|
Snet
United States3573 Posts
On November 23 2009 12:49 Frits wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2009 12:40 Snet wrote:On November 23 2009 12:03 Frits wrote:On November 23 2009 11:05 Snet wrote:On November 23 2009 10:49 IntoTheWow wrote:
Also I don't know why you defend this method so much. Why not just patrol the streets and persecute the people that commit the crimes on their own without a set up.
edit:
Also I don't see how the seriousness of the crime or how often it happens affects the morals of the law.
We are not debating if we should use this method in X or Y cases. We are debating whether it's moral or not for the law to use this methods in the first place. So it doesn't matter if crime happens 100 or 1,000 times a year. These stings are in controlled environments and with vehicles that can be shutoff remotely. Yes I think it is moral to have sting operations like this. Even if they do make it incredibly easy to take the car, its still catching criminals. Also people who are inclined to steal something as expensive as a car are probably people involved in other crimes. For example, the girl in the OP video had warrants. Patrolling the streets not knowing where to look takes time, manpower, and money. It's also safer if they know where a crime is going to be committed, so they can position themselves and know the layout of any escape routes. How is it moral? Those people are only criminals because they fall for a scenario created by the people that should uphold the law. You can't label someone a criminal before he has actually comitted a crime. All they're doing is solving the crime they created themselves. This is the most counter productive thing I have ever seen. There's absolutely no way this will reduce crime since a crime is dependant on person + situation, where the situation variable is way more relevant. The chances that they catch someone who is actually looking to steal a car before this situation presented itself is really small. Not to mention that NOONE leaves their car with the keys still in it. Does anyone here even wonder why we put locks on things? Because it reduces crime. If crime were completely dependent on personality there would be no point in locking things, since it wouldn't affect crime rates. How is stealing something not a crime? All the police are doing is making it easy to do. That's why I agree with bait car stings. What I'm trying to say is, just because it's easy doesn't mean it's not a crime. People do leave keys in their car, people do leave their cars running. Sure, it's not smart but it does happen. My uncle worked at a gas station for the majority of his adult life and he told me countless stories of people coming into the store and going out to find their car missing because they left the keys in the ignition. Stuff like this does happen. I never said it's not a crime. I never said anything even close to that. You create a completely new statement that's incredibly easy to refute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man).
Sorry, I didn't see your edit. I don't understand what in my post relates to the straw man theory?
Man, I'm getting a headache from reading all these links, haha. I'll check back tomorrow on what you say, this is all pretty interesting.
Edit:
Oh, are you saying that the uncle part doesn't relate to cops setting people up? If so all I'm trying to say is cops aren't setting up unrealistic scenarios, this stuff does happen.
|
I think its reasonable to assume areas with high car theft are areas with high crime rates in every category. People are more likely to steal not because they are missing some moral backbone that nice white folks happen to magically possess but because those black people getting caught on the show are poor, have no education and can not find jobs. Enticing people in poverty to steal is exploitation. Please don't compare this to yourself and say, "I would never do this" so it's ok for those people to go to jail because you are not those people. This is what happens when each instance of crime is taken out of context to be examined like universal law. This might be a temporary band-aid to reduce car theft in some ghetto but only as long as people find ways to bypass it.
The criminals caught on the show are not the deviants like most of you think.
|
On November 23 2009 13:06 Snet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2009 12:49 Frits wrote:On November 23 2009 12:40 Snet wrote:On November 23 2009 12:03 Frits wrote:On November 23 2009 11:05 Snet wrote:On November 23 2009 10:49 IntoTheWow wrote:
Also I don't know why you defend this method so much. Why not just patrol the streets and persecute the people that commit the crimes on their own without a set up.
edit:
Also I don't see how the seriousness of the crime or how often it happens affects the morals of the law.
