against them.

    1. Re:Uhm... iPhones aren't that valuable! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Phones are like zip guns. they only have to work once.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Uhm... iPhones aren't that valuable! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Same thing for my Samsung Epic. You can't rechip it. Shortly after you steal it, it's bricked.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  9. Vigilantism comes from apathy by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From apathy on the side of the police, that is.

    If the police at least tried to get my possessions back, would I bother going myself? Hell no. As the article said, why risk it? That's the police's job, they not only have the training and equipment, they also have the backing of the law.

    Vigilantes only emerge when the police drops the ball. Only when there is no other way to get justice, people will take justice into their own hands. That's why a state has to be careful to keep its laws and its law enforcement in sync with what their population considers just. People will only take the law into their own hands if you, as a government, fail.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd say it is. It is the job of the police to ensure laws are being enforced. And I expect them to do their job, because I pay them to. Only if they fail to, I will start doing it myself.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      This may prompt you to ask: why do we need LE at all? What *is* their role? They are Officers of the Court.

      Oh, please. Since the founding of the US (and before, as it essentially preserved the British system), the local constabulary has been tasking with ensuring public order, with much of its work, such separating brawlers, getting drunks into the drunk tank, etc., not even intended to escalate all the way to court.

    3. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's what the police is for in the US?

      One more reason not to go there.

      Personally, I prefer their local "job description".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      The Peelian principles:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

      Last time I wanted to bring this up, I was unable to find a direct link to US police enforcement. As you say, it is based off of the British system but is not directly descended, it seems.

    5. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Most cops break the law and feel that they dont have to obey them. the number of cops I see speeding, running red lights, etc (on and off duty, if the cop is not running with lights on, he is just being a dickhead flaunting they can break the law)

      I have ZERO respect for cops, the world would be better off without what is nothing more than a well funded street gang.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      Robert Peel would probably strongly approve of helmet/badge cameras, if you read his writings.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    7. Re:Vigilantism comes from apathy by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Oh, if only Pratchett were up to writing of helmet imps...

  10. Tolerance is acceptance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The police have said that it's completely acceptable, as they do nothing to stop it even when they have the exact, real-time location of the thief. Should we reinforce that by preventing citizens from cowering to law enforcement's threat of violence?

  11. Re:Let police officers take care of it? by PPH · · Score: 3, Funny

    Donuts. Tell them the perps stole your donuts.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  12. Yeah Right by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

    We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.

    Except the will to actually use it. Recovering I-Phones don't get great media coverage or the adrenaline high that a drug-bust (or maybe an eviction notice).

    Lets call it like it is, people don't trust police to take of these problems. After working with police officers a few times, too many of them are jerks. Not all of them, but enough.

  13. Okay, Fine by Oysterville · · Score: 2

    We all know that the police generally don't put a high priority on retrieving lost smart phones. So, if someone ever absconds with my smart phone and I use the app that I have on it to track it down, I will simply call the local sheriff's office and tell them that I have located my phone, give them the address, and tell them that in 10 minutes I will be going in locked and loaded to retrieve it. That should give them sufficient time to prevent a more serious crime from taking place.

    1. Re:Okay, Fine by neilo_1701D · · Score: 1

      I will simply call the local sheriff's office and tell them that I have located my phone, give them the address, and tell them that in 10 minutes I will be going in locked and loaded to retrieve it. That should give them sufficient time to prevent a more serious crime from taking place.

      Let me think: The cops are going to a) scurry over to the thief to recover a phone; or b) send a SWAT team to kick down your door because they received a credible threat of violence against another person - from you.

      Which scenario do you think gets played out here?

    2. Re:Okay, Fine by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      So they will shot his dog then go to the address he gave.

    3. Re:Okay, Fine by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      the dog with the purple collar
      FTFY

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  14. Civilians Not? by trydk · · Score: 1

    Lessee:

    Google drive ... Backup, Check
    Wiki Weapon + 3D Printer ... Guns, Check
    Pure Evoke ... Radio, Check
    Superdry ... Jacket, Check

    1. Re:Civilians Not? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      BTW: Pandora does *NOT* count as Radio....

  15. What police officers lack ... by khchung · · Score: 2

    Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.

    But obviously civilians have one thing the police officers don't - the WILL to take action.

    If the police have been taking these thefts seriously and had sent officers to thief's home instead, then no one would be foolish enough to do it himself.

    Yes, it is foolish to confront the thief at his home. What do you think would happen? "Ha ha, you got me, here's your phone."? More likely is the thief would know giving you the phone just proved he stolen your stuff, and now you know where to lead the police to him, thief would be thinking how is he going to silence you?

    Maybe after the first few fools got killed, the police will finally take a visit to the locations of stolen phones?

    --
    Oliver.
    1. Re:What police officers lack ... by sjames · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, you probably just want your phone back and don't give a crap about the rest. If you were a big believer in calling the cops you wouldn't be there at his door. But if you turn up dead and anyone at all knows where you were going, now he's looking at some serious trouble that will bring the cops around.

    2. Re:What police officers lack ... by khchung · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, you probably just want your phone back and don't give a crap about the rest. If you were a big believer in calling the cops you wouldn't be there at his door. But if you turn up dead and anyone at all knows where you were going, now he's looking at some serious trouble that will bring the cops around.

      True, but are you willing to bet your life or limb that the thug is (1) has a brain smart enough to figure that out, and (2) not on some drugs impairing his thinking at that time?

      Yup, it hurts to lose something worth $500-$1000, but is it worth getting serious injury or killed over?

      Even if you just got into a fight and won with, say, a couple broken fingers (due to a missed punch), the thug fled and you managed to get back your phone. Would you think it worth it 20 years later when your fingers still hurts whenever it rained? What if you won but lost an eye instead, is that worth it even though the thug were eventually caught and rotting in jail?

      If you care that much about losing your phone due to its price, is it wise for you to buy such an expensive phone (which you pretty much expected to carry around everywhere on your person, all the time) to begin with?

      --
      Oliver.
    3. Re:What police officers lack ... by sjames · · Score: 1

      Or, I wait till he leaves his house, call my own number and while he's distracted, I bonk his head with a bat...

      But more likely, an average middle aged guy answers, I make my phone ring and his teenaged son returns the phone. Probably the last phone he will see for a while.

      Or the more thuggish individual gets a bit hostile until he hears that distinct sound of a bolt action rifle...

    4. Re:What police officers lack ... by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      1) Make phone ring. 2) Hello, I am a NASA/Coast Guard contractor. They don't give a shit about my phone, but you can access their data from it, so I'm going to have to call Homeland Security. 3) Retrieve phone.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    5. Re:What police officers lack ... by Mirar · · Score: 1

      Also, if the police would take it serious, and there were a risk of getting a SWAT team in your bedroom if you had a stolen iphone, I believe the attraction of owning a stolen iphone would somewhat be a little less.

      Any crime the police stops caring about (stolen iphone, stolen bikes - I don't know where the limit is right now - pickpocketing, muggings?), that crime turns into not a crime. It'll be "ok" to do that. And there'll be a lot more of that crime, which means the police will not have the possibility to deal with it. It's a bad spiral.

      If the police isn't protecting us, the police get meaningless and the laws get meaningless. It'd actually be better to change the law that iphone theft isn't a crime than to have it as a crime while the police refuse to do anything about it.

  16. Citizens are empowered by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    I am SO SICK of the police telling citizens they shouldn't conduct their business. Yes it can be unwise, but the constant drumbeat of 'leave it to the cops' pisses me off.

    --
    Good-bye
    1. Re:Citizens are empowered by hawguy · · Score: 2

      I am SO SICK of the police telling citizens they shouldn't conduct their business. Yes it can be unwise, but the constant drumbeat of 'leave it to the cops' pisses me off.

      This is one case where it makes sense -- cops not only have physical protection (guns, etc), but they also have legal protection - if your phone tells you that your stolen phone is at 101 Main Street and you go to that address, bang on the door and start threatening the guy that answers to give up the phone before you kick his ass, you may find yourself in jail over the threats when it turns out that the phone was really in the basement apartment at 101A Main St (assuming, of course, that the guy you're demanding the phone from doesn't just kick *your* ass, and when he tells the cops that he felt threatened, he'll get the benefit of the doubt since you were at his house). The cops don't have to make any threats when they knock on the door -- the threat is implied.

    2. Re:Citizens are empowered by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, but these things are important if you want to maintain a submissive population. They always tell you not to resist, just lie down and enjoy it. This is the dependency the authorities want to create. Obey, and all your needs will be met, and you can keep your cable if you want to.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    3. Re:Citizens are empowered by kumanopuusan · · Score: 1

      That's great, except that if you ask the cops to get your stolen property back, they'll promptly tell you to fuck off.

      --
      Use of the words "good", "bad" or "evil" is almost invariably the result of oversimplification.
    4. Re:Citizens are empowered by kyrsjo · · Score: 2

      1) That applies to the guy who's door the victim is is banging on as well. And if you try to force yourself into his home - wouldn't he would have the right of self-defense (whether he stole the phone or not)?

      2) I would think that if the police went to the home of someone who is innocent and arrested them, they would get in less trouble than if you and a couple of friends showed up at the door of some random guy you thought stole your phone, attacked him and subdued him, and then called the police to come and pick up the "criminal".

    5. Re:Citizens are empowered by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      There is a VAST difference between confronting someone and starting a physical altercation. I can confront someone without getting violent or intimidating.

      --
      Good-bye
    6. Re:Citizens are empowered by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      If you are "confronting" someone by showing up at their door and waving a gun around, that goes a bit beyond "without getting violent or intimidating". Same goes for doing a citizens arrest of someone you're suspecting for stealing you phone.

      At least I thought this was what the AC was implying.

  17. Re: Americans don't have guns? Or jackets? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    law abiding citizens in NYC dont have guns, there are a shit ton of guns in NYC however

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  18. Except in the US by Diddlbiker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the rest of the world a stolen smartphone will get bricked, but carriers are working against that in the US. I guess because stolen phones mean people will have to buy replacements and they'll get the kickbacks from Apple and Samsung for that. As long as stolen phones keep working in the US, they'll continue to be stolen.

    1. Re:Except in the US by puto · · Score: 1

      You have some pretty shitty logic working for ya bub. US carriers have had a blacklist for almost 2 years. And if a phone is stolen, people are not expected to get a replacement? If a phone is stolen, whether it works or not, the owner should not replace it? You have also not lived in the rest of the world. I am a citizen of spain, the us, Colombia, and Panama, I can drag a stolen phone to the other countries I am a citizien of, and have it work, or buy a stolen phone and it will not be blacklisted.

