[Rogueleader_92]

Originally Posted by muddeatr

Buy a manual transmission. Built to thwart any modern day thieves.

Won't stop the tow truck from dragging it off.

[SwL_Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Rogueleader_92

Won't stop the tow truck from dragging it off.

That happens WAY faster than driving it off too.

[Z06ZLE]

Originally Posted by SwL_Wildcat

That happens WAY faster than driving it off too.

Whoa! Is this from some TV repo show? That’s nuts!

But also…how many thieves have this sort of kit? Most are just bored kids looking for a joyride.

[HemiDave]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

But also…how many thieves have this sort of kit? Most are just bored kids looking for a joyride.

Carjacking is a violent crime.

Many of these violent criminals (You call them "bored kids" ) use guns while carjacking.

They have killed and injured people in the process of committing this crime.

[Rogueleader_92]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

Whoa! Is this from some TV repo show? That’s nuts!

But also…how many thieves have this sort of kit? Most are just bored kids looking for a joyride.

quick search shows used repo trucks for 30k, while your right most jackings are just stupid kids trying their FAFO luck organized car theft is real and one of those trucks isn't out of hand if it lets them snatch and go in under a minute. the 6th gen Camaro is probably going to quickly become a hot item with the 24's probably being the last gas models, especially any SS or better edition.

[Z06ZLE]

Originally Posted by HemiDave

Carjacking is a violent crime.

Many of these violent criminals (You call them "bored kids" ) use guns while carjacking.

My take on the overwhelming context of the thread was pertaining to car burglary off the street or from someone’s driveway. That’s certainly what I was referring to, particularly since my comment was in direct response to a video/GIF of exactly that. A car jacking is something entirely different - it’s robbery, and an important legal distinction - and also not what I was talking about.

Originally Posted by HemiDave

They have killed and injured people in the process of committing this crime.

Well sure, but is that the norm or the exception? According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics, roughly 38,000 attempted or completed car jackings occur each year in the U.S. Of those, only 4% resulted in any serious injury and only 15 altercations resulted in deaths.

That’s 0.04%.

Not saying it’s acceptable, but neither is a scare tactic untethered to reality.

[Megahurtz]

Install a kill switch. If anyone is in the Dallas, TX area, my buddy's shop installs them on the Camaro. So far a little over a dozen Camaro's have had the kill switch installed. Very unlikely the thieves would ever be able to find it either. PM me if you want the shops contact info.

[HemiDave]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

My take on the overwhelming context of the thread was pertaining to car burglary off the street or from someone’s driveway. That’s certainly what I was referring to, particularly since my comment was in direct response to a video/GIF of exactly that. A car jacking is something entirely different - it’s robbery, and an important legal distinction - and also not what I was talking about.

According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics, roughly 38,000 attempted or completed car jackings occur each year in the U.S. Of those, only 4% resulted in any serious injury and only 15 altercations resulted in deaths.

That’s 0.04%.

Not saying it’s acceptable, but neither is a scare tactic untethered to reality.

My comment was referring to you saying "...most (car thieves) are bored kids."

No one in this thread (besides you) was talking about bored kids.
It was a discussion about criminals that steal our cars, and ways to prevent it.
Carjacking is one of the very increasing/concerning ways our cars are being stolen, and it was rightly discussed previous to my post.

You stated: "A car jacking is something entirely different - it’s robbery, and an important legal distinction"
But a carjacking is not something "entirely different" as you pronounced.
It's just an unsophisticated and violent method of stealing a car.
You don't seem to understand that the "theft" is already built into a robbery charge. The robbery charge only acknowledges the violence of the theft.

You claimed that when I said carjackings have led to injury and death, it was just "a scare tactic untethered to reality".
That's actually a fact sir, carjackings have led to injury and death. You even acknowledge this.
Pointing out facts is not "a scare tactic untethered to reality"...and anyone saying that it is, may actually be doing just that.

You have curiously not addressed your declaration that "...most (car thieves) are bored kids."
I would like to know where you found that in the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics.

[Z06ZLE]

Originally Posted by HemiDave

My comment was referring to you saying "...most (car thieves) are bored kids."

No one in this thread (besides you) was talking about bored kids.
It was a discussion about criminals that steal our cars, and ways to prevent it.
Carjacking is one of the very increasing/concerning ways our cars are being stolen, and it was rightly discussed previous to my post.

You stated: "A car jacking is something entirely different - it’s robbery, and an important legal distinction"
But a carjacking is not something "entirely different" as you pronounced.
It's just an unsophisticated and violent method of stealing a car.
You don't seem to understand that the "theft" is already built into a robbery charge. The robbery charge only acknowledges the violence of the theft.

