Subject: Re: She Had No Face
I'm going off my Nextdoor feed, which is now full of neighbors of mine discussing break-ins while they're there.

Needless to say, anecdotes off of your Nextdoor feed don't really support an argument that there has been a fundamental change in the propensity of burglars to try to avoid encountering residents. If such a thing really were happening with a significantly greater frequency, it should (at this point) be documented somewhere.

Who's to say those thieves don't force their way in at gunpoint?

I mean - the fact that it's not really happening now? Has there been a rash of forced entry at gunpoint into people's houses in Seattle over the last few years? If these "street junkies" you're talking about were in fact armed and had a propensity to commit home invasions - crimes that carry a lot more serious penalties than stealing some catalytic converters - then you'd see them happening. BTW, coordinated groups of bike thieves and automobile converter gangs do not sound like the kind of zero-planning "street junkies" you were talking about earlier - those aren't folks who are committing crimes of opportunity RIGHT NOW to get their fix.

The more likely explanation is that these folks are committing property crimes against vehicles (bikes and cars) for the same reason that burglars have always tried to avoid occupied houses. Crimes against property almost invariably carry lower penalties, and are lower priorities for police and prosecutors, than crimes against persons. Not just in Seattle and SF - nearly every state penal code (and the model penal code) generally provides for higher penalties for crimes of violence against persons than property crimes. So if you're going to commit a crime for the money (not because you are motivated to specifically hurt the person), property crimes almost always offer a much better prospect.