      --
      The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  19. the function of society by steak · · Score: 1

    of course the cops are saying don't do anything. if people realized that they are capable of taking care of themselves the "proper authorities" will have a harder time forcing people to buy a product they may or may not need, or take their weapons, or surveil their every move.

  20. probable cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The stolen phone reporting its location in said home should be probable cause.

    1. Re: probable cause by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In the circumstances described the cops do not need a warrant.

      They do if they want to be sure of a conviction, which they do if they're going to bother with your petty little crime at all. They've got pastries to consume.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  21. Funny... by MasseKid · · Score: 2

    They say let the cops handle it, yet the cops WON'T go arrest these guys even if you give them the same GPS info. This happens out of frustration from the uselessness of the police to act in these scenarios, not because they think it's the best course of action.

  22. Let police officers take care of it. by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dead on. The police could do their jobs and get the phone and even take a crook of the streets at the same time. Instead if a location of a stolen phone is reported they just brush it off and tell you that your $500+ item is "easily replaceable" and that you should forget about all of the personal stuff on it. They can't be bothered. I wonder why people respect police less and less every day. I'm surprised that they don't point out that while the police have guns and all that other stuff, and the bad guys likely have guns, in many states the victims don't have guns because the laws prevent it. And prevent you from even having bullet proof vests too!

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Zumbs · · Score: 2

      What about the other part of the police officers statement? Do you really want to risk your life over an inanimate object?

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    2. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by jcr · · Score: 1

      The police could do their jobs and get the phone and even take a crook of the streets at the same time.

      They could do that, sure, but they haven't been law enforcement officers in decades. What they do now is tax collection and obedience enforcement.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    3. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that depends on the data that is on the phone and how big a risk it is, If i track my phone with GPS to a local high school, yeah ill go to the school and have the principal confront him

      If its at a place of business, Ill trace it there and have a nice chat with a boss about his employee being a thief

      If i see its in the middle of compton in a known gang area, i probably will not go there to get it

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    4. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Kremmy · · Score: 1

      These days losing your phone can be hell. Sure, flip phones were cheap and easily replaceable, but smartphones are personal information management devices that many people honestly rely on in their daily lives at this point. Police officers refuse to deal with the situation because their job is .. what IS their job? The hell are they excusing crime for? Goddammit.

    5. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by smash · · Score: 1

      If you don't have a backup of the information on your phone, you're an idiot who doesn't care about his/her data.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    6. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      and well, the guy holding it when you check it might not even be the one who stole it...

      but still, if the police DID just assign one squad in a 200 000+ cities for doing it(going through the investigation when they know the probable place of the phone).. it would kill the local phone thefts pretty well, just wouldn't be worth it to steal.

      *) now those who take it for pieces and such.. that's another story. you're not going to find the phone with "find my iphone" then though, because it's going to be off and stay off. the way to make money for them is to sell the parts for parts shops.. for you know, when you get your screen broken and can't be arsed to pay apple for fixing it and just go to a chinese shop. a new iphone is worth 100-200 bucks in parts if you count out the motherboard...

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    7. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by cusco · · Score: 1

      Or a common everyday user who doesn't have the training, or whose training was inadequate/ineffectual, or for a different type of device.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    8. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by dougmc · · Score: 2

      and well, the guy holding it when you check it might not even be the one who stole it...

      Stolen property is still stolen property, even after being sold to an unsuspecting (or not -- yeah, that iPhone you bought for $20 was legit. Uh-huh.) person.

      Knowingly buying stolen property is a crime, and even if you don't know it, it's still stolen property and is still the legal property of the proper owner and is subject to being taken from you and returned to the rightful owner with no legal recourse on your part unless you can somehow get it from the person who sold it to you.

    9. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Tax collection?

    10. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by sjames · · Score: 1

      Good reminder! I'd better take some guns with me. This Uzi looks about right.

    11. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Too late. The robbery already took place. The police have the exact location of a known violent criminal, an eye witness, and physical evidence. If nobody goes and deals with the problem, THAT is what is risking life. The alternative is subsistance living, because with no law enforcement against violent crime, the mere act of owning any personal property becomes "risking your life."

    12. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The 'thefts' are more specifically ROBBERIES. That means it is a violent crime, not someone slipping a CD into their pocket. The police have no problem showing up at a Target to arrest a non-violent shoplifter. They are refusing to go and arrest violent criminals who are carrying physical evidence of their crime.

    13. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      He is refering to the fact that they assign lots of officers to anything that will produce revenue. A few years ago, in my city, that included fining girl scouts for putting money in people's parking meters at Christmas so that no crime would be commited.

    14. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      I thought it would be something like that. Easy tax avoidance strategy. Don't speed. Don't park where it says you shouldn't. Clean up after your dog. Your example is disgraceful for sure but I get so tired of hearing OMG TAX from people when they've been punished for deliberately breaking the law.

    15. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Zumbs · · Score: 1

      When the police refuse to do their job, my life is already at risk.

      That depends on why the police does not follow up on these thefts. I would expect that the police prioritize which crimes they spend their resources on. So they may ignore pickpockets (and the like) to focus on armed robbery and other violent crime? It could be interesting to find out more about that, though. Especially given that all the evidence is basically served to them on a silver plate, not to mention that following a stolen phone around could give them a wealth of information on the people that do the fencing and reselling.

      --
      The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
    16. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Where I live, Sheriff is also the tax collector. As well as the head of the largest sheriff's department in the USA (since the Parish is completely urban, but mostly unincorporated, there is no police department - sheriff does that job too).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    17. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --That should arguably have made the news. I read something similar recently - the fining/punishments stopped after the story hit the papers, as it was embarrassingly bad PR for the cops.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    18. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      If i track my phone with GPS to a local high school, yeah ill go to the school and have the principal confront him

      This is what happens, Larry! This is what happens when you fuck a stranger in the ass!

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    19. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      The majority of the time it's probably a minor stealing a phone, who's not going to get more than an uncomfortable day in court, and will not himself be discouraged, let alone any of his peers be discouraged.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    20. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Should be possible to write an app that remotely makes the battery explode when it's in the guy's pocket. God knows they write them by accident.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    21. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      If it's at a school or place of business, the cops can go have a nice chat and retrieve it.

      If it's in a gang area in Compton, they too know better than to go there to get it.

      One of you is clearly superfluous.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    22. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by un1nsp1red · · Score: 1

      I take it you've never done much parking in Chicago. It's routine to ticket cars that are legally parked. Guilty until proven innocent. They know some portion of them won't fight it (or don't know they can fight it) and it will pay off. It's not like everyone's pissed off at the goody-goody hall monitor, it's that a lot of police forces are filled with assholes and criminals (e.g., CPD).

    23. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by jcr · · Score: 1

      I take it you've never done much parking in Chicago. It's routine to ticket cars that are legally parked.

      Not just ticketed. Legally parked cars are frequently towed. There's a well-known song about the Lincoln Park Pirates.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    24. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by un1nsp1red · · Score: 1

      I almost referenced that song as well! :) Spend enough time on the north side, and you will absolutely have your car towed by Lincoln Towing. I've twice had my own car towed by them from spots I was paying to rent. Neither time would the company who leased me the space do anything on my behalf. There's a good reason those fuckers are behind bullet-proof glass.

    25. Re: Let police officers take care of it. by CrkHead · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where the rumor that civilians can't purchase bullet proof vests came from. There could be some that are 100% allocated to government orders, but http://www.bulletproofbodyarmo... seems to have choices.

  23. Re: Low Priority? by Mr.+Sketch · · Score: 1

    > because they are low priority for them

    If they are such a low priority for them, why bother taking the statements and filing the report?

  24. Easy solution by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    "The emergence of this kind of do-it-yourself justice," writes Ian Lovett, "has stirred worries among law enforcement officials that people are putting themselves in danger, taking disproportionate risks for the sake of an easily replaced item."

    If the police care, they can go get the phones themselves. People only take it into their own hands when the police ignore them.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  25. The LAPD, folks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "If anyone should shoot a thief dead over your iPhone it should be us. We're armed to the fucking teeth, thus we are better qualified."

    When exactly did we decide to turn our local police departments into paramilitary units? And at what point did they become so proud of that fact that they brag about their kills and their weapons?

    We're fighting for freedom all over the world, except the one place we actually need it now...AT HOME.

    1. Re:The LAPD, folks. by umghhh · · Score: 1

      this strikes me as a very valid comment. There were some basic ideas that served as foundations for your republic. Somehow it got all screwed over with: extrajudicial killings (drones and what not), enhanced interrogation techniques, lying all over to get UN to sanction military actions etc which internally is matched buy militarized police force and war on drugs, complete and permanent surveillance, secrete courts, tough on crime policies which are unproductive and make US biggest prison the Western world with conditions in partially privatized prisons, that a 3rd world junta would be proud of. One still hears about human rights, democracy and other nice things but rarely sees them delivered. Something went wrong over the years it seems. There are good things in the Republic but they are more and more obscured by the ugly cloud of oppression and hypocrisy.

    2. Re:The LAPD, folks. by 1s44c · · Score: 1

      What your country is fighting for all over the world isn't freedom.

  26. Re: Americans don't have guns? Or jackets? by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

    law abiding citizens in NYC dont have guns, there are a shit ton of guns in NYC however

    Granted Wikipedia is not authoritative, but it looks to me like law abiding NYC citizens may own handguns or long guns.

  27. Re:two problems... by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    you know I see a market here. Phone bounty hunters.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  28. Re:two problems... by hawguy · · Score: 2

    While the smartphone itself may be trivial to replace, all the information on one may not be, and there is the whole deal of some apps that let you save your password...

    Unless you were targeted for some specific espionage (you weren't), the phone thief doesn't care about the data on your phone. If they can unlock it, they might take a quick look through your pictures for naked pics of your wife, but they aren't going to use a compute cluster to try to brute force your passcode -- they are just going to wipe it and resell it.

    If you have data on your phone that you can't replace, you were bound to lose it eventually anyway - phones die for lots of reasons unrelated to theft. Make regular backups (local or cloud based).

