RECENT COMMENTS
Joel Cabot on Power Outage on the Hill
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Yvette Cannon on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
crd on Power Outage on the Hill
Please avoid being a larceny victim
05/31/2007 3:34 PM by John M
Richmond police are posting 129 new signs in the First Precinct as a reminder to folks to avoid becoming larceny victims. [via]
“The goal of placing the signs in these designated areas is to increase awareness and decrease crime,” said Sector 112 Lt. Emmett Williams. “We always want to help the citizens and visitors. Most visitors come to Richmond and are not knowledgeable of the areas where they could be a victim of larceny.”
Each sign reads: “The Richmond Police Department wants to remind you not to become a victim of larceny. Please remember to remove or secure any valuables in your vehicle.”
What’s larceny again? Is that where they take our money?
When our we’ve had ladders stolen or when they took the wheel off of my truck in the middle of the night, it was classified as larceny.
Larceny = the unlawful taking of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it permanently
which is distinct from:
Robbery = larceny from the person or presence of another by violence or threat
source: http://www.m-w.com
so, these signs, do they have a dictionary attached? Or is the general public more knowledgeable about what constitutes a larceny than we are?
If it were not for the previous post, I would have continue to believ that it involved geese and Barry White songs.
If one is old enough and wise enough to have and use a computer, one would like think that one would know the difference between larceny, robbery and let’s throw in burglary.
The silliness above skirts the real issue: do these signs work? While the research on this topic is pretty weak (lacking a randomized, experiment- control design), I am pretty sure they would have an impact that could be described as slight (in the beginning) to none (after a few months) all the while, adding yet another ugly sign. But, they are what might be called a measurable process effort for the police. “Q: What have you done to reduce larceny? A: We have put up some signs.” Plus, don’t these signs merely blame the victim? That is, since you were dumb enough to leave your 40 foot ladder chained to your outside fence rather than taking it inside each night, aren’t you to blame for your larceny victimization? The signs should have two sides for equal time: First side…Please secure your belongings. Second side: This community has determined that stealing another’s property is wrong and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. And if you are going to steal, please make sure the value of items exceeds a typical insurance deductible. A more serious idea: a community tool co-op.
Many times, the victim is to blame. they leave the items in plain view or unsecure and that makes for easy pickings. Property crime is not like a presonal crime. You can “harden” a target and make it difficult to the thief to make away with the goods. Putting up signs is just a reminder to the citizens to take your stuff out of your car. Maybe someone should tell Lt Williams about the above idea for the sign warning the criminals about being prosecuted. And, as far as bringing in your ladder v. chaining it up, most of the criminals don’t carry around boltcutters so chaining it is not a bad idea. The ones that carry tools around will soon have the police called on them by the good citizens of the Hill.
Despite what some might think, education is a part of the law enforcement function. Yes it seem silly to put up signs that say “Lock up your stuff” but the sad fact is that there are folks out there that need that little prod to remember to do things that others find to be common sense.
It’s a small part of the big picture but it is a valid contribution.
Zack, please excuse the coarseness of the following: Are you out of your eff-ing mind? The victim is not to blame. Period. The criminal who decides to steal is to blame and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (which, unfortunately doesn’t currently permit hunting them down with sharpened sticks). I’m all for hardening targets and all that (even if it means being villified by a certain subsection of the community that thinks my alarm and large dog make me a bad neighbor), but every homeowner has the right to demand that their neighbors will respect their property rights. That’s a fundamental part of the social compact.
Having said that, unless the world we live in is going to change dramatically in the next day or so, one would be well advised to not tempt the criminal element.
Not tempt the criminal element? If by tempting you mean taking my valuables out of my car and out of sight of the criminal element. I’m sorry, I think you’re wrong. Period. You can make yourself a victim by not doing the things I mentioned and by not paying attention to your surroundings. I for one, would much rather have some control over my “victimization” than believing I have none. You, sir, believing that the victim has no fault, makes you a victim.
No, the fact that some low life waste of space broke into the second floor of my house and managed to avoid tripping my alarm system until he was leaving the house makes me a victim.
You are free to feel as empowered as you like, but I am saying that it doesn’t matter how much control you think you have over your victimization, the only relevant factor in determining whether you are a victim is whether someone else has decided to make you one.