We are not debating if we should use this method in X or Y cases. We are debating whether it's moral or not for the law to use this methods in the first place. So it doesn't matter if crime happens 100 or 1,000 times a year. These stings are in controlled environments and with vehicles that can be shutoff remotely. Yes I think it is moral to have sting operations like this. Even if they do make it incredibly easy to take the car, its still catching criminals. Also people who are inclined to steal something as expensive as a car are probably people involved in other crimes. For example, the girl in the OP video had warrants. Patrolling the streets not knowing where to look takes time, manpower, and money. It's also safer if they know where a crime is going to be committed, so they can position themselves and know the layout of any escape routes. How is it moral? Those people are only criminals because they fall for a scenario created by the people that should uphold the law. You can't label someone a criminal before he has actually comitted a crime. All they're doing is solving the crime they created themselves. This is the most counter productive thing I have ever seen. There's absolutely no way this will reduce crime since a crime is dependant on person + situation, where the situation variable is way more relevant. The chances that they catch someone who is actually looking to steal a car before this situation presented itself is really small. Not to mention that NOONE leaves their car with the keys still in it. Does anyone here even wonder why we put locks on things? Because it reduces crime. If crime were completely dependent on personality there would be no point in locking things, since it wouldn't affect crime rates. How is stealing something not a crime? All the police are doing is making it easy to do. That's why I agree with bait car stings. What I'm trying to say is, just because it's easy doesn't mean it's not a crime. People do leave keys in their car, people do leave their cars running. Sure, it's not smart but it does happen. My uncle worked at a gas station for the majority of his adult life and he told me countless stories of people coming into the store and going out to find their car missing because they left the keys in the ignition. Stuff like this does happen. I never said it's not a crime. I never said anything even close to that. You create a completely new statement that's incredibly easy to refute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man). Sorry, I didn't see your edit. I don't understand what in my post relates to the straw man theory? Man, I'm getting a headache from reading all these links, haha. I'll check back tomorrow on what you say, this is all pretty interesting.
Not to get completely offtopic but by saying that what I said is the same as saying that people who steal in this situation are not criminals you are changing my argument in something incredibly easy to refute (that stealing cars in this situation is okay, which it's obviously not).
Oh, are you saying that the uncle part doesn't relate to cops setting people up? If so all I'm trying to say is cops aren't setting up unrealistic scenarios, this stuff does happen.
Nah that's not what I meant. Although I do think the uncle part is somewhat irrelevant because obviously he's gonna have a lot more stories about stolen cars than cars that were not stolen (Availability heuristic, in case you're actually interested in these argument things, I'm just always assuming people are because I am). :p It's still unrealistic to leave a car out in the middle of a street with keys in it for a relatively long time. At a gas station at least the owner is always very near.
|
What they should really do is just scare the daylights out of them by arresting them, tossing them in jail for a night(but telling them it is years) and then let them go the next day. That ought to teach them a good enough lesson.
|
On November 23 2009 13:19 Fontong wrote:
What they should really do is just scare the daylights out of them by arresting them, tossing them in jail for a night(but telling them it is years) and then let them go the next day. That ought to teach them a good enough lesson.
i actually had a dream about being sentenced to jail for life time, it was scary.
|
is awesome32278 Posts
I agree with zulu_nation's post.
|
i think what frits is saying committing a crime like this is not the same as committing crime you are not baited into. Then it becomes if this is enough "baiting" to be labeled as entrapment. People have said it's far from it and I would agree. This is a crime either way but the criminals, their motive, how law enforcement should handle these and try to control and reduce these types of crimes is definitely not by planting more bait cars. I actually think "the wire" is a pretty good show to explain all this. Basically, the problems with neighborhoods this show targets or the areas with high crime in general, have much deeper problems which make their inhabitants more likely to commit crimes than the average citizen. But by making this a reality show and avoiding discussing the context it only creates more prejudice and misunderstanding.
|
read it wrong, but I was in agreement with him.
|
When the cops tempt people to commit crimes, something is seriously wrong with the justice system imo
|
Austin10833 Posts
On November 23 2009 13:22 druj wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2009 13:09 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I think its reasonable to assume areas with high car theft are areas with high crime rates in every category. People are more likely to steal not because they are missing some moral backbone that nice white folks happen to magically possess but because those black people getting caught on the show are poor, have no education and can not find jobs. Enticing people in poverty to steal is exploitation. Please don't compare this to yourself and say, "I would never do this" so it's ok for those people to go to jail because you are not those people. This is what happens when each instance of crime is taken out of context to be examined like universal law. This might be a temporary band-aid to reduce car theft in some ghetto but only as long as people find ways to bypass it.