  29. Re: Americans don't have guns? Or jackets? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    thats true, I was speaking of handguns which are generally used in crimes more than long guns. I should have been more clear

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  30. prevent the small crimes......... by jafffacake · · Score: 1

    Rapid justice, and punishment, for small crimes help prevent the perp moving onto bigger stuff next time. So a minor mugging that's satisfactorily solved could possibly stop the mugger committing further, more serious, offences

  31. But the police won't do it by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    I think the reason people are pursuing stolen phones on their own is that the police is going to do absolutely zero about the situation after filling out the incident report, unless the phone happens to show up in some huge haul of stolen goods. The police are not going to raid a house to recover your stolen iphone. It's just not that important to them. (But important enough, apparently, that some law enforcement are lobbying for a manufacturer's kill switch but that's a different discussion.)

    If you need an incident number for your insurance, the police will provide that. If you need them to go to that jerk's house and get your phone back, they are not going to do that. It really is that simple.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  32. Re: Low Priority? by JackDW · · Score: 1

    They can't deprioritize the job until you have given your statement.

    --
    You're an immobile computer, remember?
  33. If you wanted to have some fun... by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Informative

    ... you could do what this guy did.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  34. Re:Uh we'll... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    ...the good ones are out busting real criminals.

    No they aren't. They're writing parking tickets and directing traffic.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  35. Re:But, it is just a phone by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And if you want to gripe about the cops not being willing to do anything about it, that's a man power issue.

    Maybe they can catch real thieves instead of spending their time trying to stop people from doing U-turns on 25th street. Which hasn't caused an accident in a decade at least. It's just an easy way to collect money (since the no u-turn signs are partially obscured by trees).

    Another thing: police defend their ability to 'stop and frisk' as a way to stop crime. NY is serious about stopping small crimes because it theoretically reduces big crimes. Well, here is something easy they can do.

    If the police aren't going to catch criminals, there's not much reason to have them.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  36. They're doing what they're supposed to by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unfortunately that sign on their car door "To serve and protect", they serve and protect the state. Getting back your iPhone does little to serve and protect the state.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
    1. Re:They're doing what they're supposed to by sycodon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "To Protect Our Asses by Shooting Yours First"

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    2. Re:They're doing what they're supposed to by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Or just type in big print over the whole side:

      WIEEE! WIEEE! WIE...

    3. Re:They're doing what they're supposed to by catmistake · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunately that sign on their car door "To serve and protect", they serve and protect the state. Getting back your iPhone does little to serve and protect the state.

      I don't like making generalized statements, however, and shame on me if the description doesn't fit, I'm about to do so. And I don't mean to even criticize the Police in general, because among their ranks are everyday heros and legitimate true, ready to lay down their lives, heros. But to make an observation that I'm sure others have noticed, that even though police

      have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have

      it seems at times the choices that the individual police officers we hear about are neither motivated by duty to protect the public nor the state, but themselves first and foremost. Speaking as a coward, fear of injury/death and self-preservation are instincts that are not easily overcome, but members of various US Special Forces and Military, firefighters and deep water and swift water rescue teams, perhaps out of bravado (but so what?), seem to have little trouble doing so. What is it about police duty that makes them less heroically suicidal than those that choose these other careers, when one should expect the vocation to attract the very brave and incorruptable, and those as close to real "superheros" as we can get, like the other vocations I mentioned?

      For those civilians that carry weapons for self-defense, no one should have to remind you that the origin of your right to do so was originally one of selflessness, i.e. to protect your defenseless neighbors at risk to your own life or property, either from raiding parties, foreign enemies, crime, or the government. I also would like to emphatically applaud the unarmed bystanders that bravely risked their lives to save a Memphis Police officer today. That is amazing to me... because I just know I would have been running away from obvious danger, and not towards it, as fast as my feet could carry me. And I would not be proud of myself for surviving.

      FWIW, material items are definately not worth even risking injury over, let alone risking life. But another life, or multiple lives is worth that risk, and we know this because we have a word for people like that and you probably noticed me using it a lot, and I do because I am facinated by... our heros.

    4. Re: They're doing what they're supposed to by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      Studies show (primarily focused on car security, with areas that have lots of lojak ) that increased rate of capture greatly reduces theft, which is a public good. It's not that one phone really matters, but the increase from 0 to 5 percent capture rate on theft of an item over $500 would reduce the overall theft rate.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    5. Re:They're doing what they're supposed to by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      Yet these "heroes" seem to have plenty of time to sit idle on the freeway ALL DAY booking people for not aligning the number on their vehicle's speedometer with the number on a sign on the side of the road.

    6. Re:They're doing what they're supposed to by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      And I don't mean to even criticize the Police in general, because among their ranks are everyday heros and legitimate true, ready to lay down their lives, heros.

      The police have no responsibility to do anything. And the number of times the cops have sued to not have to enforce a crime in progress (violent or otherwise) and have no responsibility to respond to a call, makes me think that there is no "hero" in cops any more. All the "heroes" have left and are firefighters or such. All that's left are the dirty cops and the abusive racists on a power trip. "don't be a hero" is used in training (At least the training I witnessed). So they have been trained to be non-heroes.

      One of the worst I've seen is whtn the police got a call from a woman that she received a death threat from someone she had a restraining order against (a crime), telling her that he was coming over at a specific time to kill her. The police were given the location of the suspect, and they didn't go arrest him, nor did they show up at the specific time mentioned (the informant requested they show up at that time because it would be a breach of restraining order). Nor did they show up when she called back when he arrived. But they showed up 30 minutes after, when the neighbors reported gunshots, and found the dead woman, killed by the person with a restraining order, who they were warned about multiple times. The family of the deceased sued and lost. The cops have the *right* to ignore any crime they want, and they have no responsibility to intervere, even if they are aware a crime is in progress. With response like that, there is no reason to ever call the cops. You could be one of the many who call for help and get arrested. At best, they leave you alone. I've never personally witnessed a cop "solve" a crime.

      Hell, the one time I was robbed at gunpoint, I gave a description to the cops, and they had to call me in to identify him on the surveillance video, as they couldn't find a crime on a video when they had hours with the video. And 3 months later, I was called in to go to a lineup. I didn't identify anyone, as it had been months. The people who called me in for the lineup didn't even know there was a video of the robbery, so they didn't see it to see if it matched their suspect.

  37. LAPD apathy by prehistoricman5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    My sister's friend had her phone stolen recently and when she called the LAPD about it, they also refused to do anything about it and pretty much told her that it was not their policy to go chasing after stolen phones. She later attempted to confront the fence that stole her phone and ultimately was unsuccessful in recovering her phone.

    --
    Fuck Beta
  38. Re:But, it is just a phone by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And if you want to gripe about the cops not being willing to do anything about it, that's a manpower issue

    Not when the cops are unwilling to follow up on easy leads while they are instead literally sitting in their cars all day long waiting for speeders because speeding tickets earn their department revenue (and catching muggers doesn't). There's plenty of manpower. The cops just don't want to risk their lives for "just a phone" because they know these are potentially violent criminals that are taking the phones. It's cowardice and avarice, not lack of manpower.

  39. Re: Low Priority? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    If they are such a low priority for them, why bother taking the statements and filing the report?

    Welcome to the wonders of bureaucracy. Suggest reading Kafka to learn more.

    Aside: Hey, I finally remembered how to spell bureaucracy without spell check correcting me! Only took years....

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  40. "We don't go into the barrio for an iPhone " by BoRegardless · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "and risk the life of an officer." That was the answer from the San Diego police department when my friend's sone lost his iPhone in a major hotel out of the dining room.

    My friend is an attorney involved in major San Diego port affairs. Made no diff. "We don't go into that barrio without a SWAT team."

  41. It's never "just a phone" by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    A phone isn't just a cool toy any more. We're pretty dependent on them. It's our way of communicating with people; it contains a lot of data. We spend a lot of time tinkering with it and configuring it to make it just so.

    Even if you have backed it up, it's still a; lot of work getting the data back onto the phone. And you'll probably lose something.

    Plus it takes time to replace. We are without an essential tool that we assume we'll have, and are no longer able to function well until it's replaced.

    1. Re:It's never "just a phone" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > A phone isn't just a cool toy any more

      Yes, it still is. You people are just using them wrong. And stupid too.

      Don't haul around and flaunt some dumb overpriced expensive gadget in public. If you do that, of course it is going to get stolen. Put personal information on something like that? Crazy, just crazy.

      Get a cheap "dumb" cellphone if you really can't wait until you are at home or the office to make a damn phone call.

      Of course cops aren't going to waste their time going after your dumb toy. It doesn't matter how many of your irreplaceable cat pictures are on it.

  42. Escalation by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Police often wont take care of it...because as he said, it's just a phone.

    Today it's a phone, tomorrow it's a laptop and by next week it's an armed robbery of an electronics store. I can understand that the police do not have the resources to track down every petty criminal but when confronted with clear evidence where the criminal is they have a duty to act. It is not only a fantastic public relations opportunity ("I went to the police and they caught the criminal one hour later") it also looks good for the crime statistics and it helps to reduce future crime since many phone thefts are probably opportunistic criminals who, if not caught, will carry on with their experiment to see how many phones/laptops/etc. they can steal before it crosses the police action threshold.

  43. thieves' homes by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Or the poor unsuspecting guy that bought it off craigslist..

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  44. Re: Americans don't have guns? Or jackets? by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 1

    You're joking, right? Just try to get a pistol permit in NYC. While technically, it's possible, it is neither cheap nor easy. Long guns are only slightly easier (permit still required). Meanwhile, anyone who is cheeky enough to steal and then use your phone is probably not going to be disinclined to buy any of the easily available illegal firearms that can be purchased from a local street thug for a song.

  45. Re:Stupid Comment by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    That is because most actually dont have those.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  46. backup, guns, radio, jackets by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    "We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have." What? I have all that stuff.

    1. Re:backup, guns, radio, jackets by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      Also, y'all are civilians too. You are a police force, not a gendarmerie.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  47. Bzzt! Wrong! by Powercntrl · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the rest of the world a stolen smartphone will get bricked, but carriers are working against that in the US.

    The USA has had a stolen phone blacklist for quite some time now. You can check if a phone is blacklisted here. Carriers will also ban a phone from their own network if the owner defaults on their service contract or handset finance agreement.

