iThieves

Wiis, PlayStations, iPads, blogging platforms, Facebook and anything else worthy of buzz in the digital world.
Shorty
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 12:53 pm

iThieves

Postby Shorty » Thu Jan 06, 2011 9:57 am

I don't own an ipad or iphone, but if I did this is why I wouldn't carry them around in public.

http://madisonwest.channel3000.com/cont ... old-victim
Mall Robbers Target iPad, 63-Year-Old Victim

"An off-duty Whitewater police officer tackled a robber inside West Towne Mall Tuesday afternoon, and with the help of the victim's husband, temporarily detained one of two men who stole an iPad from a 63-year-old woman Tuesday, according to the Madison Police Department. Police said one of the men grabbed the woman's iPad and pushed her down in a narrow hallway just after she left a bathroom. When the husband heard his wife scream, he yelled for help, police said."
Last edited by Shorty on Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Crockett
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1206
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:37 am

Re: iThiefs

Postby Crockett » Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:18 am

Sounds like that off-duty cop got owned.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8674
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Re: iThiefs

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Jan 06, 2011 10:21 am

Good for you, Shorty. Would you buy one in public? There's an Apple Store at West Towne; the story doesn't say if the iPad had just been purchased.

What if people like your winter coat, or your new pair of shoes? They might try to steal 'em. Gonna go without those in public, too?

If I decide to not put my property at risk at the mall, it'll be because of this nonsense, not your nonsense:

The officer was holding him down with the assistance of the woman's husband when the other robber returned, pushing the husband and knocking him down and then kicking the officer.

Fearing the men might be armed, and believing this was a property crime, the off-duty officer let go the pinned robber, police said.

[emphasis mine]

Never mind the fact that property crime is still crime, what about the kicking and shoving? That's okay now?

Shorty
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 12:53 pm

Re: iThiefs

Postby Shorty » Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:48 am

TheBookPolice wrote:What if people like your winter coat, or your new pair of shoes? They might try to steal 'em. Gonna go without those in public, too?

Those clothing items are not as easy to steal, not as use able for thiefs (need the right size) or for resale as stolen electronics are. How many stories do you hear of people who have their coats or shoes stolen? Not nearly as many as people who have electronics stolen. Electronics are a hotter commodity. Also, new shoes or coats decline in value more quickly with usage than electronics do.

I think it's risky to be walking around with a fancy cell phone or a $500 -$700 ipad in pulbic. Same goes for laptops worth even more.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8674
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Re: iThiefs

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Jan 06, 2011 11:59 am

Let's see...

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/201 ... z1AH7BGU4v

[The Air Jordan] shoe did much more than change a sport. It marked the acceleration of a new relationship - in some cases a very dangerous one - between kids, especially inner-city black kids, shoes and basketball. That's a relationship from which we are still recovering, and one that, thanks to media manipulation, we have never properly understood.

It began in the late 1980s, as the black and red Air Jordans set off such a feeding frenzy that in some communities young people were shot and killed for their sneakers. Newspapers and TV shows hyped the alleged plague by converging on black youth looking for smoking gun answers. Sports Illustrated ran a 1990 cover story: "Your Sneakers or Your Life." Through the racialized eyes of the media, this was supposedly and exclusively a black youth phenomenon.

The truth was far more complex. A high school classmate of mine, a police officer for 30 years serving in the Washington, D.C., area during the period, recalls a spike in incidents of crimes related to sneakers. But he cautioned that it was no higher than crimes for all sports apparel - specifically team jackets and other gear.

[emphasis mine]

Still, easily-frightened people--or people looking for an excuse to hate Air Jordans--immediately associated them with increased danger.

You really think a Samsung Galaxy's any safer against being targeted by a mugger? How about that car you're driving? Think it's too ratty or worn to merit a theft? Think again.

Bad people do bad stuff. Using that as a justification for either paranoia or technophobia is weak sauce.

Shorty
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2587
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 12:53 pm

Re: iThieves

Postby Shorty » Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:03 pm

Your article says "The violence, though still with us, has subsided. And its target has shifted from sneakers. Now it is iPods and cell phones that get stolen".

I would feel safer walking West town mall in new Air Jordans than I would carrying an ipad. I can lock my car. It's never been stolen. I bet Craigslist has more stolen electronics for sale than it does stolen cars or sneakers.

