In any event, the cops taking an interets is a good thing. Maybe they should spend more time on this rather than cracking down on drug crime or other useless crap.

Yeah that was dumb, and its pretty apparent the author agrees.

However, if your argument is along the lines of “she gets what she deserves” or “they shouldn’t waste police resources when its their own fault” I have a problem with that.

Taking that same argument to its logical and absurd conclusion, you can easily end up with something like this :

“Well, that girl shouldn’t have passed out at the party. She deserved 20 dudes running train on her while she was unconscious”

The best way to test the validity of a position being argued is to take it to the absurd extreme. If it can stand up under those circumstances, it is a good position indeed.

It makes me think how useful it could be to have a little pocket transmitter to keep in your wallet, backpack, etc. Just like an iPhone or GPS unit, but expressly for the purpose of tracking an object. You could pay some company to track your object’s whereabouts when (and, in an ideal world, ONLY when) they get stolen or lost. Like insurance but more entertaining. Maybe call it Blade Runner Insurance or something? And naturally, this application of technology would !never! be abused.

SamSam: This specifically gets me.. I call BS: “That sealed it: I called the police. They were over in 15 minutes. I filed a report, handed over Johnny Boi’s Craigslist ad and his photos from the dating site. The following day, I met a detective I’ll call Inspector Vargas.”

That’s a good point. I wonder though: is there a San Francisco for regular people and a San Francisco for others? That is, if you live in a super-fancy neighborhood, is it more likely that detectives will show up at your door over the theft of a GPS?

For my part I wish she posted the guy’s pictures. All that macho posturing and she withholds her best weapon, public shaming. And she’s trying pretty hard to write an interesting story, and that picture of the thief sipping a giant beer and grabbing his balls would be pretty damn hilarious.

And to the people who say its her own fault for leaving her car unlocked, get a clue.

That’s a good point. I wonder though: is there a San Francisco for regular people and a San Francisco for others? That is, if you live in a super-fancy neighborhood, is it more likely that detectives will show up at your door over the theft of a GPS?

It might make sense from a practical standpoint more then anything else. No matter where you are there are always places that are more prone to crime then others. Perhaps in the locations where major crimes are committed the population doesn’t want to associate with the police. There were a lot of good neighbors in this story, that’s not the case in some places.

Perhaps the police aversion to petty property crimes in some locations comes from the vibe of the surrounding community. In those places they are probably all tied up with larcenists and other major crimes to worry to much about petty theft.

It seems cost-effective for the police to not spend excessive amounts of time trying to track down items that they have no hope of recovering as the original owners had failed to record the serial numbers.

I guess if your home is broken into, you get a full SWAT Team response complete with snipers. Minor car wrecks are handled with white-gloved concierge service to get you where you were going, while a fleet of helicopters is standing by for anything larger.

I suspect what we have here is a superb example of the two justice systems in this country. One for the rich, and one for everyone else.

Would not maybe, but should not? If my stuff gets taken, I’d certainly like someone to take an interest. It’s an odd society that doesn’t try to deter theft, surely? Here in Switzerland it’s the complete opposite – the police come out at the drop of a hat. Neighbours having a loud party? Call the police! (yes, it’s happened, and no, it wasn’t that loud).

Coming from the UK, living here is different. Because everywhere is reasonably safe, people actually butt-in when they see something going on that they don’t like – which, in turn, keeps crime low. It may be a bit curtain-twitchy sometimes, but it is nice to actually expect my bike to still be there when I come back!

If she indeed does live in a place where cops come over in 15 minutes to investigate car break-ins, followed by a detective the next day, then what a total waste of taxpayer dollars. If the guy ran free, we’d save money over that luxe response.

Just interested, do you have any proof of this claim?

I think most cops want to investigate crime regardless of where it happens, a crime is a crime, is a crime, but lets face it some jurisdictions have more tax money to work with then others. I live in one of those Podunk places that has four cops for the entire “city” and property crime here is rather hard to prosecute as well, I think most go unsolved or are not looked at more closely since there generally is little to no evidence to go on. This woman at least developed some evidence for the police to work with.

is there a San Francisco for regular people and a San Francisco for others? That is, if you live in a super-fancy neighborhood, is it more likely that detectives will show up at your door over the theft of a GPS?

This is sadly pretty much true of all cities, at all times in history. Crack dealers in the Tenderloin go about their business right in front of the police station. Try that in the Presidio and you’ll find yourself in a jail cell within 5 minutes.

If she lives in suburbia, which she almost certainly does, then its not YOUR taxpayer dollars paying for that police response, its hers and that of other people in her town, and I’m pretty sure they don’t think it was wasted.

Of course I don’t have the pulpit of Salon.com to use to gently encourage the police to cooperate.

In the end, she got lucky since the thief was pretty dumb and left too many breadcrumbs. She also got lucky that she stumbled across his craigslist ad.

I know how frustrating it can be to have something stolen from you, especially when it was something personal. I had a sketchbook in a backpack once that was stolen from my car while I was inside a museum. I didn’t care about the other crap in the bag, but that was something I couldn’t replace. This author mentions photos and other stuff that were clearly very personal for her, so I totally get the frustration she was probably feeling.

I’ve also had someone steal money from me on ebay before, and within a day or two I had communications out to other people that he stole from, and collectively we were able to get him banned. If he was doing it to more people we probably could have gotten him arrested also, but that would have been harder to prove. I basically even knew where his shop was in New York, but since I’m in Los Angeles, it wasn’t worth it to pay him a personal visit.

It’s really not that difficult to track people down if you get the basic info. That’s the good and bad thing about the internet.

Oh, I won’t go so far as to say I’m never *curious* about what people keep/do in their homes, because I AM a little nosy and won’t refuse a glance if it’s given, but honestly? I’ve never wanted to take anyone’s stuff without their permission.

If you’re going to steal, you’re going to steal. An unlocked door makes it easier, but it doesn’t mean the same person wasn’t going to smash your window either.

Saying a thief was “just taking advantage of an opportunity” is a slap in the face of lots of people who do respect property rights and who do try to be vigilant but are still human. A dumb slip once (or twice!) shouldn’t damn a person to be shamed in public.

Look at how little the punishment is for either type of theft and this might explain why there the police are not that interested smaller theft crimes. Sections 489 and 490 of the CA codes.

489. Grand theft is punishable as follows:
(a) When the grand theft involves the theft of a firearm, by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months, 2, or 3 years.
(b) In all other cases, by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison.

490. Petty theft is punishable by fine not exceeding one thousand
dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding
six months, or both.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=484-502.9

Also if I may quote from the Bits and Pieces public service messages during Saturday morning cartoons in the early ’80s: ‘One thousand and two stupid things to do: borrowing. . .without asking.’

and goblin? I’m pretty sure the reason he got 2 years and not just a fine is because he was on probation

I and many of my friends have been burglarized and then tried to track down the perpetrator. Also I am very active in my neighborhood block watch so I get involved in the details of many personal property crimes. Even with the most well meaning law enforcement officials and other institutions who might have information you need to solve your personal crime, the kind of cooperation this lady received is unheard of. In fact, I would be a little upset all these institutions spent this much time on a crime that is partly her fault when there is a lot of more serious crime that are not getting attention.

Mark my words: I think this story will turn out to be more mini-vigilante porn than the truth.

Sounds like you’re a little full of yourself too, Amanda.

But good work!

You point out the extra year might be due to probation violation or prior conviction. Either way you cut it she was still lucky just to get him for 2 years. Cops obviously don’t want to spend large amounts of time on case that will have either a poor return or no return.