    Phones are still stolen because:

    1. Some phones can have their IMEI altered (illegal, but we're talking about criminals in the first place).
    2. They can be sold overseas.
    3. They can be sold to fools right here in the USA who don't know there's an IMEI blacklist and that they're buying a useless "brick".
    4. They have value as parts.
    5. Not everything criminal steals needs a logical reason. Some of these low-lives are so trashed on drugs they aren't thinking much beyond "take everything I can grab, sell, buy more drugs."

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  48. Then... by mbone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "It's just a phone," he said. "it's not worth losing your life over.

    Then why do they have guys with guns guarding banks and jewelry stores?

    1. Re:Then... by DogDude · · Score: 1

      To lower their insurance bill. Regardless, I think that anybody who takes their life into their hands to try to recover a generic lump of metal and plastic deserves what they get.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    2. Re:Then... by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      You're comparing a phone to a bank?

  49. "Let police officers take care of it." by Max+Threshold · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then take care of it, you worthless fucks.

  50. bonus by phorm · · Score: 5, Informative

    Except that the guy who "only stole an iPhone" probably did a lot more. When cops do investigat such things, they also tend to find further crime such as:
    * troves of stolen goods
    * stolen/duplicated credit cards
    * drugs
    * links to other criminals and/or organized crime

    1. Re:bonus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      OMG! actual police work! why would they waste time on somebody who will probably repeatedly break the law? I mean, it's not like it's their job or something. /End of Sarcasm

      Most should be easy to check on, others, they could easily just charge the perp with crimes are are easy to convict if they have time issues while ignoring the harder to check on crimes (at least the criminal will be behind bars for a while). You don't have to arrest criminal for everything. If it worked against Al Capone, why not for everyone else?

    2. Re:bonus by Immerman · · Score: 4, Informative

      If that were the case then wouldn't it be a *good* thing? It should be really easy to get a warrant to search the current location of a stolen cell phone, so they just got some more serious offenders handed to them on a silver platter.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:bonus by maxwells_deamon · · Score: 2

      I think that is the problem. they need to get a real warrant. If they just show up and demand the phone and cuff the jerk, A half way awake person will refuse the search and then destroy the phone. They need probable cause to narrow it down to a specific apartment and then go to a judge and then look like idiots if the they don't find 10 out of 10 of the phones they look for.

      Also it does not earn any revenue for the city like traffic fines do

    4. Re:bonus by buybuydandavis · · Score: 1

      You can break the phone, but destroying it such that it can't be recognized is difficult, and it's unlikely that they'd *know* it was the phone the cops were after when they show up at the door.

    5. Re:bonus by buybuydandavis · · Score: 1

      So all the cops in the Democractic one party state of Detroit will immediately hop to to find your phone?

    6. Re: bonus by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      And where is this country ?

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    7. Re:bonus by Kevin+Fishburne · · Score: 1

      I don't know man, that sounds like the beginnings of A LOT OF WORK! Probably better to let sleeping phones lie.

      --
      Buy your next Linux PC at eightvirtues.com
    8. Re:bonus by SumDog · · Score: 2

      If you have a good tracking app, the results from that should be enough to get a warrant. Unless they have an expensive lawyer, it's unlikely to get thrown out too. They can usually get such warrants in under an hour as well.

    9. Re:bonus by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how much paperwork that would create? Easier just to catch speeding drivers for profit.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:bonus by mk1004 · · Score: 1

      [citation needed]

      Seriously, some of these stolen iPhones are done as a crime of opportunity. The police probably recognize that and don't think it's worth the trouble. They'll end up spending tons of money prosecuting some kid over something worth a few hundred bucks. I don't know what the ratio of career criminals/opportunist scumbags is, but to assume that following up on a typical phone theft will lead to some crime syndicate is silly.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    11. Re:bonus by phorm · · Score: 1

      iPhones go to drug cartels
      iPhone theft leads to seizure of drugs/guns.

      Also, if you can bust the "criminal of opportunity" perhaps it'll stop before reaching the "career criminal" point.

    12. Re:bonus by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "Except that the guy who "only stole an iPhone" probably did a lot more."

      Yup - and following up on small stuff leads to bigger stuff often enough to be worthwhile (if you can do big stuff why would you stop at small stuff?)

      The Yorkshire Ripper was apprehended because a cop noticed that the car he was driving had registration plates which were in a number range reserved for heavy vehicles (stolen, of course). The guy had eluded police tracking him by his forensic/murder trail for _years_ and catching a lucky break was the way the case was solved.

  51. Re:two problems... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    "look, johnny, there is no such thing as 'phone cops'."

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  52. Cops don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Me: I'd like to report my phone was stolen
    Police: Go away, all our officers are currently assigned to DUI checkpoints, handing out speeding tickets and looking to roust drivers who might be carrying a lot of cash so we can seize it.

  53. Re:But, it is just a phone by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    tbh those aren't crimes; a crime by definition is something that is against the law (don't confuse that with right or wrong). The bankers have lawyers who carefully help them stay within the letter of the law. So most of what they do is strictly legal.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  54. I have most of those things too... by junk · · Score: 1

    I promise to bring my guns, radios and backup. The only things the cops have that I don't is a jacket (assuming they mean bullet proof vests). Then again, I'll actually show up.

    1. Re:I have most of those things too... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They are not in fact especially expensive.

      If you go to a gun range enough you can probably find a cop with your body size who has an old vest lying around who will be willing to sell it to you, maybe even if you explain what you're on about. They're probably as good as a new vest, and a massive upgrade from no vest. Figure out which range the cops go to. Kiss their asses. You're going to need to if you're planning to get into a situation where you need all that shit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  55. LAPD don't care by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

    FTA: LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith urges resisting the impulse to do so. "It's just a phone," he said. "it's not worth losing your life over. Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.""

    Yeah, but in my experience, LAPD, SMPD, and so on won't bother responding to your call.

  56. Principle matters more than survival by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 1

    "it's not worth losing your life over

    They should be telling that to the thieves.

  57. Re:thats right... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    I see flash-mob-posses as being a bad thing for society.

  58. Flip that around on ya by maliqua · · Score: 2

    And while hitting "Find My iPhone" can take you to a thief's doorstep, LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith urges resisting the impulse to do so. "It's just a phone," he said.

    Citizens urge police to do their fucking jobs so we don't have to do it ourselves.

  59. YMMV by westlake · · Score: 1

    Yes, police have all that stuff. On the other hand, they don't give a shit about your iphone being stolen, and will likely never investigate.

    Look at the numbers.

    It's a growing crime in the Bay Area and across the country; more than 3 million people nationwide were victims of cell phone theft last year.

    An estimated 60 percent of all robberies in Oakland involved a mobile device last year. According to the San Francisco District Attorney's office, 67 percent of robberies in that city involved a stolen mobile device.

    Now try working with the police instead of falling back on your favorite Slashdot meme.

    Vanna Bong knows first-hand how effective tracking software can be. She's helped customers at the Quick Communications store in Alameda use it to find lost phones and tablets, and even used it herself a few months ago when burglars ransacked her home and stole her personal electronics, worth more than $6,000 dollars.

    Bong used tracking software to pinpoint the location of her stolen devices and tracked the thieves and her stolen items down.

    ''It was 10 minutes away. They took it to McDonalds where they were using free wifi,'' Bong said. ''I was really surprised, I didn't know that it was going to pinpoint the exact address''

    Tracking software was one of the tools Oakland police used to find and arrest two suspected cell phone robbers on Thursday. The robbers stole a smart phone from a woman walking down the 600 block of Grand Avenue around 10 p.m. that evening. Moments before, the same robbers were believed to have stolen a cell phone from another victim on the 3000 block of Broadway in Oakland.

    The woman from the Grand Ave. robbery called police, and using tracking software, told police dispatchers the location of her phone and the robbers.

    Police found the phone, arrested two suspected robbers and are going through several other stolen items the robbers had when arrested.

    Think.

    Your eyewitness account will most likely lead nowhere.

    The GPS fix is pure gold.

  60. ICE - Why don't phones have this by Nukenbar · · Score: 1

    Most people lock their phones these days. Why is there not a function that I can find the owner's info (whatever they want to put there) and an ICE (In Case of Emergency) number.

    Or more so, if I come upon an injured person, it would be nice to let someone know (besides 911) that they are injured.

    If I find a phone, what can I do with it if I want to return it? This has happened a few time in cabs. Now days I just give it to the driver and it is now his windfall/problem.

    1. Re:ICE - Why don't phones have this by sjames · · Score: 1

      If it's not locked, look in the address book for numbers like Mom, Bro, Sis, etc and call one of them. Tell them you found the phone and want to return it.

  61. the missing link by westlake · · Score: 1
  62. "backup, guns, radio, jackets"... training? by Wootery · · Score: 1

    Let police officers take care of it. We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have.

    I'm not a cop, but it strikes me as odd that appropriate training didn't make it to his list of the four most important things police officers have which civilians don't.

    1. Re:"backup, guns, radio, jackets"... training? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Cops suck at firearms. I can out shoot any cop at the range, in fact a LOT of guys at the range regularly make the cops there look bad.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:"backup, guns, radio, jackets"... training? by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      I'm legitimately curious how the cops react to that.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    3. Re:"backup, guns, radio, jackets"... training? by Wootery · · Score: 1

      Not going to defend low marksmanship standards, but, marksmanship wasn't really my point. Confronting someone without needless escalation of force, etc, is more what I was trying to get at.

  63. easily replaced item by koan · · Score: 1

    Really? My phone is over $700, so it is not an "easily replaced item", however I am too smart to go to the "perp" and demand it back without backup.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:easily replaced item by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it's not easily replaced, it's unwise to have it in the first place. If your income/assets aren't large enough that your cell-phone is easily replaced, you'd be far better off with a cheaper phone and extra money in the bank.

  64. Just a phone? by PPH · · Score: 1

    No. Its just a criminal who takes peoples property, sometimes by force. And who will become emboldened if they realize that the cops won't do sqaut to stop them. Screw the phone. Its insured. Get the punks who think they can knock people down and grab their phones.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  65. Easily replaceable my ass. by Sable+Drakon · · Score: 1

    Perhaps people wouldn't HAVE to confront the scumbag that stole the phone if the police actually did shit about it. They don't even have to do any detective work, as the victim has already done it by using 'Find my iPhone' or Android Device Manager. All they need to do is get a search warrant from based on the victim's evidence, arrest the perp, collect the phone. Everybody wins except for the thieving scumbag.

    --
    The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
  66. easy way to do this by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

    explain things to an officer (show the FMi screen "LIVE" to them) and hint that you might be heading "that way" to "chat" with the person. good chances the officer will A lead you to the person B have another officer meet you there.

