Not really. Diamond necklaces don't get the page hits that anything Apple doesn't. So folks dont talk about that stuff.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Increase in iPhone and iPad Thefts Accounts for Rise in New York City Crime Index
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not really. Diamond necklaces don't get the page hits that anything Apple doesn't. So folks dont talk about that stuff.
It's a carrier based policy, has nothing to do with Apple (same as Apple can't block a stolen MacBook from getting on the Internet). BTW, your information is outdated, AT&T now blocks stolen handsets, like Sprint and Verizon does :
http://blogs.denverpost.com/techknowbytes/2012/07/10/att-starts-blocking-stolen-phones/5331/
The companies already do add such charges. At least for smoking.
----------
They do. Although it is mainly headphones etc. comes with having several thousand folks coming though their stores daily
Going into NYC this weekend with my iPhone 5
You're next
----------
Well, Japan isn't truely civilized.
----------
And arrest you and torture you to get info on Taliban's leaders. I would love to see that.
Lets put the blame where it belongs. Apple doesn't own or operate AT&T etc. they can no more set policy for the carriers than carriers can tell them how to warranty service the phone.
Your issue is an AT&T one, not an Apple one.
and then apple can counter,
"our crap are better than samsung crap/ using our crap will enhance your social status and elevate you from the rest"
they just have to incorporate theft deterrents for their mobile products.
So far, they have totally avoided this for some reason. As soon as word gets out that they can be traced, theft will drop to zero.
Sure there will be hacks, but they will just have to chase updates like they do with jailbreaking.
Of course this sort of thing cost a bit of money, and I imagine that's why Apple hasn't done anything yet, but this bad publicity will outweigh that now, I would imagine.
So far, they have totally avoided this for some reason. As soon as word gets out that they can be traced, theft will drop to zero.
Sure there will be hacks, but they will just have to chase updates like they do with jailbreaking.
Of course this sort of thing cost a bit of money, and I imagine that's why Apple hasn't done anything yet, but this bad publicity will outweigh that now, I would imagine.
In your scenario there is both a record of your prior ownership and a record of your false reporting of a theft. So you have about five seconds of fun. Ha I got them. Then a few weeks later once it is all sorted out you go to jail. I doubt this would be common.
Resale of iPhones and iPads could have another step in which the seller insists that you email apple and inform them of the legitimate sale. We have a unique device and for it to work it has to be associated with a legit identity (credit card to pay for cell services and App Store). This issue can be dealt with based on our current technology.
Someone has some sense! Very true...my pencil doesn't write good papers nor does my MacBook edit good video, they are tools, ultimately I am the master of my own choices and if I can't make good ones then I should be considered a different class of citizen and have different treatment.
Allot of people are stupid with their iPhones and other expensive toys. Don't for one second leave your iPhone unwatched on a bench while you play basketball, don't leave your car unlocked, don't assume everyone around you is as friendly as you and don't assume the police will fix everything! People need to be more responsible instead of blaming external causes. Besides EVERYONE has an iPhone now, and if they didn't you could just replace "iPhone" with "Cellphone" in the title. You have something expensive? Learn how to handle it.
While this hasn't been true in NYC (or other big cities such as Chicago, LA, etc. for that matter), but there were places in the US where the same mentality applied in the past. For some, it still holds true.
Around 20 years ago when I was still in high school and took some summer vacations with my parents outside of NYC, I distinctly remember that when we got our of the car and locals heard our alarm chirp, they would look at us like we were insane. Then after we looked at cars around us and saw most of them with windows rolled down, stuff laying around and no one even thinking of helping themselves to any of it, it was no surprise why they reacted to us the way they did.
When my father was shopping for a new car in Long Island this past summer, the sales guy was very surprised when we asked to have an alarm installed on it. That was until he started the paperwork and saw NYC address on my father's driver license. According to him, none of the locals that he sells cars to want or need an alarm, except for those buying fully loaded models, most of which already come with one.
A few years back, my uncle was visited by his cousin who lives in some small town in Virginia. The cousin was shocked when his car was broken into and the GPS that he left right on the windshield was stolen; said that this kind of thing was never an issue back home. Anyone living in NYC obviously knows better than that. Most of us use beanbag mounts that don't leave any traces on the windshield to make would-be thieves think that there is GPS unit inside that car.