I would just *love* to hear you spew your thoughts on victimization to the woman that was raped on Grace street a while back. I mean honestly, how dare she walk home from the Market?
Victims are never morally to blame for their crimes. However, sometimes, their behavior patterns do facilitate their victimization. This is where education comes in. The police try to prevent crimes by lecturing us about locking doors and not walking home alone.
Still, the signs seem like a weak effort. Perhaps something with more “real world” language would be slightly more effective. As it now stands, the signs might as well be completely in latin, for the impact that they will have is just as negligable.
I personally like the Neighborhood Watch signs better, but those are only placed by citizen request and where there are Neighborhood Watch programs. These signs, while they might not be very effective either, imply that the residents are watchful and look out for one another.
These larceny signs seem to announce, “You are now entering a dangerous neighborhood. Be careful!” Much more menacing. When I have friends and family over, I don’t know if I want them parking in front of those kinds of signs. It sends out a wierd message even though I know that larceny is a real threat in our area.
These larceny signs seem to announce, “You are now entering a dangerous neighborhood.
Just like those “Drug Free Zone” signs seem to announce just the opposite…
Yeah John, I know what you mean. I think the city/police dept. should tap into the adcenter talent at VCU and work up some better PR campaigns.
Years ago, I looked at joining the army reserve. When I went down to the center and watched the DVD on career choices, I knew it was not for me. I have great respect for those in uniform, but the DVD was scary. It was just a picture of someone in uniform then a series of numerical abbreviations were SHOUTED. “JSO 34 DASH 10! INTELLIGENCE ANALYST”. The recruiter was so proud of this high tech DVD, but no one could even begin to clue me in on what was really being said (or left unsaid). By god, it made sense, didn’t it? Did I need to watch the DVD again?
I think the police are falling vicitim to this same thing. To someone who has served the police long enough to be a manager, the signs probably make a lot of sense. But to the general public something is lost.
how about “this property is protected by a bad-ass dog” hungry for an intruder
I know what larceny means. But if I didn’t, I would have first looked at the wording surrounding it and easily figured it out.
No one is blaming the victim, they are simply trying to increase awareness so that there are fewer victims. Example: If I don’t leave my $1000 laptop in my car, no one can steal it from my car.
The signs aren’t being put up to scare anyone or label the area as dangerous. There really are people living in and visiting the area who leave their purse in the front seat of an unlocked car, keep their front doors unlocked, etc.
Heather, Zach said:
“Many times, the victim is to blame.”
Thanks Heather. I said sometimes the victim is to blame and I meant in only property crimes. The victim is NOT to blame in the rape case, Archie. Not at all. But if you talk to some rape victims, they will point out what they may have done wrong and when they do, it makes it all the worse because they think they are stupid. We all know this is not the case.
Also, the police are entering a new era where dealing with the public in a meaningful way is new to them. For so long, it has been a them v us mentality and they have not always had the best PR. The police are much better in locking up the bad guys than dealing with the good ones. Give them some time and they’ll figure it out.
Archie, you have lost my attention when you accused me of “spewing” and implying that I would tell a rape victim that it was her fault. Also, and back to this, why can this site not have a meaningful discussion without the hostilities?
From a philosophical point of view (trying to keep this away from anything personal), I do not see a meaningful distinction the relative culpability of a rape victim compared to a larceny victim. In each case, the victim’s rights are being violated by another person. One could very easily compare the risks a woman takes by dressing suggestively or walking alone at night to the risks a car owner might take by leaving valuables in their car. In each case, they are legally entitled to do it, but it may make them a target. I shudder just as strongly over the suggestion that the car owner was asking for it as I would if the same were said of the woman. I think the criminal alone should be blamed.
i think that it is the owners fault because the were stupid enough to leave their items in the car. i mean i would not leave a 100 dollar bill or neckalace in plain sight. that is stupid!
I don’t really care who is “to blame”. It’s just a good idea to practice good security measures. Just because it’s not my fault (or it is my fault) as a victim, the fact is I don’t want to get robbed.
The police are just asking for a little bit of help. If we as a community can reduce the instances of “convenience crime” it will make thier job a little easier.