Network for Stolen Bikes

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 22:40:26 GMT, "Bill" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In some states...INDIANA FOR SURE...it is illegal to possess anything of value that once had a
> >serial number and now does not. Yes, that means if you own something and file off the serial
> >number, it is still technically illegal to possess it. This law was made to stop those who
> >burglarized homes, stole electronics then filed off Serial numbers. This way, the devices are
> >illegal to have either way. The same would go for a bicycle.
>
> So if the sticker (it's usually a sticker, often a paper one) with the serial number falls off the
> back of your tv after twenty years of dry heat, you're suddenly committing a misdemeanor? Felony?
> by even having it in your house?

Probably not. For one thing, the TV almost certainly has a serial number printed internally
somewhere. For another thing, 20-year old TVs have no value. Seriously, try and sell a 1983 TV to
anyone. You can't give 'em away.

For a third thing, this is a perfectly sensible sort of law designed to prevent an act which has no
reasonable purpose except to disguise stolen goods. Well, maybe not: did you have a good reason
someone might remove a serial number? At worst, this act might force you to re-engrave a serial
number on a good if you accidentally or for a legitimate purpose (re-painting...) removed it, and if
the good in question was something that anyone would care about.

So, be careful with the re-paint jobs on serialized bikes in Indiana.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[David Reuteler]

Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
: goods. Well, maybe not: did you have a good reason someone might remove a serial number? At worst,
: this act might force you to re-engrave a serial number on a good if you accidentally or for a
: legitimate purpose (re-painting...) removed it, and if the good in question was something that
: anyone would care about.

well, strictly speaking that's not true. the law makes no stipulation w/r/t value or subjective
appraisal ("is it something anyone would care about"). it's a blanket requirement against any & all
alterations of serial numbers. as a rule i'm against any law that tells me what i can do with my
property that doesn't harm others. for licensing reasons i can understand why they don't me
scrubbing the VIN off my car but if the paper sticker falls off my amplifier i'm now in violation of
a misdemeanor? that's just silly.

it's not going to stop anyone, anyway. there's a larger payoff to the thief in having untraceable
goods than there is in the threat of being prosecuted for erasing serial numbers. if you rectify
that by increasing the penalty for erasing serial numbers the penalty no longer fits the crime. if
you can prove theft or trafficing the penalty on those offenses ought to be enough.

my god, i have a hangover.

must .. drink .. less.

the big bike related costume here in boise wss a bicycle bound mormon. a few variants were more
entertaining (mormon bicyclist's involved in varying degrees of gruesome accidents).

i think they were costumes, anyway. the mormon's don't usually come out at night.
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 02 Nov 2003 05:44:22 GMT, David Reuteler <[email protected]> wrote:

>it's not going to stop anyone, anyway. there's a larger payoff to the thief in having untraceable
>goods than there is in the threat of being prosecuted for erasing serial numbers. if you rectify
>that by increasing the penalty for erasing serial numbers the penalty no longer fits the crime. if
>you can prove theft or trafficing the penalty on those offenses ought to be enough.

It sounds like a typical "add on charge" -- if you catch a thief with 300 VCRs, 250 of which have
their serial numbers removed and the other 50 can be proved to be stolen easily, you can at least
file some sort of charge for those others as well.

Jasper

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 02 Nov 2003 05:44:22 GMT, David Reuteler <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >it's not going to stop anyone, anyway. there's a larger payoff to the thief in having untraceable
> >goods than there is in the threat of being prosecuted for erasing serial numbers. if you rectify
> >that by increasing the penalty for erasing serial numbers the penalty no longer fits the crime.
> >if you can prove theft or trafficing the penalty on those offenses ought to be enough.
>
> It sounds like a typical "add on charge" -- if you catch a thief with 300 VCRs, 250 of which have
> their serial numbers removed and the other 50 can be proved to be stolen easily, you can at least
> file some sort of charge for those others as well.
>
> Jasper

I think the real point of this law is that it discourages the handling of untraceable goods. If I go
to the flea market and see a VCR with its serial numbers gone, I can pretend I don't know why that
happened, but I can no longer pretend that there isn't a violation of the law going on.

This law isn't about what you do to your own goods, except as an unfortunate and minor secondary
effect. It's about how a change to those goods might affect efficient and trustworthy commerce among
individuals.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[David Reuteler]

Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
: I think the real point of this law is that it discourages the handling of untraceable goods. If I
: go to the flea market and see a VCR with its serial numbers gone, I can pretend I don't know why
: that happened, but I can no longer pretend that there isn't a violation of the law going on.

my track bike doesn't and never has had a serial number. i have an amplifer that had its serial
number fall off (it was a paper sticker, it got hot, it fell off). i just became a criminal.

: This law isn't about what you do to your own goods, except as an unfortunate and minor secondary
: effect. It's about how a change to those goods might affect efficient and trustworthy commerce
: among individuals.

bah. i own object. if i want to deface my camera for whatever reason i shouldn't become a criminal.
i may face consequences later on (you may not want to buy my camera w/ no serial number). perhaps
the rule should be ammended to include only SELLING objects with defaced serial numbers OR no proof
of ownership.

or how about proof of ownership at every sale? that would go much further towards effecient and
trustworthy commerce among indivuduals.

or is that too much of a pain in the ass?
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

[A Muzi]

David Reuteler wrote: -snip OT in favor of an actual bicycle related anecdote-

> the big bike related costume here in boise wss a bicycle bound mormon. a few variants were more
> entertaining (mormon bicyclist's involved in varying degrees of gruesome accidents).
>
> i think they were costumes, anyway. the mormon's don't usually come out at night.

That's funny! Here, Mormons are conspicuous with white shirts and black ties on extremely
cheap bikes.

As part of their missionary work, they visit our little Gomorrah and, being 18-20 years old and
poor, shop at thrift stores for their transportation. They don't visit us for maintenance, either.
Maybe we scare 'em.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Carl Fogel]

David Reuteler <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

[snip]

> my god, i have a hangover.
>
> must .. drink .. less.
>
> the big bike related costume here in boise wss a bicycle bound mormon. a few variants were more
> entertaining (mormon bicyclist's involved in varying degrees of gruesome accidents).
>
> i think they were costumes, anyway. the mormon's don't usually come out at night.

Dear David,

They also wake up without hangovers. Most live in Utah, but a fair number inhabit Idaho and the
western reaches of Colorado. Some even live in Pueblo.

We'd better not twit Simon Brooke about bearded young Mormon missionaries bicycling for
utility--he's heard enough about his liberal-bicycle-beard theory and we owe him a rest for
providing us with so much fun.

Carl Fogel

 

[David Reuteler]

Carl Fogel <[email protected]> wrote:
: They also wake up without hangovers. Most live in Utah, but a fair number inhabit Idaho and the
: western reaches of Colorado. Some even live in Pueblo.

yea, i'm in idaho at the moment.

more than a few mormons woke up with hangovers on saturday. believe you me.
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

[Bill Davidson]

flatline wrote:
> An RFID tag cannot be picked up through metallic frames due to the shielding effect.

Maybe it would be possible to redesign the tag so that it could use the metal frame as an antenna?
I'm thinking it might even be possible to design it so that the frame builder could attach it
inside a chainstay or seatstay which would make it really really hard to remove without destroying
the frame.

--Bill Davidson
--
Please remove ".nospam" from my address for email replies.

Support the Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org Petition Congress to stop the RIAA
lawsuits http://www.eff.org/share/petition/

 

[Occupant]

Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > [email protected] (Carl Fogel) writes:
> >
> > > On the other hand, a piece of paper with your name and address slipped inside the handlebars
> > > can be fished out with a coat hanger and will convince even the most hardened property room
> > > clerk that the battered machine is really yours.
> >
> > The police here sponsor a scheme under which you can have your post-code (similar in function to
> > the US zip code) stamped on your bike. This means that if they find a bike in suspicious
> > circumstances they have only a few houses to check (typically about six) to find the owner.
> >
> > Also, what do people think about the idea of sticking an RFID tag down your seat tube? Much
> > harder even for professional thieves to find and remove, at least without destroying the bike.
>
> I put some ID inside my seatpost, and also in/on the steerer tube. I write it on the steerer with
> indelible ink, or put it on a piece of waterproof paper and stick it in there. I don't know how
> this would fare with professional thieves, but it could be handy if someone is stopped while
> pedaling my bike around the neighborhood.
>
> RFID tags might be a good idea, especially in conjunction with some kind of registration program.
>
> However, the real problem is that police just don't have time to go chasing after stolen bikes. I
> think most police depts. only take stolen bike reports as a courtesy.
>
> Matt O.

Bikes are routinely dismantled in the darkness of alleys of the city centre and lifted from
balconies in residential areas and pawned for parts at 10:00 am. The frame is always left. Remember
the drug addicts are only looking for the next fix. Five bucks for a wheel and loose change for the
rest. Knowing this, it is about prevention. Use at least one U-lock for frame and tire of choice and
a cable for the remaining wheel for short absences from the bike. For longer absences like movies
and shopping, use two U-locks and possible a cable for accessories. One of the tricks is if the
owner leaves one tire unsecured by a cable or U-lock, they steal that. The owner arranges to
retrieve the bike later, perhaps the next day only to discover a completely stripped frame with
neither a bearing or break cable left. Thieves even break cheap u-locks and relock the stolen bike
at a rack a few blocks away - lock secured - to retrieve later to pawn, sell, or dismantle and pawn.

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 06:46:54 GMT, occupant
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Matt O'Toole wrote:

>Bikes are routinely dismantled in the darkness of alleys of the city centre and lifted from
>balconies in residential areas and pawned for parts at 10:00 am. The frame is always left.
>Remember the drug addicts are only looking for the next fix. Five bucks for a wheel and loose
>change for the rest. Knowing this, it is about prevention. Use at least one U-lock for frame and
>tire of choice and a cable for the remaining wheel for short absences from the bike. For longer
>absences like movies and shopping, use two U-locks and possible a cable for accessories. One of
>the tricks is if the owner leaves one tire unsecured by a cable or U-lock, they steal that. The
>owner arranges to retrieve the bike later, perhaps the next day only to discover a completely
>stripped frame with neither a bearing or break cable left. Thieves even break cheap u-locks and
>relock the stolen bike at a rack a few blocks away - lock secured - to retrieve later to pawn,
>sell, or dismantle and pawn.

Why on earth would they do this, when it's much easier to just break the lock and pawn the whole
bike in one operation? I never see stripped frames here, except once when there was a mountain bike
locked to a lamppost.. and the next week a wheel was missing.. and the week after the brake levers
(but not the housing of the brake levers, just the actual bits of lever metal themselves). That one
eventually got vandalised down to nearly a bare frame, but it took half a year. It's not a
coincidence, by the way, that the price of a stolen bike hovers around the 1-shot-of-heroin mark.

Jasper