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

So thieves broke into your storage unit again

oldvcr.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 317 posts

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#141

Post by mdaniel »

toast0 wrote: post #103
crazygringo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have space in your apartment or home for items you want to keep, then where else are you supposed to store things? Obviously it's up to you to figure out if it makes financial sense. But for people in urban areas with small apartments, it can be a heckuva lot cheaper than upgrading to an apartment with another bedroom.

> If you don't have space in your apartment or home for items you want to keep, then where else are you supposed to store things? On ebay? Sell the stuff now, buy it again if you need it. Doesn't work for everything, of course, and I don't practice it, I've got tons of space and tons of clutter.

I believe other people are using any such storage as a cache, trading space for time, since even if you instantly found the exact replacements, you'd still pay not only monetarily for shipping but wall-clock for both shipping and the drudgery of searching for said items

Interestingly, I read a blog post where someone was using "fulfilled by amazon" as off-site storage, but I think it was a pseudo thought experiment more than an actual storage solution, similar to those folks who use data-as-video on YouTube as infinite backup storage

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#142

Post by bko »

immibis wrote: post #138
bko wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain to me why someone that's been arrested 15 times should be let go to terrorize others. That person that has been arrest 15 times before cannot continue to commit crime if he's behind bars. You don't need to "read" the data to come to this conclusion. People commit crime in large part because they can get away with it. It's not complicated.

You don't have to commit a crime to be arrested. You just have to do something the police don't like - like holding up certain signs in a public space.

Read the study

> 73% of the prior offenses are violent and 80% are property related (obviously non-exclusive)

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#143

Post by peppermint_gum »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #109
smeeger wrote: post #106

he gives a list of things to do or consider. supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively is somehow not on that list…

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, so laws based on deterring through fear-of-sentence would not seem to be likely to have much effect. What is it that you're proposing/desiring?

> AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime,

Could you share some of this evidence?

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#144

Post by dangitman »

bko wrote: post #104

The indifference of this by everyone involved is infuriating. This criminal activity is treated as natural as rain, just something us 98% of people have to endure. It's important to remember that accepting crime, especially low level crime like this is a policy choice. It's the same people doing the same crimes over and over. They have run ins with the law and they just get let go to continue terrorizing the rest of…

[dead]

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#145

Post by dangitman »

_dain_ wrote: post #131
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US already incarcerates vastly more people than most comparable nations. And yet this level of incarceration does not seem to have had the effect you want. It seems that you imagine that the crime is somehow intrinsic to the current group of people committing it, and that by removing them from society, their behavior would not recur. While there are arguments for this sort of thing, it is also based on a wilfull…

>The US already incarcerates vastly more people than most comparable nations because it has vastly more crime than comparable nations. you have to look at what happens to crime in the US over time, when you are more or less stringent about jailing criminals; predictably as you fill the jails, crime goes down, and when you empty them, crimes goes up. >It seems that you imagine that the crime is somehow intrinsic to th…

[dead]

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#146

Post by nytesky »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #102
bluedino wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but it's just another one of those illogical things people do.

You could apply the same logic to the stuff inside your house, which is just a glorified storage unit. Why are you paying premium to store that stuff, when you could downgrade to a studio apartment or a tent? The bottom line is, if you want to own stuff, then you must store it. You know what is more expensive than storage? Buying stuff you need or want and reselling it, again and again. Or leasing it in general. Some…

Well, when you are writing an apartment, people do generally go for the cheapest smallest place they can afford.

But when you’re buying a place, you’re looking to have isolation from shared walls, and generally a larger property will appreciate more in value than a smaller property With some limits in both directions up and down in size.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#147

Post by wjnc »

treflop wrote: post #93
tim333 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to avoid the insurance and just pile up the money I would have paid to cover the losses. Depending on the type of insurance. But theft insurance tends to be problematic. The fraudulent buy expensive stuff, keep all the receipts, sell the stuff for cash to a friend and then claim on insurance with the proper paperwork. Normal people tend not to keep and file away all paperwork and lose out.

Although it’s a little more complicated, generally if you can cover a loss out of pocket, then you don’t need insurance. Insurance is for losses that will have a major impact on you. It’s putting a price on risk.

Insurers do notice that small claims (in P&C) are a relatively small part of claims + cost so most don’t offer the high deductibles. As a bonus, with higher deductibles come relatively more lawsuits. So safer to only offer low deductibles. (My experience after 20 years in the sector.)

In my country a family perhaps pays about €5k total a year for two cars, health, house and the assortment of legal and liability insurance. That is quite modest (not for all income classes though), since there are catastrophes possible in nearly any avenue of life. A minimalist insurance scheme would save one about €2k/yr. That just isn’t that worthwhile utility wise.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#148

Post by rocqua »

dataflow wrote: post #59
rocqua wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between gambling and insurance, is whether you have an insurable interest. It makes the market for insurance much better if everyone actually has insurance. Because it reduces cost. It also keeps the industry legitimate, preventing gambling legislation from applying, and anti-gambling activists from targeting insurers. You'll have to go to a bookie if you want to gamble.

I don't follow the logic? How does above-market-value insurance discourage people from having insurance? I don't get the comparison to gambling either, that reads more like an appeal to emotion than actual reasoning.

Because premiums will rise across the board, so people with an insurable interest pay premiums set for people who intend to gamble or manipulate their insurance.

By demanding an insurable interest, insurance companies keep out gamblers and frauds. It also helps strengthen the idea that insurance shouldn't be abused or manipulated for a payout.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#149

Post by rocqua »

dataflow wrote: post #59
rocqua wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between gambling and insurance, is whether you have an insurable interest. It makes the market for insurance much better if everyone actually has insurance. Because it reduces cost. It also keeps the industry legitimate, preventing gambling legislation from applying, and anti-gambling activists from targeting insurers. You'll have to go to a bookie if you want to gamble.

I don't follow the logic? How does above-market-value insurance discourage people from having insurance? I don't get the comparison to gambling either, that reads more like an appeal to emotion than actual reasoning.

As for gambling. The point isn't gambling is evil, but that others think gambling is evil, so being associated with gambling is bad for business.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#150

Post by maxbond »

bko wrote: post #139
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the issue though (and for the record, I agree that a person found guilty of what they were arrested for 15 times should be incarcerated). The problem is: why is this person doing this, because there are at least two outcomes: 1. we lock them up, and a part of the problem is gone 2. we lock them up, and someone else steps in to do the same thing From my perspective, there's ample evidence to suggest…

There's only so many people that are criminally predisposed. The org doing bike thefts will stop if the penalty is high enough. Singapore has low crime because they prosecute aggressively. No one seemed to fill in for arrested gang members in El Salvador (extreme example) Then there are the crazy person punching an Asian lady on the subway crimes and these fall squarely in 1

You've blinded yourself by othering them. "There's only so many people criminally predisposed" - that may be comforting, but it's too naive to build a policy around.

100% of people would commit crimes under the right circumstances. As an extreme example, 100% of us could sustain a life changing head injury that renders us more violent and aggressive than we were before, and that could happen at any moment. The most kind and timid person you know could turn into a monster if they fell down the stairs. You could turn into a monster if you fell down the stairs. The only thing you can do to stop that from happening is to protect your head, it doesn't matter how good or virtuous you are presently.

You can't incarcerate your way out of crime. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Post reply on HN