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: 1146
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on
-
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.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on
-
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.
-
-
Indeed -except for the definitive statement* part. You are adding that yourself.
*The views and opinions expressed herein,, by the individual known as James BlackHeron, are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Chainlink, other members, reality, or any other individual, living or dead -and any similiarities between him and any fictional character(s) are strictly coincidental.
For entertainment purposes only. Advice or information available for free on the internet is worth exactly what you paid for it. No guarantees, implicit or implied are intended or expected.
Kevin C said:
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.
-
Permalink Reply by Michele on
-
This is what the link provided showed.
Lock Type Newer U-Lock w/ Flat Key 25.17% No Lock 18.74% Other 17.78% Combination Cable Lock 13.36% Cable w/ Integrated Key Lock 12.19% Cable w/ Padlock 6.63% Older U-Lock w/ Round Key 2.43% Heavy Duty Bicycle Security Chain 1.89% Other U-Lock 1.81%
I thought 25% new u-locks was high. I'd suspect the data are skewed because these are reported thefts not all thefts, and people who report are more likely to have used a u-lock.
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.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael J Blane on
-
A few days ago, I saw a very sad sight: a quick-release front wheel, with a U-lock around two spokes, attached to a city installed rack.
Sometimes, bikes get jacked because of operator error.
-
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on
-
Your tone and habit of continually rebutting those who disagree with you gives the impression you believe your views, opinions and conclusions are definitive.
I think you are quite wrong when it comes to bike theft, and that opinion comes as somebody who has put a lot of effort into the helping the CSBR, recovering bikes, learning about how locks are defeated and trying to find out as much as I can about theft; where does your basis for your opinion come from?
Sad fact is most stolen bikes get ripped off by a bum/crack-head/petty criminal style thief with very little in the way of tools. The most common took used by thieves is a simple pair of side cutters; they can make it through a Kryptonite cable in about 30 seconds. Most of these stolen bike end up, regardless of their actual value, sold on the street for 20 bucks. This class of thief is not going to 'step up their game' if there are more chains and u-locks.
James BlackHeron said:Indeed -except for the definitive statement* part. You are adding that yourself.
*The views and opinions expressed herein,, by the individual known as James BlackHeron, are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Chainlink, other members, reality, or any other individual, living or dead -and any similiarities between him and any fictional character(s) are strictly coincidental.
For entertainment purposes only. Advice or information available for free on the internet is worth exactly what you paid for it. No guarantees, implicit or implied are intended or expected.
Kevin C said:
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.
-
-
notoriousDUG said:Your tone and habit of continually rebutting those who disagree with you gives the impression you believe your views, opinions and conclusions are definitive.
-
-
Have I ever claimed to not believe I'm right all the time?
Go read what you right and think of how it would play to somebody who has never met you; it can be surprising.
James BlackHeron said:
notoriousDUG said:Your tone and habit of continually rebutting those who disagree with you gives the impression you believe your views, opinions and conclusions are definitive.
-
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on
-
We put a silly amount of time into making sure listings don't show U-lock erroneously.
Still, a certain percentage that we aren't able to eliminate may be simple user error or false info (e.g. victim trying to avoid abuse/save face by saying they locked to a bike rack with a U-lock when they actually locked to a broken wooden fence rail with a cable lock.)
Your theory certainly holds water though-- the ole' "self-selecting sample" problem; and there's virtually no way to ever find out just how skewed the "data" here might be.
Michele said:
This is what the link provided showed.
Lock Type Newer U-Lock w/ Flat Key 25.17% No Lock 18.74% Other 17.78% Combination Cable Lock 13.36% Cable w/ Integrated Key Lock 12.19% Cable w/ Padlock 6.63% Older U-Lock w/ Round Key 2.43% Heavy Duty Bicycle Security Chain 1.89% Other U-Lock 1.81%
I thought 25% new u-locks was high. I'd suspect the data are skewed because these are reported thefts not all thefts, and people who report are more likely to have used a u-lock.
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.
-
-
Yes, the words "definitive statement" were my words. Do you have a better adjective for your statement that "Successful angle-grinder attacks to U-locks are almost common in this city. They happen all the time."?
How do you quantify that?
I asked you a direct question, and the response was:
"*The views and opinions expressed herein,, by the individual known as James BlackHeron, are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Chainlink, other members, reality, or any other individual, living or dead -and any similiarities between him and any fictional character(s) are strictly coincidental.
For entertainment purposes only. Advice or information available for free on the internet is worth exactly what you paid for it. No guarantees, implicit or implied are intended or expected."
So what is the community supposed to take away from the fact that your myriad posts aren't accurate, aren't authoritative, and aren't particularly entertaining? Your penchant for posting to every thread on the chainlink, and your underlying theme of the Man (mayor, governor, former mayor etc.) always keeping you down, makes me question what exactly you think your contribution is to this community.
A Jesuit professor once said to me, "Mr. Conway, it's not that I don't like you... I don't like you, but it's not that.." I turn that question to you.
What do you have to offer to the chainlink community, Mr. Baum? Or are you just here to stir the pot?
James BlackHeron said:Indeed -except for the definitive statement* part. You are adding that yourself.
*The views and opinions expressed herein,, by the individual known as James BlackHeron, are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Chainlink, other members, reality, or any other individual, living or dead -and any similiarities between him and any fictional character(s) are strictly coincidental.
For entertainment purposes only. Advice or information available for free on the internet is worth exactly what you paid for it. No guarantees, implicit or implied are intended or expected.
Kevin C said:
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.
-
-
One point to Hufflepuff!
Kevin C said:A Jesuit professor once said to me, "Mr. Conway, it's not that I don't like you... I don't like you, but it's not that.." I turn that question to you.
-
-
Didja ever notice how disagreements get personal?
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Chicago Ride of Silence
118 members
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