The criminals caught on the show are not the deviants like most of you think. Seriously, how many of you would pick up a 100 dollar bill on the ground if you felt that no one will catch you?
Totally irrelevant.
|
is awesome32278 Posts
On November 23 2009 13:24 BroOd wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2009 13:22 druj wrote:On November 23 2009 13:09 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I think its reasonable to assume areas with high car theft are areas with high crime rates in every category. People are more likely to steal not because they are missing some moral backbone that nice white folks happen to magically possess but because those black people getting caught on the show are poor, have no education and can not find jobs. Enticing people in poverty to steal is exploitation. Please don't compare this to yourself and say, "I would never do this" so it's ok for those people to go to jail because you are not those people. This is what happens when each instance of crime is taken out of context to be examined like universal law. This might be a temporary band-aid to reduce car theft in some ghetto but only as long as people find ways to bypass it.
The criminals caught on the show are not the deviants like most of you think. Seriously, how many of you would pick up a 100 dollar bill on the ground if you felt that no one will catch you? Totally irrelevant.
What if you were wingsandrockx and I left an unlocked M3 in front of you. Would that be considered entrapment?
|
is awesome32278 Posts
And imagine I modified the maps on LastShadow's starcraft folder. He makes a game but he doesn't notice the minerals and unit build times are modified until the game started. If he continues playing, is that considered cheating?
|
I'm talking about the propensity of people to do these actions, not so much if its wrong or not, or the definition of it..and I was agreeing with him, something you were too.
So I'm taking, you thought I was arguing against him?
this was directed at itw :S
|
Austin10833 Posts
On November 23 2009 13:28 IntoTheWow wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2009 13:24 BroOd wrote:On November 23 2009 13:22 druj wrote:On November 23 2009 13:09 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I think its reasonable to assume areas with high car theft are areas with high crime rates in every category. People are more likely to steal not because they are missing some moral backbone that nice white folks happen to magically possess but because those black people getting caught on the show are poor, have no education and can not find jobs. Enticing people in poverty to steal is exploitation. Please don't compare this to yourself and say, "I would never do this" so it's ok for those people to go to jail because you are not those people. This is what happens when each instance of crime is taken out of context to be examined like universal law. This might be a temporary band-aid to reduce car theft in some ghetto but only as long as people find ways to bypass it.
The criminals caught on the show are not the deviants like most of you think. Seriously, how many of you would pick up a 100 dollar bill on the ground if you felt that no one will catch you? Totally irrelevant. What if you were wingsandrockx and I left an unlocked M3 in front of you. Would that be considered entrapment?
If I were wingsandrockx I would 1) Have my own M3, plus my back-up M3 2) Have the cash in my wallet to BUY another M3 3) Probably drive the abandoned M3 into the ocean to make sure no poor people accidentally wandered by and got it. Poor people don't deserve M3's, and they lower its brand value for all true M3 owners.
|
Austin10833 Posts
On November 23 2009 13:31 druj wrote:
I'm talking about the propensity of people to do these actions, not so much if its wrong or not, or the definition of it..and I was agreeing with him, something you were too.
So I'm taking, you thought I was arguing against him?
I was saying your example was pretty unrelated to the topic in any meaningful way.
I honestly don't know what to think here. On the one hand, the people taking these cars aren't naive rubes duped into being bad by the police, they're willing criminals. If you've ever had your car stolen, you'll know how infuriating it is and how disruptive it can be to your everyday life.
On the other, sometimes things like this serve to perpetuate stereotypes and hyper-criminalize misdemeanor acts. It often presumes to make out intent, and I think they're a difference between taking a car for a joyride and taking it to a chop-shop, a distinction this show rarely, if ever, seems to make.
|
The bait car program is not ridiculous, it's actually pretty awesome since it lowered car thefts in my city by 47% (as official figures go.)
As far as I'm concerned, whatever puts the thieves in jail is fair play for me. Like some people say, a law-abiding citizen, or at least anyone who is afraid to go to jail and get raped, will not touch a car that has unlocked doors, let alone a car that is idling. I've seen many unlocked car doors, and garages that have been left open, and i just go past it. It's not hard to avoid crime.
Besides, in my city, they have warning signs in parking lots that clearly state they are holding a bait car program in the lot. If you're a dumb thief and still get caught, that's your fault.
|
why can't everyone in the ninth ward be more like you
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
There's a lot of grey here. But also an important distinction to make.