But in general, yes for stuff of any kind you take out in public: cars, cloths, electronics, it's more likely to be stolen if it cost more. I still say electronics is the easiest to steal of those items and the easiest for thieves to use or resell. But shouldn't you be worrying about stolen books? What's the black market for them?
Last edited by Shorty on Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: iThiefs

Postby green union terrace chair » Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:34 pm

TheBookPolice wrote:Never mind the fact that property crime is still crime, what about the kicking and shoving? That's okay now?

Are you criticizing this officer for backing off? He was off-duty ... did he have a gun / tazer / cuffs to subdue the suspects? Did he have a radio to call for help? Two aggressive and possibly armed suspects versus one un-armed, off-duty cop is not a good match-up.

Good for the officer for jumping in to help, but he had to make a judgement call that he might be in over his head and withdraw.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8674
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:53 pm

I'm not second-guessing any tactical decision; I'm not trained as a law enforcement officer, so I defer to what the off-duty officer thought was appropriate. But as it is worded--"believing this was a property crime"--the description implies a "just" between "was" and "a", and that law enforcement typically disengages if it's just stuff that's at stake.

Maybe that's true, and obvious to everyone but me. But I see a person as the victim of this crime, not just the iPad--which you'll note gets first billing in the article, over the human.

Ducatista
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4883
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:31 pm
Location: 53703

Re: iThieves

Postby Ducatista » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:15 pm

The post-robbery shoving and kicking didn't occur until the guy who'd fled saw his buddy on the ground and returned to help him.

Could be that the policy with property crime is "If you can't get control, don't escalate." Which seems reasonable to me.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8674
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:25 pm

Ducatista wrote:Could be that the policy with property crime is "If you can't get control, don't escalate." Which seems reasonable to me.

To me, too. I'm just not thrilled or heartened by the way it was expressed, absent any sort of official statement from law enforcement on standard procedure.

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby green union terrace chair » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:43 pm

TheBookPolice wrote:I'm not second-guessing any tactical decision; I'm not trained as a law enforcement officer, so I defer to what the off-duty officer thought was appropriate. But as it is worded--"believing this was a property crime"--the description implies a "just" between "was" and "a", and that law enforcement typically disengages if it's just stuff that's at stake.

Maybe that's true, and obvious to everyone but me. But I see a person as the victim of this crime, not just the iPad--which you'll note gets first billing in the article, over the human.


Can you understand that a property crime is less important than an assault or other violent crime? Robbery < Assault < Murder?

I interpret the event to have transpired like this:
1. Suspect grabs iPad, victim starts yelling.
2. Off-duty officer responds, apprehends one suspect.
3. Second suspect returns, things escalate to a physical struggle with two suspects, potential weapon.
4. In order to avoid further escalation, officer disengages, expecting suspects to flee instead of aggressing further.

thebookpolice
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 8674
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby thebookpolice » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:49 pm

green union terrace chair wrote:Can you understand that a property crime is less important than an assault or other violent crime? Robbery < Assault < Murder?

Sure can. You know what it is? That it wasn't said that way. That it was reported (in the police report, mind you) as a property crime apparently not meriting further engagement. It irks me that the report didn't state "In order to avoid further escalation, officer disengages, expecting suspects to flee instead of aggressing further." It reads "believing this was a property crime, the off-duty officer let go the pinned robber."

And I started off annoyed by Shorty's "see, this is why technology is bad" silliness. I'm in a huff, making more of this than I should. Sorry.

green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3132
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby green union terrace chair » Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:52 pm

TheBookPolice wrote:And I started off annoyed by Shorty's "see, this is why technology is bad" silliness. I'm in a huff, making more of this than I should. Sorry.


Rick James says fuck yo' iPad.

I_Am_Before_Names
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:47 pm
Location: West Side
Contact:

Re: iThieves

Postby I_Am_Before_Names » Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:16 pm

If you take your CyberBuddies to the mall, there is no need to fear the iThieves. No more going solo.

indycoyote
Forum Addict
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 9:48 am

Re: iThieves

Postby indycoyote » Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:47 am

See, if we just had concealed carry, why that old woman could have screamed "make my day" and opened up on these brutes with her 357 Magnum...right there in the mall...imagine the carnage!


Return to “Technology & Video Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest