how does your bike get jacked?
how do so many bikes get stolen when they're locked up? does it happen late at night? i don't get it.
when, how and where do the majority of bikes get jacked?
Views: 1173
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Duppie on
-
Answers to you question about how and where do bikes get stolen can be found here: http://chicago.stolenbike.org/report-statistics
-
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on
-
Cordless angle grinder and a big to hide the cutting/sparks. Happens all times of day.
-
Permalink Reply by Reba 4.0 mi on
-
Am I missing something on that statistics page, or are those really just raw stats? I don't mean to criticize whoever keeps this page going, thank you for doing it! But, without any correlating data or weighted percentages there's no real way to know what the factors are behind stolen bikes. Look at the numbers for
"How was the bike locked?"
Locked through front wheel and frame to object.29.71%
Not locked.18.81%
Only the frame was locked a solid object.17.54%
Other situation, please describe below.13.34%
Locked through both wheels and frame to object.12.52%
Locked through rear wheel and frame to object.5.17%
Bike was locked only to itself, through one or both wheels.2.91%
What explains the almost 13% difference between bikes locked through the front wheel and frame and bikes locked only by the frame to an object? I would think that locking more of your bike would be more of a deterrent (or locking the back wheel inside the rear triangle of the frame to a solid object). Well, I'm guessing this discrepancy is largely due to the type of lock (front wheel and frame might suggest a cable-type lock) and the type of bike that is typically locked in these styles (just guessing, but locking only the frame is typically done with a U-lock, perhaps an indicator of a higher-end bike, representing a lower percentage of the bikes in the report). These are all assumptions I'm making based on nothing but my own observations and therefore they are totally meaningless (as is anecdotal data on "why my bike got stolen" - hence someone keeps stats). BUT, without showing the relationships of one category to another, I'm not sure this page gives anyone an idea of what makes a bike more likely to be stolen.
Again, I applaud the folks who keep the stolen bike registry going. I just don't think the stats page gives much info for the question asked here.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on
-
Absolutely raw, and the overwhelming majority self-reported by the victims themselves. For me, the statistics that really matter are 35% of CSBR reports were locked with only a cable lock AND 25% of CSBR reports weren't locked at all. That's the target demographic for reducing bike theft in Chicago.
Reba said:Am I missing something on that statistics page, or are those really just raw stats? I don't mean to criticize whomever keeps this page going, thank you for doing it! But, without any correlating data or weighted percentages there's no real way to know what the factors are behind stolen bikes. Look at the numbers for
"How was the bike locked?"
Locked through front wheel and frame to object.29.71%
Not locked.18.81%
Only the frame was locked a solid object.17.54%
Other situation, please describe below.13.34%
Locked through both wheels and frame to object.12.52%
Locked through rear wheel and frame to object.5.17%
Bike was locked only to itself, through one or both wheels.2.91%
What explains the almost 13% difference between bikes locked through the front wheel and frame and bikes locked only by the frame to an object? Well, I'm guessing it's largely due to the type of lock (front wheel and frame might suggest a cable-type lock) and the type of bike that is typically locked in these styles (just guessing, but locking only the frame is typically done with a U-lock, perhaps an indicator of a higher-end bike, representing a lower percentage of the bikes in the report). These are all assumptions I'm making based on nothing but my own observations and therefore they are totally meaningless (as is anecdotal data on "why my bike got stolen" - hence someone keeps stats). BUT, without showing the relationships of one category to another, I'm not sure this page gives anyone an idea of what makes a bike more likely to be stolen.
Again, I applaud the folks who keep the stolen bike registry going. I just don't think the stats page gives much info for the question asked here.
-
Permalink Reply by Matt Talbert on
-
I think there should be some data broken down to compare cable locks only v. U-Locks. I one time browsed through the stolen bike registry, and it seemed like all bikes that had been locked were snatched as a result of a cut cable. I believe I only know of one instance where a U-lock was cut. The owner however claimed this was because it was a Standard U-Lock, and therefore uses the Kryptonite New York Lock.
-
-
I guess I should have been more specific. Someone I know that is an avid cyclist had a their U-lock cut and therefore, their bike stolen. That is the only time I have ever heard of a U-Lock being cut. It scared me enough to get Kryptonite New York Locks for my bikes.
h' said:I don't quite understand what you're saying about "only one instance where a U-lock was cut" (cut U-locks are again on the rise even though the two busiest perps are still on time-out at 26th and Cal) but yes, I also wish all cable locks were presented as one total figure on the stats page. Starting to wonder whether it might be better just to can the link to that page for now (at least that's within my skill level...)