What Drunken Master said is actually true about theft being less of a problem in smaller towns/communities. Once branded a thief in one of these places, that reputation will pretty much haunt you for the rest of your life. You pretty much have no future there. If you want to start over, your best is to move to somewhere where no one knows you. In contrast, it's much easier to disappear in large cities, that coupled with the fact that local police is way too busy to deal with petty crime makes if much more prevalent.
another great example of how "gun control" isn't helping the matter. give NYC residence a proper CCW Permit and personal attacks like this will end differently. once a few punks get shot dead while pulling this crap it will dramatically drop occurrences.
![anti_obama_criminals_prefer_unarmed_victims_bumper_sticker-p128492362379477969z7b7j_152.jpg]()
Samsung's latest ads
A bunch of old people, frail and vulnerable, ducking around corners. Hiding their cell phones, which we see are mostly iPhones. Punks come by, demanding they get the iPhones ("your iPhones or your life.") Angry, frustrated old people hand them over to the punks. They come up to a smiling old geezer who hands over his Note. The crook looks at it and snorts. "Take it back, Pops. I don't want this."
Samsung spokesman: "If you want to join these old people, go ahead. But just know: nobody ever steals the latest, best thing, the Samsung pretend iPhone giant phone with a pen. Because there's no resale value."
----------
Gun nuts love to kill people over an iPhone instead of getting it insured.
A bunch of old people, frail and vulnerable, ducking around corners. Hiding their cell phones, which we see are mostly iPhones. Punks come by, demanding they get the iPhones ("your iPhones or your life.") Angry, frustrated old people hand them over to the punks. They come up to a smiling old geezer who hands over his Note. The crook looks at it and snorts. "Take it back, Pops. I don't want this."
Samsung spokesman: "If you want to join these old people, go ahead. But just know: nobody ever steals the latest, best thing, the Samsung pretend iPhone giant phone with a pen. Because there's no resale value."
----------
Gun nuts love to kill people over an iPhone instead of getting it insured.
Don't need mine insured and hope to never need to pull my firearm but if I was in fear for my life or grave bodily harm from an attacker or multiple attackers I absolutely would.
These reports don't happen often where we live to even average working guys like me as we have a high percentage of ccw holders and bad guys don't like the odds.
Electrify the phone. Like in Robocop 2
----------
By mistake maybe.
----------
Or they shoot first. Bang your dead over an iPhone.
----------
Perhaps a firmware password like I use on my desktop machines. Preventing change of sim as does sim lock but also prevent software refresh.
Last edited by a moderator:
Or you shoot first, get first degree murder charges against you and end up 25 years in prison. Over an iPhone.
Really some people fail at logic.
Um, no. Being a native New Yorker, crime has been continually going down BECAUSE OF gun control laws. Since 2008, New York's "Cash for Guns" has turned in (as of May 8, 2010):
1,696 revolvers
1,161 semi-automatics
111 sawed-off shotguns
745 shotguns
94 assault weapons
1,225 rifles
979 others
That's just in two years, even more since.
*from Leaders, Police Collecting Cash For Guns In Brooklyn
More on New York City's program:
Cash for Guns Program Information
Thousands of weapons were taken off the streets, helping to lower crime rates even further while supplying the city with more revenue even with a cash incentive. Last week in LA, two rocket launchers were brought in from this same program:
2 Rocket Launchers Turned In During LAPD Gun Buyback (PHOTOS)
Most of the guns turned in were originally purchased from people who thought owning a gun would make them safer (research tracing serial numbers to original owners, assuming serial numbers were not chiseled off). Statistics have proven otherwise. Gun owners do not train themselves properly, and in many instances these weapons end up on the streets in the wrong hands, or worse, an adult or child in said household is injured or killed due to improper storage and handling of firearms.
I certainly would not want my next door neighbor(s) packing, the odds are they'd shoot someone. Trained police and military officers still make mistakes as human emotion plays a large part in firearm use. No matter how well trained an individual may be, it doesn't mean you will pull that trigger when [and if] the time comes for you to use it. I would rather be protected by trained officers than "Joe Six-pack".
