Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google isn't some app designed for criminals, so no.
The app was designed for phones.
Intentionally misunderstanding simple sentences doesn't make you clever or further your point.
Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
461–470 of 487 posts
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#462Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of them are in their 20s. I can't imagine myself being part of a nationwide theft ring in my 20s. What a wild life.
Can you imagine being part of a nationwide theft ring in another decade of your life?
After 40s if things go south. Not that I would do it but it is better than wasting my childhood. :D
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#463Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are really discounting the ingenuity of criminals. If they can steal 4 tires with wheel locks off your car, they can steal your undercarriage battery.
EV batteries are becoming STRUCTURAL, meaning they make up the core vehicle shell of the car, use hardened steel reinforcement and weight 1-2K pounds. They're also super dangerous if punctured. It would be easier to steal the whole vehicle than to steal the battery alone. I'd go so far as to say that an EV is a glorified "battery with wheels" since the actual drive components are a minority of the weight/complexity/c…
Non-removable batteries, wow.
I worry that a parallel development might happen in smartphones.
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#464Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#465Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's not worth your life then don't steal it.
What is your threshold at which killing a non-violent thief should be allowed? If I catch someone stealing my car from my driveway at night, can I shoot them as they try to start the ignition? If I see someone swiping my cell phone off my restaurant table while I'm turned around... shoot them? What about my umbrella?
My opinion would be at the point when a reasonable person would fear for their life.
For instance, if I own a vehicle and it is my primary method of escape, and someone starts fucking with critical systems like say the exhaust with a sawzall, I woud definitely start fearing for my life and the life of my family. Particularly when automobile is absolutely critical for survival, access to grocery/medical care etc, escape from say criminals in your yard operating sawzalls in commission of felonies, in much of America. If someone is in my yard fucking with my way to get away in danger, and they're physically tearing it apart with a sawzall, then I think it would be reasonable to allow defense of my family.
If someone is just stealing a hood ornament with their hands, then no maybe it's unreasonable to fear for your life.
With a phone I think it would depend more on context. Intentionally and without consent stealing / disabling someone's method of calling for help and emergency could make a reasonable person fear for their life if that person was also in the process of commission of felonies in your immediate proximity with a dangerous sawzall.
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#466Earlier quoted context omitted.
What helps with art is people with art want to show it off. Steal some art and you risk showing it off to someone who knows who it belongs to.
Is this really the case? Isn't a great deal of stolen art not shown around so it can't be identified? I wonder if most stolen art is kept in vaults and never shown to anyone.
Some is, but most people who steel art want to look at it.
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#467Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hammurabi agrees with you ( https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp ): 6. If any one steal the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death. 9. If any one lose an article, and find it in the possession of another: if the person in whose possession the thing is found say "A merchant sold it to me, I paid for it be…
The point of punishing the rafinery is for them to figure out next time how could they know if this powder was stolen or not. The role of companies is to undertake risks in exchange for profit. They have all the incentives and tools to lower the risk they took wherever possible. If company can't be punished for buying stolen goods then there's no risk and society has to take the risk and the costs. Which makes no sen…
The government is ultimately the 'buyer' of the stolen goods. They are the ones that demand the catalytic convert be installed. Government created the risk for theft when they created this black market incentive. They have all the incentives and tools to lower the risk they took wherever possible.
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#468Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but we definitely have intruded on Joe's freedom to buy and sell cats No we haven't. Joe is free to resell converters, provided he proves he obtained them legally, which is trivial _if_ you obtained them legally.
Oh, so now Joe is guilty until proven innocent? Nice!
How's the fugitive life going?
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#469Earlier quoted context omitted.
No catalytic converter theft, no gas gouging, no oil changes. I read things like this and is just makes me hope more people get on board. In the meantime, I’ll be sticking with my Tesla, thanks.
How do you deal with mileage anxiety and going uphill for more than 10 minutes?
I have owned an electric car for 3.5 years and never once was concerned about range
Re: Justice Department announces takedown of catalytic converter theft ring
#470Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hammurabi agrees with you ( https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp ): 6. If any one steal the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death. 9. If any one lose an article, and find it in the possession of another: if the person in whose possession the thing is found say "A merchant sold it to me, I paid for it be…
The point of punishing the rafinery is for them to figure out next time how could they know if this powder was stolen or not. The role of companies is to undertake risks in exchange for profit. They have all the incentives and tools to lower the risk they took wherever possible. If company can't be punished for buying stolen goods then there's no risk and society has to take the risk and the costs. Which makes no sen…
You cannot accidentally commit a felony - there has to be intent. What you are suggesting would substantially impede legitimate commerce (which by the way makes up the supermajority of all commerce) and would just result in actual fences coming up with fake documentation. As it stands now companies are basically expected to avoid deals where they see red flags around the provenance of the items. In neither indictment is the refinery mentioned as knowingly receiving the stolen metal powder. DG auto is basically the perfect target because they are a high level facilitator of stolen catalytic converters, they have connections to refineries, and unlike street level guys are probably hard to replace in the stolen catalytic converter supply chain. They even had a pricing app (https://dgauto.app) so prospective thieves would know which cars to target.