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  67. Administrators? Try pensions by mveloso · · Score: 2

    If you really want to freak out, take a look at how much money municipalities pay for police pensions. It's not the administrators that are munching the budget, it's the retirees.

    1. Re:Administrators? Try pensions by HiThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the police were doing their purported job, then those pensions would have been well earned. And should have been expensed while the officers were serving (except in the case of medical retirements, which justifiably need funding after the retirement).

      That I don't feel they are doing their job doesn't mean that I think that the retirements should be eliminated, it means that I think the officers in question should be fired for cause. It frequently means that I also think they should be prosecuted for various crimes in addition to either misfeasance or malfeasance. (Which various crimes obviously depends on what the officer did.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:Administrators? Try pensions by Reziac · · Score: 1

      What I've heard as typical is that police retire at half pay at around age 45 after 20 years on the force.

      We're all in the wrong career....

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  68. Re:But, it is just a phone by dryeo · · Score: 1, Informative

    Why the fuck are police getting financed by speeding tickets? That's one of the big problems, underfunding forcing the cops to spend their time making sure there is enough funding to pay them. Same problem with the other ways police are forced to get funding such as civil forfeiture.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  69. It's more along the lines of... by Sable+Drakon · · Score: 1

    It's not that the phone has the sole copy of a piece of information. It's that the phone is a very easy method to get at said information.

    --
    The Amarri pray for god, the Caldari pray for profit. the Gallente pray for peace, but the Minmatar pray their ships hol
  70. Funding by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    it really comes down to funding. Cops have limited resources, especially after 30 years of budget cuts in the name of "Reduced Bureaucracy" and tax cuts for the rich. Remember when you voted down that 1% sales tax increase? Guess where that money was earmarked for?

    So Cops ignore non-violent offenders and focus on the violent ones. Seems when it's Pot heads everyone's OK with that. Yeah, yeah, pot heads don't hurt anyone. Except there's already guys in this thread banging on about how when you investigate one crime you find another....

    Want better law enforcement? Raise taxes. Corporate profits and the cash held by the top 1% are both at levels not seen since the 1920s, lets have them pay some of that.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Funding by Fringe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it really comes down to risk and reward. Not funding. Cops are widely believed (there are some naysayers) to get promotions and plumb assignments based on ticket revenue. Recovering stolen items involves getting a warrant - they can't just go to the house - and then risking being shot at or accused of racism. What's the up-side?

      Better law enforcement would come from using the same tools those capitalists you revile used to get the riches you covet... merit rewards rather than union protection.

    2. Re:Funding by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is BS. We are talking about violent criminals who are holding evidence of their crime. Even if the phone wasn't worth investigating, muggings are. These phones are being stolen via muggings. At a minimum, holding people against their will while you take their phone. At worst, real beatings with a real chance of injury or death. Cops not investigating the stolen phones isn't an issue of cops ignoring petty theft. It is an issue of cops ignoring violent criminals who have been served up on a silver platter with evidence of their ciminal behavior in their possesion, and eye whitneses ready to testify.

    3. Re:Funding by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it really comes down to funding. Cops have limited resources, especially after 30 years of budget cuts in the name of "Reduced Bureaucracy" and tax cuts for the rich.

      I'm sorry, WHAT? You are full of shit.

      Police departments are well funded, the question is: What do they spend that money on?

      A new "MRAP"? Oh yeah, every cop shop needs one of those... And I've noticed many cops are now driving high-end "muscle cars" - because you know a $60K Dodge Charger with a "police package" is so much more effective in city response than the old Crown Vics or whatever the "off the shelf" cop car is these days.

      Yeah, the police are hurting of cash...

      Except maybe in Seattle where there are significant numbers of "average cops" making well into the 6-figures with overtime and other cash cows.

      I'm not saying cops should not be well equipped and compensated according to skill and danger, though many studies show that being a police officer is not particularly dangerous - maybe because they rarely get out of their cars anymore - but get real: Since "9/11", US police departments have become bloated bastions of over-paid steroid freaks with power issues.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:Funding by tompaulco · · Score: 2

      Remember when you voted down that 1% sales tax increase? Guess where that money was earmarked for?

      Here's the magic of percentages. If they were getting by fine on x% before, and inflation goes up, then they STILL get x% which is what they got before already magically adjusted for inflation. You don't have to keep increasing the percentage year after year. If anything, the marginal increase in cost of doing business should allow us to DECREASE the percentage of sales tax we need to collect year after year in order to fund the governments operation.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    5. Re: Funding by buybuydandavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, it's priorities, not funding.

      A priority is shaking down law abiding citizens for money. A priority is terrorizing citizens in the middle of the night with an armed raid of a dozen officers to find a joint. A priority is terrorizing your children and shooting your dog on such a raid.

      A priority is padding pay checks with overtime pay. A *big* priority is confiscating cameras from citizens recording what the cops do, and then arresting them on some bogus charge. A priority is protecting cops by abusing citizens, using wholly disproportionate and unnecessary force. A priority is putting the populace in their place whenever they seem a little uppity.

    6. Re: Funding by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      And of course ignore the wisdom of cutting police, fire fighters, and teachers first. Save the critical services like PR, for instance.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    7. Re:Funding by adolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And I've noticed many cops are now driving high-end "muscle cars" - because you know a $60K Dodge Charger with a "police package" is so much more effective in city response than the old Crown Vics or whatever the "off the shelf" cop car is these days.

      Cops cars have never been cheap. The suspension and chassis are stiffer, the wheels tend to be bigger (though steel, to reduce cost) to house larger brakes, the transmissions and differentials are often special. Various options exist for bullet-proof Kevlar armored doors. There are often extra, dedicated oil and transmission coolers. The batteries are huge, and there can be more than one of them, and the alternators are bigger. The seats are wider, not because cops are fat (remember, most other Americans are fat), but because they carry a ridiculous amount of hardware on their belts. These are all safety and durability improvements for the type of driving these cars are expected to be doing on a regular basis, with the vehicles themselves sometimes working 3 shifts per day.

      And then there's a lot of work and expense that goes into modifying them for police duty even once they're delivered: By default, the interior is spartan, at best (what cup holder?). Communicaitons, lights, computer(s) need added, and added stoutly. Cages, locking shotgun holders need added. Push bars. Graphics and/or paint need changed to match the rest of the fleet Et cetera.

      These are not luxury automobiles -- you can easily find a cheap Kia on the lot at Enterprise that is more pleasant, with more creature comforts than any average cop car for normal driving.

      That said, there are three "off the shelf" cop cars since demise of the Crown Vic: Dodge Charger, and Ford Police Interceptor.

      None of these are implicitly "muscle cars." They're all available with a normally-aspirated V6 that is identical (or at least very nearly so) to the same engines you'll find in the same civilian cars at the dealership, though more-powerful engines are certainly available.

      So, what does such a purpose-built car cost? From this article, base prices (including, in these cases, upgraded engines) looks like the following:

      2012 Chevrolet Caprice PPV, 6.0L/355-hp/384-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8: $31,745

      2012 Dodge Charger Pursuit, 5.7L/370-hp/395-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8, $30,965

      2013 Ford Police Interceptor Sedan, 3.5L/365-hp/350-lb-ft twin-turbo DOHC 24-valve V-6, $29,155

      and for comparison with the venerable Crown Vic:

      2008 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor, 4.6L/239-hp/276-lb-ft SOHC 16-valve V-8, $28,470

      I, for one, think my money is being better-spent on any of the three standard-issue cop car chassis, than it ever was on a Crown Vic. Price is roughly in-keeping with a last-gen, inflation-adjusted Crown Vic, and even though the new cars are actually a bit heavier, every single performance feature (including gas mileage) is improved.

      This is not opulence, but simply progress.

    8. Re:Funding by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That would be the case if population and size of patrol areas wasn't increasing. Almost all cities are growing, increased population, increased density and increased size. Inflation only counts on increases in costs, not growth.

      The reason cops are interested in theft is it's not as lucrative as drug crime. Most departments spend almost all their police time on drug crime because in the 80's the government relaxed seizure laws and allowed the local cops to keep any drug money and assets seized. Most police departments benefit directly from this and will spend almost all their time locating and seizing money and assets, even going as far as taking poor people's car's for buying a joint (a rather memorable cops episode).

      Until we end the war on drugs and roll back all the seizure laws cops aren't going to be interested in petty crime. Before the war on drugs you could actually get the cops to investigate car theft and muggings, now they don't even care.

    9. Re:Funding by afgam28 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, Ford no longer manufactures the Crown Victoria so this is not an option for police departments anymore.

      A top-of-the-range SRT Charger costs about $47k MSRP and not all cops are driving around in SRTs (except maybe Highway Patrol?). With the model that the police are buying, together with the "police package", they're paying $42k (according to http://cjonline.com/opinion/20...) and I doubt the Crown Vics would've been much cheaper than that.

      Having said that I totally agree with you that US police departments are not allocating resources effectively.

    10. Re:Funding by rahvin112 · · Score: 2

      The reason cops are interested

      That "are" should be "are not". Changes the entire meaning.

    11. Re:Funding by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fascinating, but you are focusing on the wrong element and even there your vision is myopic.

      The real issue is not choice of over-priced police cruisers - used mostly for hot-dogging to non-events. I can no longer count the times I've seen 3 or 4 cops weaving in and out of traffic at high speed to arrive at a situation involving a drunk street guy or a hooker.

      A few years back, I was waiting for a MAX train in in Portland at around 0030 after work, and had wondered up to the second or third floor of a parking garage to look over the street and smoke a butt. I watched a Portland cop drive up onto the sidewalk just to be able to chuck a Burger King bag into a trash can.

      I give the cop points for disposing of trash in a proper receptacle.

      And these MRAPs - yes, every Cop Shop seems to need one. You know, you might need to lay siege to a crack house... God forbid cops do like they had done for years and just fucking BREAK DOWN THE DOOR.

      Oh yes, Police Work is a tough job... Here's what Forbe's has to say about it, let's have a look:

      1. Logging workers
      2. Fishers and related fishing workers
      3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
      4. Roofers
      5. Structural iron and steel workers
      6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
      7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
      8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
      9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
      10. Construction laborers

      Cops? Not on the list.