What makes this entrapment is not the use of a car as a lure, but the manner in which the car is set up. A bait car designed for catching real car thieves (of which there are not many) is a car left in an area that has been prone to car theft. The aim to to bring the known car thieves in the area out into the open. The secondary aim of such a program is to create suspicion among thieves, who after a highly publicized program, may be unwilling to steal a car for fear that it is bait.
What makes this bait car a case of really not-so-good entrapment and therefore entertaining for TV, is that this car is made steal-able to any random member of the general public. The keys in the ignition, the engine running, this is akin to giving a person on the street the ski mask, the crowbar, the plans of the museum, the location of the priceless ruby, ect. It's giving ordinary people all the tools they need to commit a robbery they were not previously considering.
This is not good, imo.
On November 23 2009 14:00 jello24 wrote:
The bait car program is not ridiculous, it's actually pretty awesome since it lowered car thefts in my city by 47% (as official figures go.)
As far as I'm concerned, whatever puts the thieves in jail is fair play for me. Like some people say, a law-abiding citizen, or at least anyone who is afraid to go to jail and get raped, will not touch a car that has unlocked doors, let alone a car that is idling. I've seen many unlocked car doors, and garages that have been left open, and i just go past it. It's not hard to avoid crime.
Besides, in my city, they have warning signs in parking lots that clearly state they are holding a bait car program in the lot. If you're a dumb thief and still get caught, that's your fault.
You live.... here.
On November 23 2009 14:07 zulu_nation8 wrote:
why can't everyone in the ninth ward be more like you
Unfair. jello was speaking about a very successful, very positive bait car program not unlike the one that we have right next door to me in Minneapolis. Awareness that a car might be a bait car is very important.
|
On November 23 2009 13:01 Frits wrote:
Enough with the strawmen, I didn't say it's a manufactured fantasy I said it's unrealistic.
I don't see how I'm misinterpreting your argument, I'm merely using stronger language.
On November 23 2009 13:01 Frits wrote:
They leave these cars out there until someone stumbles upon them, not leave them for 5 minutes in places that are likely to have cars with keys still in them (at gas stations etc, where the likeliness of criminals waiting to steal something is much larger). If you leave a car out in the open for a large amount of time the likeliness of it getting stolen increases until it reaches eventually 100%.
Yeah, and if I were to live for 4000 years, the chances of my having sex with a midget increase until it's just about a certainty! Again, I don't see how this is relevant. Are you implying that nothing separates me from those women other than opportunity? Stealing a car is not a decision to be taken lightly, and the vast majority of people DO NOT do it the second the opportunity presents itself. This is why I was using the example of smaller cities which have a lesser prevalence of gangs, drug addictions, crime, and social problems in general. People can and do leave their car running in locales where there are not a large number of opportunistic criminals.
On November 23 2009 13:01 Frits wrote:
This is not proving anything, the police are just creating statistics to look good. They're preventing car theft because they create so many car thefts and instantly solve them that the amount of real car thefts are left ignored.
What? They can't just "ignore" actual car theft. If it's reported it's included in the statistics...
On November 23 2009 13:01 Frits wrote:
The crime rates of car theft probably rose with 70% when they started doing these busts before they dropped 70%.
"These statistics are flawed and misleading. Listen to my personal opinion and judgments based off absolutely nothing but a hunch instead."
On November 23 2009 13:01 Frits wrote:
Also you said it's common in small towns. I said it's irrelevant. And suddenly it's relevant because it happens rarely in cities? That doesn't make sense.
As stated above, it is relevant as it sets a bar for a standard of human behavior that we should be expected to abide by. The statistics for a larger city are to refute your claim that the scenario is unrealistic.
|
On November 23 2009 10:22 IntoTheWow wrote:
The law should try to get people NOT to commit crimes, not trying to get the worst out of people to nail them.
I agree with IntoTheWow-- this doesn't really catch car thiefs per sé. Rather, it tries to entice people (who may or may not normally steal things) into stealing. It's like asking for a bad thing to happen. A person may not normally steal a car, but gift-wrap it with keys in a started engine, and you have a breakdown of morals waiting to happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
