Auto theft is a big problem, here in the Seattle/Tacoma/Everett/ Olympia area. One of the main causes of this problem is the lack of punishment for the theives, who are usually juveniles. I specifically remember a story a few months back about one kid who stole over 50 cars before he saw 10 minutes in juvenile hall.
The reason there is no punishment is because the defense lawyers have the system whittled down so that even if the person who stole the car is stopped, unless someone actually witnessed them stealing, all the thief gets hit with is “Possesion of Stolen Property”, which is basically a ticket, and not even a moving violation that’ll hold them back from getting their license when they’re old enough.
The problem is getting so big, the new Dem controlled state legislature is working on a plan to try and stop it. A plan that has, in my mind, some questionable measures.
Auto thieves would be locked up longer and people caught with the illicit tools of the trade would be punished, under a bill gaining traction among lawmakers.
The bill also could prompt a new program in which car owners allow authorities to stop their vehicle late at night simply to ensure the rightful owner is behind the wheel.
(snip)
Lovick hopes to see the start of a program in which car owners voluntarily put a sticker on their vehicle giving notice that police have permission to randomly stop the car to see who is driving.
I’m a law abiding guy, but there is nothing on this planet that would make me put one of those on any of my vehicles. Even if thieves were completely avoiding the vehicles with those stickers and I was the only guy in my jurisdiction without one.
No way. No how.
“Auto thieves would be locked up longer and people caught with the illicit tools of the trade would be punished, under a bill gaining traction among lawmakers.”
I expect those who have lock-picking as a hobby, or a coathanger bent in a non-regulation way will be locked up for having “illicit tools of the trade”.
“The bill also could prompt a new program in which car owners allow authorities to stop their vehicle late at night simply to ensure the rightful owner is behind the wheel.” = “I love Big Brother, and here’s my sticker to prove it.” Also means that if you ever do loan your personal vehicle to someone, they can’t use it after sundown without being hassled.
Before you give any credits to your local PeeDee for coming up with something new, don’t.
Portland has had that plan, called “CAT” for catch-a-thief, for at least five years. Seems to me and the insurance bureau that auto theft hasn’t dropped as a result.
When a night-shift cop stops a car, he or she goes into a little self-protective trance. Here’s how it DOESN’T WORK: Cop sees the CAT sticker, decides to stop the car with it, calls in the stop or keys it into the patrol car mobile data terminal. Cop turns on the overheads, and you in the vehicle pull over. Cop comes up, you present your DL and registration and he smiles and waves and you both go your separate ways.
So sorry. Doesn’t work that way. Here’s how it REALLY works:
Cop sees the CAT sticker, initiates the stop as in above, gets out of his patrol unit and “puts the shields up”. This is, after all, after midnight, a check for stolen, and car thieves after midnight are likely to be armed and in a shooting mood. Car stops after midnight can yield great treasures as in felony drug arrests, parole violators, warrant arrests, just to mention a few BESIDES car thieves, who the community treats rather lightly anyway. The cop is simply using the CAT sticker as a pretext to stop a car which might have one or more hi-value targets in it.
The cop approaches the driver with all this in mind. The cop will give everything in the car a SEVERE once-over, and especially any passengers (always the possibility that one of the pax is carjacking the real driver, ya know). If you’re packing heat, and you SHOULD BE at that time of night, make sure you do all the right things as your state/town requires for CHL people who are stopped by the police.
In sum, the CAT stickers don’t seem to have much effect, and you add into that little failure the distinct possibility that you will get a young, overeager cop just out of the Academy who wants to make big points with a high arrest rate, and who knows that the way to do that is never assume ANYTHING, such as: driver of CAT-stickered car has proper ID and registration, so there is no more reason to be suspicious. After all, who knows what evil lurks in the heart of man? Only the Shadow knows, and he’s not with that cop, and so the cop must dig for himself.
Forget the CAT stickers. They don’t work and raise your chances of getting into some sort of situation with the cops. You also make a perfect target for a phony cop to stop you and carjack you since said phony cop, of which every large metro area has a few, knows that you EXPECT to be stopped and WILL pull over when he turns on his phony police light.
BTW, Phil, if you know of any solid, Constitution-minded outfit which plans to oppose this legislation, and they need an expert witness to testify AGAINST it in committee hearings, let me know. I’ll come up to Oly and say the words. Since the pols who push this plan will likely have a Portland Police Bureau brass hat speaking FOR it, it would be nice to counter that brass hat with the facts that their gee-whiz idea didn’t fly.
BTW2, whenever (D)onks push anti-crime plans, it’s because someone is paying them to do it. In your case, it’s probably SafeCo Insurance, which has a lot of clout in Olympia. someone should clue SafeCo in that the way for them to reduce their losses is to offer incentives, or better incentives if they already have them, for theft-proofing the target, not try to drag the gummint bureaucracy into it. There’s probably just ONE risk-management executive in SafeCo who is behind this whole thing, and someone needs to take him/her aside and whisper in their ear.
Bravo, Rivrdog! A single expert witness will stop bad bills in their tracks more often than most folks would think. Back in 1996 when I interned in Sacramento, I was astonished at how many bills would sail through committee solely because there was no opposition presented.