      It's not hard to understand that when you never get out of your car, and when you do it's to write a $200 ticket, well, life is good.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    12. Re:Funding by adolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nice try, but I won't be trolled into a discussion of the merits and demerits of police behavior as that varies wildly between locales and jurisdictions and is an unresolvable debate, at best.

      I simply submit that ~30k is not overpriced for a specially-designed service vehicle, especially in comparison to the singular previous option.

      If you wish to debate that single insular point, then I'm up for it.

    13. Re:Funding by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      That would be the case if population and size of patrol areas wasn't increasing. Almost all cities are growing, increased population, increased density and increased size. Inflation only counts on increases in costs, not growth.

      Yeah, it should be cheaper to police such a situation. If density is increasing you are still policing the same area, there are just more people in it. The increased population bring greater sales tax and property tax revenues. Maybe cities in the middle of nowhere are increasing in size but most existing cities don't have anywhere to expand to, they are already surrounded by other cities.

      --

      Enigma

    14. Re:Funding by GauteL · · Score: 2

      2012 Dodge Charger Pursuit, 5.7L/370-hp/395-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8, $30,965

      Meanwhile, in an alternate dimension (Norway):
      Civilian 2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L/80-hp $29,116.

    15. Re:Funding by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      Cops cars have never been cheap.

      Well, of course they are not cheap...
      It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant, it's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks, it's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas.

    16. Re:Funding by Letophoro · · Score: 1

      Well, of course they are not cheap... It's got a cop motor, a four hundred and forty cubic inch plant, it's got cop tires, cop suspensions, cop shocks, it's a model made before catalytic converters, so it'll run good on regular gas.

      But the cigarette lighter is missing, and the motor is prone to throwing a rod.

    17. Re:Funding by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Cops cars have never been cheap. The suspension and chassis are stiffer, the wheels tend to be bigger (though steel, to reduce cost) to house larger brakes, the transmissions and differentials are often special.

      Seriously, we are literally talking about an uprated alternator and stiffer shocks and springs. None of the rest of that shit is actually uprated at all. You can especially see this in Ford stuff across all lines. Whether it's Police or Ambulance variants, you get a second or bigger alternator, you get heavier springs and shocks, you get a fatter sway bar, and performance is actually inferior to the production version because of the additional weight of that stuff plus the crap the PD bolts on. And you don't get bigger brakes. Why would you need them? You don't get better suspension, so you don't really have any business going particularly fast. The car needs the upgrades to handle the weight of the additional equipment, it doesn't really improve the car until all that stuff is ripped out and then it compromises ride comfort. The difference in production costs of the base vehicle are negligible.

      I, for one, think my money is being better-spent on any of the three standard-issue cop car chassis, than it ever was on a Crown Vic. Price is roughly in-keeping with a last-gen, inflation-adjusted Crown Vic, and even though the new cars are actually a bit heavier, every single performance feature (including gas mileage) is improved.

      The chief virtues of the vic were mass and interior room. It's got to be seriously cramped in that shitty warmed-over Impala with all the cop shit on the dash.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:Funding by CaptSlaq · · Score: 1

      2012 Dodge Charger Pursuit, 5.7L/370-hp/395-lb-ft OHV 16-valve V-8, $30,965

      Meanwhile, in an alternate dimension (Norway): Civilian 2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L/80-hp $29,116.

      Import tariffs?

    19. Re:Funding by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Cops are widely believed (there are some naysayers) to get promotions and plumb assignments based on ticket revenue.

      Leprechauns are widely believed (there are some naysayers) to hide their pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

      "Widely believed" is widely used to make bullshit seem more legitimate.

    20. Re:Funding by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      And these MRAPs - yes, every Cop Shop seems to need one. You know, you might need to lay siege to a crack house... God forbid cops do like they had done for years and just fucking BREAK DOWN THE DOOR.

      Adolf has already handed you your ass on the main point you were trying to make but, just to finish this off, here's the situation with those MRAP's you hate so much:

      Police departments inside the United States are acquiring MRAP vehicle through the 1033 program, which allows the Defense Department to redistribute equipment it no longer needs to state and municipal agencies. Rather than buying a new vehicle, which would cost $535,000-$600,000 to produce, some police departments like the Ohio State University Police Department have picked up surplus MRAPs from the Pentagon for free. By October 2013, nearly dozen departments in several states had acquired the armored vehicles. Domestic agencies plan to use them in disaster relief roles, as they can go through flooded areas unlike normal police armored vehicles, and to respond to terrorist threats, like playing a role in guarding sports stadiums. MRAPs used by police forces have the machine gun turret removed and are repainted from their original flat desert tan to black. Organizations have become critical about police use of military vehicles and worried about police militarization. Proponents of the domestic acquisitions say they fill the same role as the standard police Lenco BearCat armored vehicles which cost $200,000, while the MRAPs can be received for free.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

    21. Re:Funding by bungo · · Score: 1

      I have to say that it's expensive for a Fiesta (it's only around $20k where I am), but in general the US has the cheapest car prices for a western country. I think that's because the market is competitive, and consumers are price sensitive. Everyone in Europe, Australia and New Zealand get ripped off. The prices in Japan aren't so bad.

      My last new car cost about 20% more in Euros, than in USD, and that was with a â1/$1.30 exchange rate - almost half price in the US. It would have been cheaper for me to purchase the car from the US, have it shipped over to Europe and then pay 20% in import duties.

      The worst part was, the car was built in England!

       

      --
      "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
    22. Re:Funding by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      What a great deal !

      Because anyone with a used car will tell you, they're real reliable and you don't have to spend anything to constantly repair/maintain them !

    23. Re:Funding by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The Crown Vic probably wasn't all that much cheaper; remember, it was a rear-wheel drive car, and those cost more in assembly than FWD cars because of the prop shaft and rear differential. FWD cars are much easier to assemble in a factory; you just put everything together on a subframe, and then bolt that into the car.

      In addition, since the consumer market for (Ford-made) RWD cars has completely dried up, it was probably highly unprofitable for Ford to keep making a car model that only police would ever buy, instead of pushing them to use some a police-version of some other existing car. In fact, considering the police departments seem to have switched to Chrysler cars (like the Charger) these days, and Ford is doing quite well financially, maybe the profit they were making on police cars just wasn't worth the trouble, and it made more sense to just push them away altogether.

    24. Re:Funding by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      That would be the case if population and size of patrol areas wasn't increasing. Almost all cities are growing, increased population, increased density and increased size. Inflation only counts on increases in costs, not growth.

      What, you think that increased population doesn't produce increased sales tax revenue all by itself?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    25. Re:Funding by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      It was after all the Portland Police. I hope they're an outlier. Their standard response to a mentally ill person making trouble in public for a few years was executing the person on the sidewalk.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    26. Re:Funding by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      If anything, the marginal increase in cost of doing business should allow us to DECREASE the percentage of sales tax we need to collect year after year in order to fund the governments operation.
       
      There's something wrong with that idea. Ever read the Myth Adventures series by Robert Asprin? I think it's Myth Inc. in Action where he points out that growing the economy (in the story line through attempting to conquer and assimilate neighbors) while lowering taxes is an extremely bad idea.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    27. Re:Funding by gzuckier · · Score: 2

      A few decades ago my bike was stripped while locked up outside Sears. Wheeling the hulk home, I came upon a bunch of kids talking to a cop, while still holding my handlebars, seat, etc. Haha I thought, lucky me. Turns out I had the situation wrong. The cop wasn't grilling them, he was the older brother of one of their buddies, chewing the fat, and my claims that the parts they were carrying belonged to the bike i was dragging was just a wild claim, and it was just a coincidence that they were not only the exact parts the bike was missing, but were even the right size (French sizes, not the most common). Somewhat ironically, it was one of the kids who assumed the leadership role and presumably out of some remnant of common decency offered to give me back all the stuff with no admission of guilt; they actually whipped out a bunch of wrenches and rebuilt it, while the cop glared at me with hostility. anyway, the points are: cops are human, they're going to serve and protect not some conceptual citizenry, not "the state" in some Cliven Bundy paranoid wet dream, but their families and friends and neighbors and people with whom they identify.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    28. Re: Funding by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's priorities, not funding.

      A priority is shaking down law abiding citizens for money. A priority is terrorizing citizens in the middle of the night with an armed raid of a dozen officers to find a joint. A priority is terrorizing your children and shooting your dog on such a raid.

      A priority is padding pay checks with overtime pay. A *big* priority is confiscating cameras from citizens recording what the cops do, and then arresting them on some bogus charge. A priority is protecting cops by abusing citizens, using wholly disproportionate and unnecessary force. A priority is putting the populace in their place whenever they seem a little uppity.

      You realize that happens mainly to black people, followed by other minoritIes, followed by white kids who don't come from powerful families, followed by white adults who don't appear to be middle of the road middle or upper class, followed by white middle or working class, right?

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    29. Re:Funding by Reziac · · Score: 1

      As I recall, "police officer" came in at #60 on that list (last I looked, it's been a few years) -- well down among the more-mundane jobs that are generally regarded as safe.

      And I'm surprised you didn't get run in for 'loitering'.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    30. Re:Funding by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The person who was mugged was an eye witness to identify the mugger. If stopping violent crime where the criminal can be identified with both physical evidence and eye witniesses while carrying around a tracking device to make sure they are easiliy caught, is considered to be the police being "commandeered and led off on a fishing expideition", then we don't need them. At that point, they are no longer police, but mercenaries for business and government.

    31. Re:Funding by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      FYI 4WD is only useful in mud, not snow which quickly becomes ice.

      4WD (especially with a locking diff) is extremely useful in snow. It means those other two tires you were pushing through the snow are now pulling themselves onto and through the snow.

    32. Re:Funding by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Because anyone with a used car will tell you, they're real reliable and you don't have to spend anything to constantly repair/maintain them !

      Technically speaking, every car is a used car. And since all vehicles require maintenance, your sarcastic insinuations are entirely correct. They're also entirely meaningless.

    33. Re:Funding by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2

      Sounds simple but you can't do that with public money. Same goes for teachers, why not sack the dummies and reward the performers? Who decides who the performers are? How do you ensure a level playing field (ie some schools are in better socioeconomic areas etc) in order to compare performance? There is no magic bullet. One way leads to corruption, the other to bureaucracy. Somewher ein the middle is where we have landed, and although not perfect, it does work relatively well (relative to say Iran or Nigeria for example).

    34. Re:Funding by garote · · Score: 1

      What a pathetic individual.