You claimed that when I said carjackings have led to injury and death, it was just "a scare tactic untethered to reality".
That's actually a fact sir, carjackings have led to injury and death. You even acknowledge this.
Pointing out facts is not "a scare tactic untethered to reality"...and anyone saying that it is, may actually be doing just that.

You have curiously not addressed your declaration that "...most (car thieves) are bored kids."
I would like to know where you found that in the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics.

RE: Car Theft vs. Car Jacking - It appears we're discussing two distinct subjects; I'm focusing on grand theft auto or car theft, which occurs when the victim is not immediately present. To that point, I had directly embedded/referenced a post involving a tow truck doing just that with a vehicle parked on the site of the street. Your emphasis on carjacking — defined legally as the forceful seizure of a vehicle while the owner is present — is a separate issue. Both fall under the umbrella of "vehicle theft" but have different legal distinctions, implications and contextual differences. It is possible to have a conversation about vehicle theft while simultaneously honing in on one particular method of it. Let's not conflate the two or use one as a straw man argument for the other.

RE: Kids - My assertion that a significant number of car thieves are underage isn't an anecdote; it's backed by empirical data. A New York Times article just last month reported Mayor Eric Adams saying that half of those arrested for car theft were minors. A 2019 study by the National Library of Medicine corroborates this, citing the peak age for car theft offenses at 15–19 years old. Full paper here.

RE: DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics - Your apparent conflation of my separate citations is either a misunderstanding of basic academic methodology or a deliberate attempt to cobble together a disjointed argument. In either case, it's misleading. I cited "kids" in car thefts in one context and used DOJ statistics to discuss injuries/deaths from carjackings in another. These citations were distinctly framed to support separate points in separate posts. To intermingle them as if they were universally applicable compromises the rigor and integrity of your reasoning, and indeed this entire discussion.

RE: Scare Tactics - The issue isn't whether carjackings can result in injuries or fatalities, but the frequency at which this occurs. Your initial assertion, devoid of context or data, implies a commonplace occurrence, which is highly misleading. As previously cited, according to DOJ statistics, only 4% of approximately 38,000 annual carjackings result in serious injuries, and a mere 0.04% result in fatalities. This data contradicts the veracity of your statement and its implication, which lacks nuance and leans towards sensationalism - aka a scare tactic "untethered to reality."

It's crucial to discuss these matters with a level of accuracy that respects both the data and the inherent complexities of the issues at hand. I'm not challenging the fact that car theft and carjacking are problematic; rather, I'm emphasizing the importance of portraying them in an accurate and nuanced manner.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

RE: Car Theft vs. Car Jacking - It appears we're discussing two distinct subjects; I'm focusing on grand theft auto or car theft, which occurs when the victim is not immediately present. To that point, I had directly embedded/referenced a post involving a tow truck doing just that with a vehicle parked on the site of the street. Your emphasis on carjacking — defined legally as the forceful seizure of a vehicle while the owner is present — is a separate issue. Both fall under the umbrella of "vehicle theft" but have different legal distinctions, implications and contextual differences. It is possible to have a conversation about vehicle theft while simultaneously honing in on one particular method of it. Let's not conflate the two or use one as a straw man argument for the other.

RE: Kids - My assertion that a significant number of car thieves are underage isn't an anecdote; it's backed by empirical data. A New York Times article just last month reported Mayor Eric Adams saying that half of those arrested for car theft were minors. A 2019 study by the National Library of Medicine corroborates this, citing the peak age for car theft offenses at 15–19 years old. Full paper here.

RE: DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics - Your apparent conflation of my separate citations is either a misunderstanding of basic academic methodology or a deliberate attempt to cobble together a disjointed argument. In either case, it's misleading. I cited "kids" in car thefts in one context and used DOJ statistics to discuss injuries/deaths from carjackings in another. These citations were distinctly framed to support separate points in separate posts. To intermingle them as if they were universally applicable compromises the rigor and integrity of your reasoning, and indeed this entire discussion.

RE: Scare Tactics - The issue isn't whether carjackings can result in injuries or fatalities, but the frequency at which this occurs. Your initial assertion, devoid of context or data, implies a commonplace occurrence, which is highly misleading. As previously cited, according to DOJ statistics, only 4% of approximately 38,000 annual carjackings result in serious injuries, and a mere 0.04% result in fatalities. This data contradicts the veracity of your statement and its implication, which lacks nuance and leans towards sensationalism - aka a scare tactic "untethered to reality."

It's crucial to discuss these matters with a level of accuracy that respects both the data and the inherent complexities of the issues at hand. I'm not challenging the fact that car theft and carjacking are problematic; rather, I'm emphasizing the importance of portraying them in an accurate and nuanced manner.

