Posted by Scott on December 21st, 2007 — Posted in Property Crime
During the holiday season, pickpockets and thieves can target the stressed, hurrying people at all the packed stores and malls.
Make sure you keep track of all your possessions and your wallet or purse. Also, avoid carrying a lot of cash on you. Also, if you notice your credit cards, debit cards, or gift cards missing, make sure you call the provider as quickly as possible. A thief can more easily make large fraudulent charges during the holidays because stores expect big orders during the holidays.
If you go on a big shopping trip, you can consider taking breaks and locking what you have already bought in the trunk of your car. Of course, you may not want to leave very valuable objects even in the trunk of your car.
Even though retailers have every right to advertise and sell their products, remember that they will try to legally swindle your into buying needless items over the holidays. I suggest that you consider resisting the commercialized versions of the holidays. And instead you can look for more personal (and less costly) ways to show your appreciation for your friends and family.
What do you think?
No Comments »
Posted by Scott on November 18th, 2007 — Posted in Property Crime
I just read an article about a man who left his wallet and some other stuff in his car while at dinner. Thieves stole his stuff and used his credit cards to charge $2,500 before he even knew.
The main lesson is to not leave valuables in the car.
I would hope that the credit card company did not charge the man with the $2,500 of fraudulent purchases, but the article seems to imply that he had to pay it.
I would recommend being very careful about taking out credit cards with high limits unless the company has policies to not charge you for fraudulent use. Check the paperwork carefully, and do not trust credit card company slogans that say you are generally protected from fraudulent charges. With credit cards, thieves can steal more money than you have. They will not just leave you with nothing; they will leave you in debt.
I do not own any credit cards, so that neither I nor thieves can spend more money than I have.
What do you think?
1 Comment »
Posted by Scott on October 18th, 2007 — Posted in Property Crime
A recent AlterNet article pointed out the absurdity of strict drug laws in comparison to the softer laws against violent crime. The article focuses on the draconian laws against the possession of crack cocaine. The first sentence of the article sums it up nicely: “When crack cocaine possession means 24 years in prison and manslaughter means only 3, you know something is seriously wrong with the U.S. criminal justice system.”
Of course, crack cocaine has such strict penalties, because poor people and black people use it most of all. These laws date back decades, and the long-running war on drugs has always been motivated greatly by racism and classism. The war on drugs has in many cases been a war on poor people and minorities. Remember, in the United States, more than four-fifths of people tried with crack cocaine offences are black, which helps explain why the penalties for crack cocaine are literally 100 times more strict than those for powder cocaine which is more often used by richer and whiter users.
I found the following excerpts out of the article particularly telling:
Nearly 6 out of 10 people in state prison for a drug offense have no history of violence or high-level drug-selling activity but are often receiving harsher sentences than people who do. People caught with the drug in 2004, the last year for which data is available, served an average of ten years in federal penitentiaries, while the average convict served 2.9 years for manslaughter, 3.1 years for assault and 5.4 years for sexual abuse.
[…]
A drug abuser whose drug of choice is powder cocaine would have to be found with more than two cups of it (500 grams) before receiving the same sentence as a person caught with two sugar packets worth (5 grams) of crack.
[…]
Since crack is made by cooking powder cocaine with baking soda or another base when it reaches the street retail level, the 100-to-1 ratio has served to exact harsher punishments on low-level dealers than the kingpins supplying the raw material. According to USSC data, low-level crack sellers are punished 300 times more severely than high-level, international cocaine traffickers on an imprisonment-per-gram basis.
I find the last statistic especially interesting, though unsurprising. The government often seems more interested in using drugs as an excuse to wage a war on non-violent people, but never actually stopping drug trafficking. Besides, the drug kingpins make enough money from the multi-billion drug industry that they can buy off cops and government officials. The government and powers that be have many reasons to keep the drug game going, which explains the CIA’s continued promotion of drug trafficking.
Throwing non-violent drug offenders in jails and prisons does not help protect the general working class, but it does make loads of money for the government, the private-owned prison industry, the police unions, the drug kingpins and their cronies. Legalizing drugs would take the multi-billion-dollar industry away from organized criminals.
Violence and victimizing crime are increased not by drugs but rather by the war on drugs.
At the very least, the government could make the drug laws consistent and take out the racism and classism. Or course, if they threw many people besides racial minorities and poor people in jail, then the general public might start to object to the whole idea of jailing non-violent people for victimless crimes. The government needs to keep the racist inconsistencies in drug laws, because few people seem to care when it’s the black and poor being oppressed.
What do you think?
2 Comments »
Posted by Scott on September 4th, 2007 — Posted in Property Crime
In a recent article, Sunstkitts.com published some security tips for business owners to do their part in the prevention of robbery:
Have at least two employees open and close the business;
Do not release personal information to strangers;
Keep purses and personal valuables locked in desks or lockers;
Install a robbery alarm and use it;
Place a surveillance camera behind the cash register facing the front counter.
Place excess money in a safe or deposit it as soon as possible;
Don’t use marked “moneybags” that make it obvious to would-be robbers you are carrying money for deposit, instead place it inside of some other bag.
They seem like good tips to me. What do you think?
1 Comment »
Posted by Scott on July 28th, 2007 — Posted in Property Crime
While a thief always holds full legal responsibility for their crime, potential victims often hold some non-legal blame. Potential victims leave themselves vulnerable to attack and attractive to potential attackers.
A victim’s stupidity in no way absolves the perpetrator. Still, if you want to avoid getting robbed, you have to protect yourself by not leaving yourself open to attack.
In addition to the common sense precautions, such as locking doors and staying in well-lit areas, you also want to avoid flashiness. Wearing needlessly fancy jewelry and otherwise obtaining and/or flaunting needlessly expensive possessions will nearly invite thieves, robbers, and burglars. Not only will these victimizers want to take what they see, your flaunting will lead them to think you just generally have excessive amounts of wealth to steal.
Modern humans have the dishonorable tendency to try and show off and make others jealous. Doing that will catch the eye of crooks.
What do you think?
No Comments »
