Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 940 posts

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#411

Post by Strilanc »

bovermyer wrote: post #331
tivert wrote: post #256

If you're concerned about package thieves, just buy an outdoor cabinet and put it next to your door with a note asking that packages be placed in it. I use an Ikea Josef: https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/storage-furniture/outdoo... You don't even need a lock for it. If you can get the deliverymen to consistently place packages in it, the thieves will have no idea if there's actually a package at your door to steal…

One fun psychological hack for this - paint an eye above or on said locker. This is backed by research. For example: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-22270052

This is one of the psychology results that failed to replicate [1] in the replication crisis [2].

[1]: Artificial surveillance cues do not increase generosity: two meta-analyses https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S109051381...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#412

Post by cwkoss »

mmcwilliams wrote: post #303
entity345 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is it a felony to have a CCTV?

In California, New York and Rhode Island it's illegal to place a hidden video camera in a place where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These would be considered hidden video cameras. Not sure the severity of the charges in those states, but in other jurisdictions recording audio of conversations without all-party consent violates wiretapping laws and is a felony.

They don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy on the porch, where it was placed. The criminal act which they performed caused themselves to be recorded in a place where they might expect privacy, so I don't think they would have a valid complaint against the package owner.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#413

Post by vkou »

dylan604 wrote: post #339
jboy55 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't press charges yourself. You can go directly to the DA with your evidence and hope they press charges, but there is no role for you as a citizen to instigate a criminal preceding. https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2015/12/pressing-charges-w... You could sue them in court.

Getting robbed is just the opening salvo in getting fleeced. The second round is the insurance company. Yes, I know insurance fraud exists, so one way the insurance companies "protect" themselves is to issue a check for a fraction of the value of the items stolen. They know most people will not replace the stolen items. If you do replace the items, then you have to re-submit your claim with the receipt to show it was…

This is why I don't insure my personal property. The probability of theft * the amount of payout will unlikely exceed the cost of insurance.

Generally, unless you know more then the insurer about your risk factors, and can afford to eat the loss, you should be self-insuring your stuff.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#414

Post by cwkoss »

ryani wrote: post #343
mmcwilliams wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California, New York and Rhode Island it's illegal to place a hidden video camera in a place where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These would be considered hidden video cameras. Not sure the severity of the charges in those states, but in other jurisdictions recording audio of conversations without all-party consent violates wiretapping laws and is a felony.

There might be a technicality here, though. The camera is 'hidden' in a place with no expectation of privacy -- his porch. It's the thief who places the camera in a place where privacy might be violated.

Ask the DA to charge the package thief for wiretapping if they move the package to a private area and record a third party :-P

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#415

Post by arkades »

mmcwilliams wrote: post #315
entity345 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that's quite different from putting a CCTV on your front porch... which isn't a felony.

If your intention is for someone to take the CCTV into their private car or residence, that is also very different from putting a CCTV on your porch. I'm not saying the thieves are in the right here. Just that crimes don't usually cancel each other out.

The thieves are the ones bringing the camera into their privacy zone, not the person who made the package. The thief, in committing the theft, explicitly consented to taking an unknown item into their possession.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#416

Post by SilasX »

mmcwilliams wrote: post #303
entity345 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is it a felony to have a CCTV?

In California, New York and Rhode Island it's illegal to place a hidden video camera in a place where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy. These would be considered hidden video cameras. Not sure the severity of the charges in those states, but in other jurisdictions recording audio of conversations without all-party consent violates wiretapping laws and is a felony.

You have no expectation of privacy in your actions on someone else’s porch where you’re visible from the street.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#417

Post by apricot »

shaftway wrote: post #390
tivert wrote: post #256

If you're concerned about package thieves, just buy an outdoor cabinet and put it next to your door with a note asking that packages be placed in it. I use an Ikea Josef: https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/storage-furniture/outdoo... You don't even need a lock for it. If you can get the deliverymen to consistently place packages in it, the thieves will have no idea if there's actually a package at your door to steal…

Yeah, we had a package stolen off our porch, so we did that. It's a bench with a liftable top. The plan was to put a padlock on it. All of our packages are addressed to: Shaftway Place in Bench - Code 1234 24601 Where I Live St. My City, ST, ZipZipZip We order a lot of stuff, and probably average 3 deliveries per day. In the last 3 months we've had exactly one package placed in the bench. And we never even got around…

To be frank, I had to read it a couple times before parsing "Place in Bench - Code 1234" as "Delivery person, please put this parcel inside the bench, using the code 1234". We expect addresses to be data, not executable code.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#418

Post by ineedasername »

learc83 wrote: post #370
ineedasername wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't take a lot of risk to offset the "value" of stealing $950 labeled-worth goods (which will net you If you're trying to say the risk isn't worth it, sure, you're right. And the average person wouldn't do it. But plenty of criminals don't live their lives by such risk/reward calculations. Roughly 5% [0] of people in prison in the US have decided to disregard the risk/reward ratio and go ahead with relatively…

The question though is would that 5% react to increased punishment. The studies done on raising felony theft thresholds indicate that they don't.

agreed, they'd probably need to be substantially higher to really enter criminal's conscious consideration to put a dent in things, and even then it might only be a small dent, if any. Especially when the motivation is something like drug addiction.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#419

Post by wuunderbar »

amai wrote: post #402

Why is not an option in the US to get your parcels delivered to your workplace? This is quite common practice in Germany.

People do it all the time; many US office workplaces are okay with it.

However, not everyone has an office situation like that nor should we need to live in fear of getting items delivered to our home.

Re: Glitter bomb tricks parcel thieves

#420

Post by bduerst »

jki275 wrote: post #161
lukev wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burglar traps are definitely not legal. Where are you getting your information?

Can you cite a law that says they're not legal? Certainly if you caused someone harm using one it would be illegal in the sense that causing someone harm is illegal anyway, but a harmless trap like this one doesn't seem to me that it would be illegal. I'm not a lawyer though, so I'd be interested to see if there is some law I'm not aware of.

>Can you cite a law that says they're not legal?

The Geneva convention, for starters.

It's also a five second Google search: https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/booby-traps/

Post reply on HN