Your verbosity is unwarranted and doesn't lend additional credence to your arguments.

He did conflate theft and robbery to a degree, which is incorrect. Also, there is some merit to your scare tactic accusation, given the statistical irrelevance of fatalities resulting from carjacking attempts. We should not resort to sensationalism.

These weren't HemiDave's points, however. The issue is not nuanced at all, the "nuance" you refer to is artificially forced in to 1) water down the actual underlying argument highlighting the drastic increase of these crimes and 2) create sympathy for perpetrators.

Carjacking and car theft are absolutely unacceptable, methods nothwithstanding. For most people, their vehicles are the only means of transport and the second most valuable asset class in their lives, and that is what should define the legal gravity of vehicle theft.

It also doesn't matter how old the perpetrators are, if they are able to do the crime, they will be able to do the time, too. Predictable, reliable and consistent sentencing also carries a much needed element of deterrence. (Now, I will say that a prison sentence should not automatically mean the end of someone's opportunity to live a normal life, as it so frequently happens today, but that's a whole another issue, let's not deviate from the topic of this discussion.)

[Z06ZLE]

I don’t disagree with your statements, arpad. The purpose of the post was to set the record straight from points being conflated/confused/misconstrued, and/or to provide citations for my assertions that were being challenged, ie. most car thefts being as a result of kids.

Which, incidentally, I never once implied sympathy for, which you oddly suggested. Their age group is/was simply a fact being affirmed.

[SwL_Wildcat]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

I don’t disagree with your statements, arpad. The purpose of the post was to set the record straight from points being conflated/confused/misconstrued, and/or to provide citations for my assertions that were being challenged, ie. most car thefts being as a result of kids.

Which, incidentally, I never once implied sympathy for, which you oddly suggested. Their age group is/was simply a fact being affirmed.

When you say kids I'm assuming that's all makes and models combined? I can see kids smashing out ignition columns and stealing them, like the 2nd and 3rd gens. The kids must be pretty sophisticated to be able to steal these newer 6th gens and deal with all the security?

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Z06ZLE

I don’t disagree with your statements, arpad. The purpose of the post was to set the record straight from points being conflated/confused/misconstrued, and/or to provide citations for my assertions that were being challenged, ie. most car thefts being as a result of kids.

Which, incidentally, I never once implied sympathy for, which you oddly suggested. Their age group is/was simply a fact being affirmed.

I understand and don't want to go into semantic hairsplitting, so just one thing: when you say "most are just bored kids looking for a joyride", this implies a higher level of acceptability to practically everyone because of "kids" and "joyride", whether you meant it or not.

Anyway, I can also understand your resistance against fearmongering and the argument that not every car theft is the same (and the worst kind), no disagreement here on that either. The baseline severity of this sort of crime is high in my book, though.


A bit more on topic, I'm not a fan of beefed up security systems, IMO it's a local "patch" to a deeper problem that then comes with unasked for victim blaming ("why did you park your car there" -> "why did you leave your whatever on the seat" -> "why didn't you wrap the fob in tin foil" -> "it's your fault for not using xxx product/measure to protect your asset" etc.) and side effects (insurance costs, owner paranoia, inconvenience).

[Z06ZLE]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

I understand and don't want to go into semantic hairsplitting, so just one thing: when you say "most are just bored kids looking for a joyride", this implies a higher level of acceptability to practically everyone because of "kids" and "joyride", whether you meant it or not.

Anyway, I can also understand your resistance against fearmongering and the argument that not every car theft is the same (and the worst kind), no disagreement here on that either. The baseline severity of this sort of crime is high in my book, though.


A bit more on topic, I'm not a fan of beefed up security systems, IMO it's a local "patch" to a deeper problem that then comes with unasked for victim blaming ("why did you park your car there" -> "why did you leave your whatever on the seat" -> "why didn't you wrap the fob in tin foil" -> "it's your fault for not using xxx product/measure to protect your asset" etc.) and side effects (insurance costs, owner paranoia, inconvenience).

Fully agree. And you’re right - in hindsight, I can see how “just bored kids looking for a joyride” sort of dilutes the onus of responsibility with the qualifier “just bored” and the connotation of “joyride.” I suppose my intention was merely to communicate that it was minors up to no good.

Which, incidentally, has happened to me. I’ve had two motorcycles of mine in the past stolen - and when they were recovered, it was determined they were used (and crashed) for the purposes of joyriding.

More on topic, it is definitely a shame there isn’t a bulletproof - no pun intended - security system that does what it’s supposed to do. I guess the issue isn’t so different from that of the cybersecurity world where you are always one step behind the hackers, because you don’t know what you have to patch until there’s something new to patch.