    35. Re:Funding by adolf · · Score: 1

      *ahem*

      Sometimes, yes: The brakes can be bigger. I remember when Crown Vic cop cars started coming with 17" wheels, because that was the smallest that could be fit. (Other Crown Vic-alikes of that era aren't so-equipped, IIRC).

      Why would bigger brakes be needed? I'm not going to answer that. I'm just going to let you look at brake rotor sizes today vs 15 years ago, and come to your own conclusions.

      The difference in production costs of the base vehicle are negligible.

      There's a -lot- of extra wire and wiring provisions that come from the factory for a cop car: They're designed to be kitted out (and indeed are). And you forgot the extra coolers, and the larger and/or extra battery. None of this is free. A real spare tire is normal equipment (it gets removed immediately upon delivery, of course, to make room for other stuff but, but it means that the department will have a proper spare laying around for when a tire inevitably fails in the middle of a shift).

      One can easily look at the BOM and go "oh, well, it shouldn't be THAT much more..." until you start looking at doing the same things with aftermarket gear and aftermarket installers, and then: Yep, it's not so much money after all to have GM/Ford/whoever just take care of it. And it comes with a warranty.

      The chief virtues of the vic were mass and interior room. It's got to be seriously cramped in that shitty warmed-over Impala with all the cop shit on the dash.

      Fail. Mass? The new cars -- even the smallest -- are each heavier than the Crown Vic. Look at the chart in the article I linked previously.

      Granted, the old-new FWD Impala was garbage. The first generation killed batteries because the alternator wasn't able to keep up with Cop Stuff with the engine at idle. The second generation improved electrical things a bit, but eliminated the provision to mount the siren speaker behind the grill, instead requiring it to be mounted behind the driver's side headlamp (I shit you not) or externally.

      But it doesn't matter. The Impala is now dead as cop cars go, and should have been stillborn to begin with.

      The new Chevy Caprice is not at all like an Impala. The thing is huge inside, on-par with a Crown Vic. Made by Holden in Australia, it has little in common with domestically-produced GM cars except for drivetrain bits. Of the three current choices for a new cop car, it is the only one designed for the role of playing cops-and-robbers in the US.

      Oh, and it's also the most flexible, as far as installation options go. Programmable buttons on the dash for controlling aftermarket, third-party gear? Check. Automatic high-idle based on alternator load? Check. Built-in functionality for flashing headlamps and tail lamps? Check. Lots of dedicated 12V and ground connections, of various ampacities which are variously accessoriy-switched, third-party switched, or unswitched all amply pigtailed or studded out as appropriate forward, aft, and in midship? Check. Extra, dry wires already installed and documented as such for other accessories? Check. Extra relays wired in and supporting documentation, awaiting instruction? Check. Good paths for other cabling? Check.

      This all lends itself toward durability and safety, while maybe even reducing total end-user cost: One doesn't need to be all that competent with proper automotive wiring to do a fail-safe installation in a new cop car with zero firewall penetrations.

      [etc]

      ~$30k doesn't sound so bad to me.

      (You and I banter back and forth about cars a lot, but I've been working on cop cars for a decade. I'm always up for an apt debate, but I'm not sure you'll convince me of anything on these points. I've kitted out bunches of Crown Vics and police package Impalas, and while I seem to be moving away from that sort of work, I've also done a few Caprices, and some of the new Dodges and Fords. Time is money, and it's a lot less time have the companies who build automotive wiring harnesses do all this stuff on an assembly line than it is to have each individual car be a totally custom installation. It's also better.)

    36. Re:Funding by stenvar · · Score: 1

      Somewher ein the middle is where we have landed, and although not perfect, it does work relatively well (relative to say Iran or Nigeria for example).

      Unfortunately, it consumes an ever growing amount of resources without delivering any better results, year after year, and that can't go on forever. Remember that most of the failing countries used to be wealthy and powerful at some point in the past too.

    37. Re:Funding by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      GPS data is no less reliable than eye witnesses. GPS data IS EVIDENCE. If the cops won't use it, that doesn't change the fact that it IS EVIDENCE. Any argument that would render GPS data as not being evidence would apply exactly the same to eye witnesses and then some.

  71. Re:The police don't bother for stolen CARS these d by PPH · · Score: 1

    You kidding? Departments have had to put 'no pursuit' policies in place to keep the hothead cops from killing bystanders while chasing stolen wrecks.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  72. We have guns, radio, jackets........ by jzatopa · · Score: 1

    and maybe back up if we call enough friends and neighbors. We also have something else...an expectation that the law will be carried out by the people hired to do so. Andrew Smith should be embarrassed that civilians have to do his and his coworkers jobs for them. If they can't do their job then maybe it's time they found someone who can.

  73. Because your phone might be lying. by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    Just ask Wayne Dobson

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

  74. Wait for it to happen the other way around by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    I'm waiting for the victim to confront the thief, have it turn violent and the thief gets killed.
    If those stories start becoming popular in the news it might help lower theft.

  75. Death wish? Exaggerate much? by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I don't argue that it's possible... but is there actually any precedent of anyone being killed who confronted an alleged phone thief?

  76. Funded with traffic tickets by hessian · · Score: 1

    US police are woefully underfunded. They might get a bunch of SWAT stuff from the government, but actual basic policing, substations, and other items needed to process all but murders and attempted murders are not funded. Most cities are far more interested in making sure the professional sport league has the latest and greatest stadium so they won't move to a city that would. So, blame the city councils that deny adequate funding to city services, not the people who have to decide between catching the perps from a drive-by shooting versus some guy who lost his cellphone.

    The unpopular truth is that "We The People" don't want to vote for the actual funding required for police departments, because that would require us to admit how much crime runs among us and take a more seriously look at certain egalitarian illusions.

    Instead, we've made police dependent on and drunken with money from traffic tickets and drug forfeitures, which is a dishonest way of doing things.

    Given the choice between a complex truth and an easy lie, voters (as a group) always pick the lie.

    Don't blame cops for what the voters did.

  77. Re:"We don't go into the barrio for an iPhone " by RocketChild · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and going in with a SWAT team costs the tax payers $60,000 each time they have to make a simple house call that could be done with two Black & Whites. Wasn't Mayor Giuliani's policy of going after small stuff semi-successful at turning NYC around because they felt that knocking down the pattern's of small crime helped fleece the bigger crimes as well?

  78. That's Amazing by cpiera · · Score: 1

    Wow cool! Now i will also have my own blog here! Welcome! http://slashdot.org/~cpiera

  79. Why this is necessary by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    I'm faster, stronger, and better armed than fat and lazy police officers first of all. Second, I don't actually have to follow the laws like they do. What is the thief going to do, call the cops? And third, my friend had his iPhone stolen and the police refused to follow the find my iphone app to get it back. So he got me and some friends to go get it back. Simple as that. They cops are too busy/lazy/afraid of law suits to do a damn thing.

  80. What do the have we don't? by gabrieltss · · Score: 1

    "We have backup, guns, radio, jackets — all that stuff civilians don't have."

    Backup - yup - take some friends with you.
    Guns - yup - ever heard of the 2nd amendment. I own MANY.
    Radio - yup - anyone can buy radios with 5+ mile ranges on them - I have 4
    Jackets - yup - you can buy those too - I have one

    Ok so what do the police have we don't besides a worthless piece of tin on their shirt?

    Since the cops don't a rats @$$ about your radio - you should go get it yourself. The job of the cops is to clean up the mess afterwords - they don't care about your stolen iPhone....

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
    1. Re:What do the have we don't? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      "Ok so what do the police have we don't besides a worthless piece of tin on their shirt?"

      The legal right to violate any and all laws. Police can mow down your kids and you can not sue them. They are indemnified from any punishment, you cant sue them.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:What do the have we don't? by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Ok so what do the police have we don't besides a worthless piece of tin on their shirt?

      The blue code of silence.

      Almost unlimited sympathy from prosecutors and judges.

    3. Re:What do the have we don't? by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      Eh, if the police mowed down my kids, that country wouldn't have a police force anymore come next year.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  81. Special Treatment For Journalists by MrSteveSD · · Score: 1

    I had a friend who was violently mugged here in the UK, and the police weren't even interested in taking a statement. They just told him to go to the hospital if he felt dizzy (the robbers hit him over the head).

    When a UK journalist gets mugged though, he gets star treatment

  82. Let police officers take care of it. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    And they will do absolutely nothing. Cops are worthless, utterly worthless, you do not call them for help. And they do not recover stolen property unless you have a cop right there and point at the bag of your stuff and say, "you going to get that?"

    People need to take the law into their own hands, because the police will not do it.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  83. Re: Americans don't have guns? Or jackets? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Yet street criminals and gang members have no problem at all getting a gun.

    gun laws are there to punish the honest citizen, they are not there to stop criminals.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  84. Re:But, it is just a phone by dryeo · · Score: 1

    Good points from both ACs, namely its a problem handling funds as much as anything and still needs fixing somehow

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  85. Re:"We don't go into the barrio for an iPhone " by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    Maybe this helped at the margins, but Giuliani was riding a generation long decrease in crime rates that has been observed all across the country.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  86. Re:Uh we'll... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    Fortunately not all cops are such crooks but the good ones are out busting real criminals.

    What happens when they both call in sick at the same time?

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  87. Tell them you and your armed friends can do it by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    Just tell them that you and your friends have guns for self-defense and will go retrieve your property. The cops can do it for you or not.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  88. Re:two problems... by trawg · · Score: 1

    How is this not a thing with a reality TV show already?!?

  89. Sarcasm? by Skynyrd · · Score: 1

    Was the cop serious?
    "Let police officers take care of it." Uh, yeah, we'll be right on that.

    I can only dream of living in a city where the crime rate is low enough that cops will bother to talk to you about you stolen phone.

  90. TRUE STORY: This happened to me and police helped by cyberfringe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My backpack was stolen at Orlando airport while I was distracted. It contained my iPad, Macbook Air and a ton of other really good stuff. For various reasons I won't list here, we didn't discover it missing until we returned home. I used Find My iPhone and within ½ hour got a hit and the address when the thief turned on the iPad. Once I was sure he was not moving, I sent the commands to wipe everything. There is a story to tell about find the "right" police to report the crime to, which can be tough when the theft occurred at an airport, in one county, and the perp is in an adjacent county and you live in yet a third county. I made literally 24 calls to multiple police agencies and at multiple points was told, "do you know how many calls we get like this every single day?". Apparently, hundreds. As a rule, the police have bigger crooks to catch. I decided to make a huge fuss, invoking DHS, FBI and everything else I could think of. Finally, I hit on the right strategy. I had been telling the (multiple) police officers I talked with that I was going to get in my car and confront the guy, and they ALL thought that was a really bad idea. Maybe I felt like doing that but --- I'm NOT stupid, OK? -- but it was a good negotiating ploy. I told them I would be there in an hour and so they finally connected me with a deputy sheriff, in his patrol car and not too far from the perp's location. I guess he was convinced I was on my way and likely to get really really hurt, so I allowed him to talk me out of going to the house in exchange for a promise to visit it at dawn. He kept his word. An older woman answered the door. Here is the conversation: "Were you at the airport last night?" "No, my son went to pick up his girlfriend". "Is he here" "Yes, he's asleep" "Is that his car in the driveway?" "No, that's my car" "Mind if I have a look?" "Go right ahead." THE SHERIFF FOUND MY IPAD AND AIR! (But not the backpack). A few days later I had them back. After weeks of more wrangling and assuring the district attorney I would prosecute, the perp was arrested. Six months later, they have not tried him (yet). Bottom line: mixed results which I only gained by being both a pain in the ass to three law enforcement departments all night long, including convincing them I was going to get in a situation where something REALLY bad would happen and they would have to deal with it. I don't recommend this approach. The lesson: it is highly unlikely that the police will do anything. I was lucky. I recommend checking out a service called "Witness" at wittnessapp.com . They have some great ideas for security and will help you with all this (dealing with police) in the event your equipment is stolen. I hope never to have to use their service but now I'm better prepared.

    --
    There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about. -- John von Neumann
  91. Dude, that's my point by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    you _are_ paying all you can. The Rich aren't.

    And no, they're not mismanged. Gov't is a lot more efficient than you give it credit for. _Everything_ is mismanaged to a degree. Especially in a large organization. But large organizations are often the only way to get things done. Large scale cooperation is necessary to do anything major, like keep the piece in a city with over a million people...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  92. America baffles me by rebelwarlock · · Score: 1

    In Taiwan, I can go to the cops and say I lost my phone. They'll ask me to help them backtrack where I've been. Since most businesses and apartment buildings have security cameras, they can usually catch it on camera. Most phone thefts happen here because someone dropped their phone and someone else picked it up, then took out the SIM card. Also, people generally show security camera footage to cops without a warrant if they're looking for a lost phone. So they put the pieces together for me, pick the guy up, and get my phone back. Meanwhile, in the states, you hand them the location and they tell you to go fuck yourself. What the hell is wrong with your country?

  93. Requirements by locrien · · Score: 1

    So; as long as I have backup, flack jackets, radios and guns then its ok for me to go get my iphone back?
    I'm pretty sure I can fulfill those requirements right now as a civilian.
    Maybe I'll start my own iphone swat team business. Too bad I have an android with a broken volume up button that no one would want to steal.

  94. Re:But I DO have all of that stuff, sans vest by soundguy · · Score: 1

    doughnuts?

    --
    Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
  95. Some of it is education, rather than friendlyness by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    A big problem in many departments seems to be they just don't understand new technology. They don't understand that these devices can be located easily, and that they can have companies do the locating and give them a result if they get a warrant. Also that it is often worth doing because they nail someone with a bunch of other stolen goods usually.

    This kind of thing happened at the university I work at. One of our employees got his laptop stolen by what can only be described as extreme stupidity on his part. Laptop had Computrace so my boss called them and got the tracking going. They were able to locate it, it was still in the city and being used regularly. This was handed to the police... and nothing happened for a long time. There was back and forth with my boss, the university police, the city police, the general council, etc, etc. Finally they seemed to figure shit out, got a warrant, found the guy and busted him. They recovered a bunch of stolen goods.

    Of course after that it took even longer to actually get the laptop back, since it had to sit in the evidence room while all that went on, but we did get it.

    Really to me it seemed mostly like the police just didn't understand what was going on. They thought they were being asked to go on a wild goose chase or something and didn't understand that the case was being handed to them all wrapped with a bow.

    Education isn't the whole pboelm, but I think it'd help a lot. If police forces understood:

    1) What to do. As in what company do you call, what do you need (just a phone call, subpoena, warrant, etc), and what kind of information do you get.

    2) That this kind of thing gives you all the probable cause you need.

    3) That when you bust someone like this, you usually get to nail them for a bunch more stuff. They generally didn't just make one theft, so you get to recover a bunch more stolen goods, and often other crimes (drugs, etc) as well.

    Then I think it might be more common. They get a call saying "My phone has been stolen," they open up their "Policel2recoverphones" guide and start asking the questions it says and then go from there.

  96. The HELL it was. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    For those civilians that carry weapons for self-defense, no one should have to remind you that the origin of your right to do so was originally one of selflessness, i.e. to protect your defenseless neighbors at risk to your own life or property, either from raiding parties, foreign enemies, crime, or the government.

    The HELL it was.

    It was to protect yourSELF,your FAMILY, and the property that keeps you and them alive and prospering, first and foremost. Protecting your friends, neighbors, fellow tribesmen/countrymen, defenseless widows and orphans, etc. is, and always has been, farther down the list, and often a side-effect of your higher-priority guard work. (For instance: Crooks avoid houses "that shoot", and to a lesser extent the neighborhoods that contain them, when there are enough of them or enough uncertainty about which is which.)

    Altruism is a survival characteristic, but only when it's limited to its proper level. Putting most others above yourself in your priority scheme is a recipe for extinction (though very convenient for others who want to run your life for their own benefit). The law recognizes this, as does the bulk of the population who actually spend time thinking about and researching it. It's time you did, too.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:The HELL it was. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      [sarcasm]So sayth the Randroid. All hail the glorious John Galt![/sarcasm]

      For some of us, altruism isn't about survival. It's about the right thing to do to a fellow human being.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  97. Ink Dye like the banks by cgfsd · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't be awesome if you could activate an ink dye that exploded all over the person who stole your phone?
    Recovering a stolen phone is pretty much hopeless, but at least you would have the satisfaction that the perp looked like a smurf.
    Of course the downside, hackers would think it would be funny as hell to set off the dye on people they didn't like.

  98. Let's quit dinking around by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    Put a few grams of C-4 in those phones and really put the "kill" in "kill switch".

    1. Re:Let's quit dinking around by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I'm thinkin' that's actually doable, tho you'd want to be very careful to failsafe the circuit, so you don't get a suprise in your own pocket. But it would bring the value of 'hot' phones right down to zero in a hurry, and perps don't usually steal what they can't fence.

      Wasn't there a phone a few years back that could be remotely bricked? That would work too....

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  99. Priorities by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Had a similar situation.

    Had my car vandalized. Know exactly who did it (I accidentally parked in their Condo parking spot, was visiting a friend, another friend who had been there before said it was fine to park there). Knew exactly where they lived (Condo #). It was a secure building, and had video surveillance of them actually keying my car (was not subtle, keyed every panel, including hood and trunk).

    Police did nothing. Insurance did nothing, they just wrote it off and paid it out. I told them I was very willing to go to court for them (even if it meant missing time off work), as I was very angry (my car was literately like 2 weeks old).

    About the only thing I could do was go after them civilly. However since the insurance paid out, I would only really be able to go after them for the insurance deductible which was 500$, and I would incur more than that myself taking the time off, travel, etc... to do it. So i ate my rage.

    Last year I had someone break into my house while I was there. Police took a report. Never heard anything again.

    Yet I was drunk and noisy one night and one of my neighbors called the cops on me and one showed up to tell me to turn it down. Which is fine, I was kind of being a jerk in hindsight. However it is very hard for me to think of things like home invasion and thousands of dollars worth of theft or vandalism, not being much of a "priority" but yet they have time to come and chastise me about listening to my music too loud on the weekend.

  100. I gave up on police assistance years ago.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    1. My truck was stolen in Los Angeles. I reported it within an hour. They called me about 40 days later when my truck wound up in a police impound yard. It had been parked in a no parking zone about ten miles from where it was stolen the same night it was stolen. It collected a parking ticket each day for a month, while it was parked in a red no parking zone. After it collected more than 30 parking tickets, they decided to tow it, and that was when they discovered it was stolen.

    2. I was mugged and shot by a raving meth addict in Los Angeles. I had all the windows of my truck shot out, and got a wound from a bullet that fortunately only grazed my neck. I went to the police, to show them my wound, and my shattered windows and make a report. The LA County Sheriff took my report, but claimed it was probably not their jurisdiction. I knew it was, but they were unsure. Six months later they sent me an apology letter, the result of an internal investigation, saying that they now realized it was their jurisdiction. That was when they finally asked me to look at mugshots. They never found the guy.

    3. I was mugged and beaten in Long Beach. The police were called and they insisted I go to the emergency room so they could document my wounds. I insisted I was ok and did not need medical help. The police said there was a California Victim of Violent Crimes fund that would cover the costs. For three years a collection agency called me at least once a week to harass me about the medical bills incurred by my "free" visit to the emergency room that night. I got no medical attention, just photos taken of my wounds for the police. They never caught anyone. I got mugged twice, once by the muggers and once by the police. It took me a lot longer to repair my credit after the police caused this problem than it did to recover from the beating.

    Now, if I have a problem and can't solve it myself without police, I just let it go. It actually surprises me how many here seem to have a similar sentiment. Once in a while the police do something right, but I prefer just to do without their services.

    1. Re:I gave up on police assistance years ago.... by Mirar · · Score: 1

      I think there's many, many similar stories to yours.

  101. Big Trouble In Little Chine quote by rhyous · · Score: 1

    Quote: "Cops got better things to do than get killed." --Wang from Big Trouble in Little China

  102. Considering how corrupt LAPD is by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    The Commander's advice doesn't carry much weight.

    Then again, he is making it clear what priority theft has to the LAPD.

    Which is exactly why people confront the thieves themselves.

  103. Re:Let police officers take care of it? by fafalone · · Score: 1

    Better yet, tell them the perp had a small amount of drugs. They'll be busting down the door with the SWAT team and shooting dogs in no time.

  104. do your job by Mirar · · Score: 1

    If they don't want civilians do to their job, they should do their job.

    What's hard to understand about that?

    Mind, It's also disproportionate to fetch iphones with SWAT teams.
    These things do not always point to the correct address.