The fact remains, we're a volatile country prone to knee-jerk emotional reactions (just read some of the political comments on YouTube, or even here, there is so much hate in this nation it's disheartening), we don't deserve the right to carry a deadly weapon. We lost it after the fifth shooting and xx number of children were needlessly killed this year. We should be ashamed.
Last edited:
I lived in NYC for years too and the facts still stand that gun control doesn't help. Just ask Chicago or DC. Chicago crime has surged and DC....where there are no guns, pales in comparison to Arlington VA just across the river where citizens are legally armed.
Violent Crimes
Washington, DC 46.4 per 100,000
Arlington, VA 2.1 per 100,000
Laws that disarm law abiding people give criminals a far safer environment. Disarming the law abiding people does NOTHING to curb crime as again, they are law abiding people. Bad guys don't care about laws regardless.
What's cleaned up NYC over the years is far better police officials and proactive vs reactive cops, not gun control. Funneling money into cleaning up the city and boros has helped too. Night and day compared to 20yrs ago. Especially the police force.
Numbers don't lie and they are right from the cities themselves.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
Last edited:
Finding a way to tie the device to the user is the only really practical method here. If stolen devices aren't usable, the problem is alleviated. Phones don't weigh very much. They're easily concealed. They can be sold for potentially several hundred dollars within a few hours. The only thing that will fix that is making the stolen item unusable or undesirable. People are severely misinformed regarding what constitutes self defense. In most states even someone trespassing in your house doesn't make it legally permissible to shoot them.
I agree on your points above, having studied urban theory the "Broken Window" principle does play an important part. However, statistics have positively correlated lower crime rates in Manhattan and the borrows with firearm control laws and programs such as "Cash for Guns". All play integral roles, but having people armed is dangerous. Unless properly trained and emotionally stable enough to operate a deadly weapon, it's adding fuel to the fire. I'm not a doctor, I will not pretend to be one nor tell a medical professional how to do their job. I am not a cop, I will not tell a police office how to do their job. Statistics and causality are extremely important in this matter. Until the general population has proven they are capable of handling firearms, which they have not, there should be no reason for arming them. This isn't 1775, there are no redcoats, the world is a much different animal than it was centuries, even decades ago. The law needs to be remedied to reflect this fact.
Fact: Currently only 7 states have laws that require the report of a lost or stolen firearm
Fact: 9 out of 10 illegal firearms can be traced back to the original owner
Fact: The original owner(s) of [most] recovered illegal firearms are middle aged, caucasian males in a household of 3 or more
Fact: A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder.
Guns in homes can increase risk of death and firearm-related violence
(PS "Just the Facts" is hardly an objective source as it's a conservative Republican leaning organization with roots grounded in extremist views. Using sources such as those I referenced directly from the government and city are much more reflective of the state of gun laws and crimes involving firearms. Try to avoid sources with blatant agenda's)
Last edited:
Feel free to read up or contact me via PM to discuss further. I'd love to discuss the stats on Australia and the UK and how gun control has impacted crimes rates on their people. However, start with Chicago, DC, Florida, California and Michigan here in the states first. Then look at how NYC and tell me what they do different. Hint...it's not the gun control that's cleaned up NYC.
Feel free too to read the specific citations Just the Facts article provides. They are well documented and credible sources that do not come from JTF site. Hence the reason the article is titled Gun Control Facts.
Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.
Kellermann AL, Somes G, Rivara FP, Lee RK, Banton JG.
Center for Injury Control, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.
METHODS:
We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.
RESULTS:
During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.
CONCLUSIONS:
Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.
Source:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182
This is just one of thousands of empirical studies done that statistically support the fact that gun ownership leads to more harm than good.
With that, PM it is.
