B&E Calgary

[kootenayguy9]

Very interesting data posted on CBC's Calgary Website this afternoon. Some of Calgary's more affluent neighbourhoods seem to have a high B&E rate per capita.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...urge-1.3492739

[btimbit]

Duh, wealthier people live the more affluent neighborhood, with pork prices it's no surprise that they have more Bacon and Eggs.

[troutman]

Perps don't mess with Chinatown.

[NuclearFart]

Sutton's law -

Why rob banks? Because that's where the money is.

[Amethyst]

If I'm going to break into a house, why would I go to a poor neighbourhood???

[Swift]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

If I'm going to break into a house, why would I go to a poor neighbourhood???

Because that's where the junkies are keeping the stuff they stole from the rich neighbourhood.

[Barnet Flame]

At our school sports day (Jr. High - we were about 14), two friends and I got bored. So we went to one of my friend's house to play some Intellivision. After about an hour we decided to go to the other friend's house to play on his Atari because he lived closer to the school.

En route we got picked up by the cops and put in the back of their car while they questioned us about a break in that had occured near the first friend's house.

Part way through, one of the cops asked us if we had ever done or been arrested for "B&Es". We didn't know what he meant, so we looked at each other and one of my buddies said, "drugs"?

They let us go shortly afterwards.

[fredr123]

"Target hardening" as used in that CBC article is basically just victim blaming. We are moving past faulting women for getting sexually assaulted because of what they are wearing. Why should it be any different because we had the audacity to park your car at the hockey rink in Forest Lawn or leave your front door unlocked while you enjoy a BBQ in the back yard?

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by fredr123

"Target hardening" as used in that CBC article is basically just victim blaming. We are moving past faulting women for getting sexually assaulted because of what they are wearing.

Because it's been shown time and time and time again that what women wear has absolutely nothing to do with being sexually assaulted.

Why should it be any different because we had the audacity to park your car at the hockey rink in Forest Lawn or leave your front door unlocked while you enjoy a BBQ in the back yard?

Because it's been shown that time and time again that folks are jerks and will take advantage of a crime of opportunity. I would love to live in a perfect world where I could leave my house unlocked, my car unlocked with the keys in it as I skip over a rainbow and pet a unicorn...but most people know better. Want to keep your stuff? Then you need to protect your stuff, or someone will grab it.

https://www.facebook.com/Acasadasogr...48178068718535

Link leads to a facebook video that I can't embed for some reason, but basically shows multiple people stealing a purse when they think they'll get away with it, and a bit of revenge for the theft.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by fredr123

"Target hardening" as used in that CBC article is basically just victim blaming. We are moving past faulting women for getting sexually assaulted because of what they are wearing. Why should it be any different because we had the audacity to park your car at the hockey rink in Forest Lawn or leave your front door unlocked while you enjoy a BBQ in the back yard?

Pointing out cause and effect is not victim-blaming. That's like saying it's victim-blaming to say people should wear seatbelts while driving.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Pointing out cause and effect is not victim-blaming. That's like saying it's victim-blaming to say people should wear seatbelts while driving.

While true, I think Fredr was pointing out the lunacy of stuff like this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10162753.html

It is pretty obvious for police forces to give tips to prevent crime. Don't leave valuables etc. But apparently this doesn't translate to tips on helping to prevent sexual assaults.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Cappy

While true, I think Fredr was pointing out the lunacy of stuff like this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10162753.html

It is pretty obvious for police forces to give tips to prevent crime. Don't leave valuables etc. But apparently this doesn't translate to tips on helping to prevent sexual assaults.

Sorry, I think stuff that really happens takes precedence over how people feel. Women (and men) who are out alone (and I take 'night out' to imply drunk also) are more likely to be victims of crime. That is reality. Should we shy away from that reality because someone can twist that reality around to make it sound like an excuse for crimes? No.

The safest thing to do is stay home behind locked doors with a big guard dog. It's less safe to go outside in public. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night and get drunk. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night and get drunk by yourself. Those are empirically true statements. That doesn't mean people who prey on others are excused for doing so. It's simply pointing out it's more likely to happen. And that's useful information.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Sorry, I think stuff that really happens takes precedence over how people feel. Women (and men) who are out alone (and I take 'night out' to imply drunk also) are more likely to be victims of crime. That is reality. Should we shy away from that reality because someone can twist that reality around to make it sound like an excuse for crimes? No.

The safest thing to do is stay home behind locked doors with a big guard dog. It's less safe to go outside in public. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night and get drunk. It's even less safe to go outside in public at night and get drunk by yourself. Those are empirically true statements. That doesn't mean people who prey on others are excused for doing so. It's simply pointing out it's more likely to happen. And that's useful information.

Exactly, so when people spout off that PSA's geared toward sexual assault are merely victim blaming CIS(?) sexists, it's pretty hypocritical.

The use of PSA's isnt new or controversial, except in this area:

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/..._in_rapes.html

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...victim-blaming

[polak]

complaining about victim blaming is turning into the new victim blaming.

[calgarywinning]

Really, police consider B&E's an acceptable statistic and don't have any commitment or resources to catching the perps. (To much Criminal Minds for me).

When a B&E occurs the criminals more than always are casing for a return. I've had several people close to me who have been broken into. Everything is not taken. The police come out and do an interview, then the thief returns within a few days to get those items he missed.

In here, you have the fact that the police are resigned to not finding the perps. Same story every time.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

When a B&E occurs the criminals more than always are casing for a return. I've had several people close to me who have been broken into. Everything is not taken. The police come out and do an interview, then the thief returns within a few days to get those items he missed.

Many years ago for our personal experience but it wasn't to get items they missed. Chatting with police the delay was a bit longer than that to wait for people to get new replacement stuff after insurance claims from the original B&E.

[me_dennis]

That shooting in Springbank hill this morning is a few houses down from my in laws. Definitely really scary that this is happening so close to home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

Really, police consider B&E's an acceptable statistic and don't have any commitment or resources to catching the perps. .

There's a lot you can do yourself.

A buddy of mine came home for lunch and found his house had been broken into. He noticed their DVDs were missing (this was years ago), so he drove around to every pawnshop in the city looking for the DVDs. At one Cash Converters, he noticed his DVDs in a stack. He called his wife to meet him, and while she distracted the clerk he took down the name and address on the purchase form. He then drove out the address (a trailer park) and waited with his baseball bat. Then he realized he was being dumb and went home and called the cops with the information. They went to the Cash Converters and, no surprise, the security cameras were out of order. But they had enough information to identify the burglars, and arrests were made.

[MrMastodonFarm]

(a trailer Park)

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

There's a lot you can do yourself.

A buddy of mine came home for lunch and found his house had been broken into. He noticed their DVDs were missing (this was years ago), so he drove around to every pawnshop in the city looking for the DVDs. At one Cash Converters, he noticed his DVDs in a stack. He called his wife to meet him, and while she distracted the clerk he took down the name and address on the purchase form. He then drove out the address (a trailer park) and waited with his baseball bat. Then he realized he was being dumb and went home and called the cops with the information. They went to the Cash Converters and, no surprise, the security cameras were out of order. But they had enough information to identify the burglars, and arrests were made.

But was a conviction entered?

Tough to convict when the only evidence is dude sold a bunch of DVDs.