They are organized and setup drop off points to box the cars in. The 'passanger' then holds them at gun point and another person gets in the driver seat.
Stolen phones and credit cards are also being used for this.
Its out of control. Multiple Amber alerts issued with infants or toddlers in the back seat from separate car jackings are increasingly common. A few days ago another happened. https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/01/07/1yearold-missing-in...
This sounds like a typical made-up crime panic narrative, honestly. The linked story being about a car left running with an infant in it being stolen doesn't help. Terrible, but not at all some boxed-in high octane car theft.
Sibling posts chimed in about actually living there and this not being a thing. I don't live there, so can only search the news, but any stories about car thefts I'm seeing include warnings from the police for people to stop leaving their cars heating up with the keys in them.
We should endeavor to not buy into moral panics but act on data. We've seen from history that good reactions basically never come from decisive responses to crime waves that are actually constructed narratives from a data point or two.
Taxi drivers make easy crime targets for a number of reasons. They carry cash, they can be lured to virtually any remote (or easy to escape) location, they are working alone, they are working late at night.
Between 1992 and 1997, at least 50 cab drivers were murdered each year while at work. There may or may not be a recent surge in a specific location, but it has been a dangerous profession for a long time.
This is not as many newcomers like to say "just life in the city", it is a big change from the 2010s.
Many people are getting cameras at their houses because it makes insurance payouts easier when something goes wrong. Otherwise you end up on the legal treadmill to get back to where you were.
Here's my anecdata: neighbor from my block got his car stolen, joy ride until suspension broke, thieves totaled the inside by cooking drugs inside it. Neighbor gets 8k for his car from insurance (Honda CRV 2010sish). Now has to deal with current market on cars, ends up going new getting Mazda CX off a boat because no cars on the lot. These guys are a professor and nurse, so this put a good dent in their income.
One other fun data point, is now carjackings are turning into shootings as people in the city don't expect police to do anything so there is an uptick in concealed carry for ride share drivers and delivery people.
The box in tactic has only been seen in a couple instances here in Philadelphia. The case I saw (in the neighborhood next to mine) they rear ended the guy, and when they got out to talk/exchange info passenger popped out and pulled a gun on the driver. The driver was armed, as they got into his car he shot the dude driving and then shot the other car's driver. Total mayhem. Cops thought he was the carjacker until witnesses told the story and showed camera evidence.
I'm not advocating for any particular solution or outcome, but that is the weather pattern in Philadelphia.
That's WILD.
I live here, it's happening in broad daylight, and becoming more violent.
Last week we had an amber alert because someone stole a car with a 1 year old in it.
Yes. Letting your car warm up or idling unattended with the keys inside even if you lock the doors is specifically illegal in Minneapolis. It was made illegal specifically to curb car theft opportunities.
https://www.startribune.com/a-breakdown-of-2021-carjackings-...
Uber/Lyft drivers are specifically targeted because they can be easily lured to a semi-remote location by the apps. But multiple criminals using that tactic doesn’t make it “organized crime.” It would make sense that an app driver knows other drivers who have been carjacked, but this M.O. isn’t exclusive to Minneapolis.
Crime is still really low here. I live at a dodgy intersection with major bus lines that brings a lot of characters—good and ‘bad’—around. I don’t worry about walking around even at night. I don’t worry about driving anywhere in this city, even in the areas where carjackings have been “up” (which I travel through frequently in order to reach the now infamous Lake Street Target).
Anyway, fear-mongering comments or anecdotes from people who visit here don’t really express the lived experience of people living in Minneapolis. :)
Nothing like growing up in 80s NYC, but property crime in my city is way up, and police either aren’t taking reports or people don’t bother. The little league I’m on the board had the wall of a storage shed cut open and turf equipment stolen. The police took a report and the video and filed it away.
Shady people know what the police will arrest for, and what the DA will prosecute; they operate in the fringes. Basically if it’s a burglary at a house or assault the police respond and prosecute. Other thefts don’t even warrant a report unless there is an insurance angle. In general, the stupid crime done by drug addicts is basically not on the radar.
10 years ago, guys robbing sheds and plundering the little league would have prompted a mini-task force response. Today, the paperwork to book the guy would last longer that his time in custody.
However, I still have many friends in Minneapolis and without exception they are all very negative on the overall direction of the city. It's been particularity intersting to watch friends of mine in that area who I considered pretty far left start spouting more and more "conservative" talking points after the riots and as they view their quality of life deteriorating.
So I am curious about the source of multiple Amber alerts
So it's not just ride share services...
The first few victims I get. But after it becomes an identified pattern and makes the news people are gonna be on somewhat of a lookout or at least have it in the back of their mind that it's possible and the odds of your victim seeing the trap before you've got it complete go way up.
Sure you can try and profile people and avoid the car with five dudes in it and go for the middle aged lady in the car with a real estate agency sticker on the door but even then you can only point a gun at so many people before someone's knee-jerk reaction is to either hit the skinny pedal and GTFO or whip out their own piece. This seems like the kind of crime you can only commit 5-10x before you get unlucky and it goes off the rails.
And I know this next bit is going to come off as defensive - but I think it provides some context. I’m native to the upper Midwest, but I’ve spent a lot of time living in other large cities around the country. Take a look at the FBI violent crime data below.
Minnesota is a very low crime state and is coming off historically low crime. The current uptick in violent crime is real, but still doesn’t come close to the 90’s and lags significantly behind US average.
All that said, talking with people - including family - in neighboring communities and across the border in Wisconsin, you’d think Minneapolis is a burning, crime ridden hellhole where you can’t even walk down the street safely. There’s clearly some kind of political hay being made by that narrative.
https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/explorer/cri...
I don’t agree with the program, but since I have some context around it, I thought I’d add to the conversation.
[0]: https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/12/11/edina-pd-offers-5k...
The suburbs are not nearly as safe as they were. My county has reported an explosion in carjackings and is considering boosting the police budget, and has referred to it as crime spillover.
In the west we see communities opting in to self surveillance 100% of the time, in China it can be literally having your door welded shut so you stay at home.
It all stems from the desire to control other people’s behavior to varying degrees. This desire is probably tied to a survival trait, but more often it is to satisfy something else.
Having a camera on your house, pointed into the street, is the opposite of self-surveillance. It's a way to surveil people in a public thoroughfare. Some of those people happen to be thieves who steal things from homes and cars, and if they get caught by video surveillance, that's great.
What exactly do the neighborhood residents lose by participating in this surveillance? It's only an upside for them -- they might be able to catch the thieves, with no loss of privacy for themselves.
a) not much to lose from secret information being divulged
b) not much secret information in the first place
It is really only a tiny minority that actually practically need privacy rights: prominent people, public figures, the wealthy, highly attractive people, alternative lifestyles, political or labor organizers, those speaking truth to power, et c.
We are a very small segment of the population by real numbers. Most people dgaf about privacy because they don't have to, so they never will.
Just about everyone needs privacy rights and most care about those rights for themselves. Unfortunately many are very willing to sacrifice other people's rights if they are told it will make them safer or protect the children, etc. (If someone does claim they don't care about privacy since 'they have nothing to hide', ask them for their medical records and tax returns - all of a sudden they do care.)
Assuming police in the 1840s couldn't find citizens with cameras watching the street, how long is your "always"?
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_... )
I'm glad a warrant-like system is the plan. Technology opens the door to many dystopias I hope we avoid.
This includes dummy cameras (in Germany).
I had a neighbor that was allegedly pointing cameras at his neighbor because he didn't want a black woman in the neighborhood. He was also an officer of the HOA. He was trying to intimidate her with cameras and staring at her all day. She sued and won. The judge ordered him to remove the cameras. I got out of that HOA in a hurry. They've since doubled the fees to compensate for the law suit, so they should have it paid off in 25-30 years.