Myth: The availability of guns causes crime
Fact: Though the number of firearms owned by private citizens has been increasing steadily since 1970, the overall rate of homicides and suicides has not risen. (SOURCE: FBI Uniform Crime Reports, CDC W ISQARS, BATF Firearms Commerce)
Fact: In 1968, the U.K. passed laws that reduced the number of licensed firearm owners, and thus reduced firearm availability. U.K. homicide rates have steadily risen since then. (Firearm Use by Offenders, Bureau of Justice Statistics)
Countries with the strictest gun-control laws also tended to have the highest
homicide rates. (Violence, Guns and Drugs: A Cross-Country Analysis, Jeffery A. Miron, Department of Economics, Boston University)
Supporting that: According to the U.N., as of 2005, Scotland was the most
violent country in the developed world, with people three times more likely to be assaulted than in America. Violent crime there has doubled over the last 20 years. 3% of Scots had been victims of assault compared with 1.2% in America. (Dutch Ministry of Justice, Criminal Victimization in Seventeen Industrialized Countries)
Ironically, firearm use in crimes has doubled in the decade after the U.K. banned handguns. (A Century of Change: Trends in UK Statistics since 1900 & International comparisons of criminal justice statistics 2000)
In fact Australia, UK, Canada and Scotland all top the list of per capita where people are struck by violent crime. In fact 12 countries are higher than the US.
I lived in Toronto for 3 years from 1999-2002 and can say gun control up there hasn't meant much either. News sounds the same as here in the states. Facts prove it too.
Fact: After the implementation of Canada's 1977 gun controls prohibiting handgun possession for protection, the “breaking and entering” crime rate rose 25%, surpassing the American rate. (A Comparison of the United States, Canada and England and Wales, Pat Mayhew , Nattional Institute. of Justice., Wash., D.C.,)
Last edited:
As an esteemed Brit I find it amusing that you Yanks are having arguments about who should be allowed guns.
Over here in the UK it goes something like this:
"Should we allow anyone to buy weapons designed to murder people?"
"No, that would be a stupid idea."
And seriously, if someone comes up to you and points a gun at you first, they'll probably shoot you as soon as you start reaching for yours. Is it really worth dying over a ****ing phone? Just buy insurance. All my **** is insured, I have insurance for up to £1,500 of goods, and although I do exercise caution when using my expensive tech in public regardless, the fact is I know the absolute worst that could happen is I'd have to wait a few days for a replacement phone. Your smartphone isn't worth your personal safety or your life. No, not even the iPhone 5.
Over here in the UK it goes something like this:
"Should we allow anyone to buy weapons designed to murder people?"
"No, that would be a stupid idea."
And seriously, if someone comes up to you and points a gun at you first, they'll probably shoot you as soon as you start reaching for yours. Is it really worth dying over a ****ing phone? Just buy insurance. All my **** is insured, I have insurance for up to £1,500 of goods, and although I do exercise caution when using my expensive tech in public regardless, the fact is I know the absolute worst that could happen is I'd have to wait a few days for a replacement phone. Your smartphone isn't worth your personal safety or your life. No, not even the iPhone 5.
Myth.
Fact: You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:
Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%
(British Home Office – not a “pro-gun” organization by any means)
----------
^^ on the surface one would think that makes sense, but the statistics prove otherwise. There are thousands of ways to kill people besides guns. The weapon has nothing to do with killing someone, it's the person using it. The only thing going to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Not just a cliche either. It's no different than banning fertilizer to stop your subway/train bombings.
Here's a more relevant stat than just a phone.
Fact: When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of rape attacks are completed, compared to 32% when the woman was unarmed. That's a fact taken right from our very own U.S. Department of Justice Law Enforcement Assistance Administration studying victimization in 26 of our largest cities.
My own wife was confronted and nearly attacked back in 2007 outside her law practice....she slapped and pushed the attacker away, drew her Ruger LC9 and as soon as he saw the red dot about the size of a quarter from her site on his chest, he ran like a scalded cat.
True story and yes, she is armed every time she leaves the house. I'll never forget getting the call as she raced home. I don't leave without my CCW either.
Rape Rates 1995–2003 (per 100,000 pop.) as per US National Crime Victimization Survey, Department of Justice
United Kingdom
1995 43.3 vs
2005 69.2
+59.8 increase
United States
1995 37.1 vs
2005 32.1
-13.5 decrease
No surprise in the US as more and more woman are authorized to carry a firearm.
Last edited: