Hacker News Reader

Comment by sacnoradhq | Hacker News Reader

I live in Texas. I have 2+ AirTags in my vintage, non-truck vehicle.

I don't know what the circumstances are of this story, whether there is alleged fault with the presumed owner, presumed thief, or both because I wasn't there.

If a presumed thief were to threaten imminent great bodily harm to prevent me from recovering my vehicle, there's not much choice.

To intend to actively use excessive force without an immediate threat would signal becoming a vigilante. The near total monopoly on violence must be delegated to the state to prevent feuds and inappropriate uses of force between non-state actors. (It also requires that the police use force judiciously and minimally.)

View on HN

From somebody who had their car stolen somewhat recently, be aware that AirTags get in a habit of beeping when left in cars and whom ever wants the car will find it and hurl it at the ground to silence it. I’d recommend adding non-AirTag find my trackers that don’t beep. Throw in a chipolo or anker one and glue it under a seat for a little extra peace of mind

It is common to solder off the beeper.

Don't even need solder, removing the airtag speaker is a four-minute job with a small flatblade[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vAQNedIa0o

Yeap. The other matter is anyone with an Apple device will show any AirTags moving with them. They're not Tile Pro or Lojack.

Also anyone with android and airguard installed will find out about the airtag. Also the tile pros, BTW.

Or wrap in tape. Leave one for decoy too.

This is true. I have a couple of Tile Pros and also a wired-in SIM-based tracker.

I thought of doing Lojack but I think I have more coverage.

The police are NOT required to respond to your call, much less defend you or your property.

SCOTUS have repeatedly re-clarified this point.

So, what is an average citizen going to do? Drop dead by gunfire? Or take it back by force?

> If a presumed thief were to threaten imminent great bodily harm to prevent me from recovering my vehicle, there's not much choice. To intend to actively use excessive force without an immediate threat would signal becoming a vigilante.

I recommend that you read the Texas penal code sections that pertain to this type of situation. They are very clear on the lawful use of deadly force.

> To intend to actively use excessive force without an immediate threat would signal becoming a vigilante. The near total monopoly on violence must be delegated to the state to prevent feuds and inappropriate uses of force between non-state actors. (It also requires that the police use force judiciously and minimally.)

The police are always at the disposal of the political apparatus and often ignore the rights of unpopular groups and sometimes actively terrorize them. This is a feature of democracy, in which the majority holds power over the minority. Vigilante justice is a natural result of overly-political police, and I would argue something that would be very popular in many areas of the American Empire.

It is in movies and other forms of mass media. Unfortunately, far left jurisdictions frown on anyone using force, including defending themselves. Triumphal, might-make-right exceptionalism shouldn't be a core value. Patience, letting most things slide, and choosing not to use force where rights allow should be celebrated heroic virtues.

That’s all well and good until someone has a tool critical for their survival stolen, and are told to ‘turn the other cheek’.

In most of the US, a car is as critical to survival as a horse used to be.

"Survival" means "lacking will cause death." Stealing someone's vehicle doesn't kill them. OTOH, stealing a portable ECMO would.

If someone lives out in a remote area with bad weather, stealing their vehicle definitely can kill them.

I’ve run across some folks near death from losing a vehicle, in fact, when out in remote areas. It’s why folks stop to check if they see someone on the side of the road out in the boonies. But there isn’t always someone there.

Additionally, many people who live out in the sticks will lose their jobs without a vehicle very quickly (sometimes even a day or two), and that can make them homeless pretty quick. And when you look at the stats, that kills a lot of people too.

God knows what the actual circumstances are here. It could be someone worked up and angry and unjustified, or the equivalent of stealing someone’s jacket in a blizzard. Justice system, etc.

BS. That's what emergency services are for.

No cause of death has been "lack of car caused a stroke".

It's also the fault/responsibility of someone living too far from major medical. Personal responsibility and backup plans. Someone steals your car, you make arrangements.

Clearly you’ve never actually lived outside a city.

I’ve lived places where the fastest response to a felony in progress was an hour, and the county sheriff’s vehicles (4wd SUV) couldn’t get into at all for 4-5 months out of the year. I imagine if the weather behaved (it often doesn’t) and they were really motivated, they could get a helicopter from another agency out there sooner. But I never saw it happen.

The desert can work a lot faster.

So you think it is in any world fair to shoot someone who has stolen a car?!

Do you think it is in any world fair to steal a car from someone who has done nothing to you?

Fair? No. Grounds for executing someone? Absolutely not.

If you go to that car, and the person who stole it attacks you, yes.

> in which the majority holds power over the minority

That’s absolutely not how it supposed to be, it’s a very cynical take. They are the executive pillar of democracy, and actively terrorizing anyone is not a benefit of any society. Their whole purpose (should be) is to uphold the law created by the democratically elected government.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com