Matthew Talbert said:I think there should be some data broken down to compare cable locks only v. U-Locks. I one time browsed through the stolen bike registry, and it seemed like all bikes that had been locked were snatched as a result of a cut cable. I believe I only know of one instance where a U-lock was cut. The owner however claimed this was because it was a Standard U-Lock, and therefore uses the Kryptonite New York Lock.
-
-
Hey Matt. Here's a prior thread that may be helpful.
Matthew Talbert said:I guess I should have been more specific. Someone I know that is an avid cyclist had a their U-lock cut and therefore, their bike stolen. That is the only time I have ever heard of a U-Lock being cut. It scared me enough to get Kryptonite New York Locks for my bikes.
[snip]
-
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on
-
Successful angle-grinder attacks to U-locks are almost common in this city. They happen all the time. While cable-lock thefts are more common by far the U-lock thefts happen enough that they can't be called "uncommon."
-
-
James, I consider you to be knowledgeable about a good many things. I have been one of the administrators for the CSBR for close to two years now. I have read and/or approved (at least once, more often than not, multiple times) every post that has come in during that time. My reading of the CSBR reports suggests not that we are battling legions of well-equipped, professional thieves, but that we are dealing with too many people who either don't know how or don't lock their bikes properly. Successful bike theft reduction programs in New York and Portland have found the same thing.
I don't know that angle grinder thefts "happen all the time." To the contrary, I suspect that there are a handful (less than 10) of thieves employing this method. What's your basis for making such a definitive statement?
James BlackHeron said:Successful angle-grinder attacks to U-locks are almost common in this city. They happen all the time. While cable-lock thefts are more common by far the U-lock thefts happen enough that they can't be called "uncommon."
-
-
The number of high-end bikes that were recovered plus those that were attributed to the last couple of busted bike theft rings points to this fact. While many of the high-end bikes that were stolen by Kenny et al were not locked with U-locks, when they were it didn't slow them down at all. If they targeted a high-end bike for theft they took it -regardless of how it was locked up. U-locks are pretty easy to cut in the end.
Sure, I agree that U-locks would raise the bar for thieves slightly -but the professional ones will not have any trouble jumping it. Cutting a U-lock with grinder takes only seconds longer when they have the right tools -and the sparks can be hidden by simply using a sack or bag. It's over very quickly and people don't want to interfere. If everyone converted to only using U-locks the thieves would simply adapt. Either they would upgrade their toolkits or move onto simply taking high-end components which no lock can secure easily. An expensive derailleur set and/or brifter can be separated from the bike in seconds with nothing more than a hex key and a very small bolt cutters to cut the chain and cables. A higher-end 105 or better groupset sells for hundreds of dollars on CL.
There really is no real solution to thievery that simply focuses on better security. The thieves will just adapt. The only way to truly stop them is to either take away their financial incentives (which are pretty darn high) or raise the stakes for punishment/re-compensation of their victims when caught. But the city really has no interest in pursuing bike theft and bike thieves so that is never going to happen.
-
-
So the short answer is, there is no basis for your definitive statement. You are relying solely on your powers of deductive reasoning.
James BlackHeron said:The number of high-end bikes that were recovered plus those that were attributed to the last couple of busted bike theft rings points to this fact. While many of the high-end bikes that were stolen by Kenny et al were not locked with U-locks, when they were it didn't slow them down at all. If they targeted a high-end bike for theft they took it -regardless of how it was locked up. U-locks are pretty easy to cut in the end.
Sure, I agree that U-locks would raise the bar for thieves slightly -but the professional ones will not have any trouble jumping it. Cutting a U-lock with grinder takes only seconds longer when they have the right tools -and the sparks can be hidden by simply using a sack or bag. It's over very quickly and people don't want to interfere. If everyone converted to only using U-locks the thieves would simply adapt. Either they would upgrade their toolkits or move onto simply taking high-end components which no lock can secure easily. An expensive derailleur set and/or brifter can be separated from the bike in seconds with nothing more than a hex key and a very small bolt cutters to cut the chain and cables. A higher-end 105 or better groupset sells for hundreds of dollars on CL.
There really is no real solution to thievery that simply focuses on better security. The thieves will just adapt. The only way to truly stop them is to either take away their financial incentives (which are pretty darn high) or raise the stakes for punishment/re-compensation of their victims when caught. But the city really has no interest in pursuing bike theft and bike thieves so that is never going to happen.
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Wednesday Night for Mort…
1 member
-
Great Lakes Ultra Cycling
270 members
-
Major Taylor Internation…
1 member
-
Critical Mass discussion
261 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
