Hacker News Reader

You've conveniently excerpted the article to avoid showing that it wasn't two thefts randomly scattered across four decades, but four decades without theft and then two thefts that have just happened. Here's the full quote:

> Mark Shull, a Palo Alto resident since 1983, also supported the use of license-plate readers. Until last year, he had never experienced property theft, Shull told the council. That's when thieves stole catalytic converters from two different cars in his household.

In recent years, there were hundreds of catalytic converter thefts in Palo Alto. Some residents have had their converters stolen multiple times, costing thousands of dollars. This includes residents who have paid several hundreds more to have converter shields installed, in a vain attempt to prevent subsequent theft. [1] Due to supply chain shortages, some people had to wait several months to get new converters, which left them unable to drive their cars. This is not an infrequent issue in Palo Alto, and it is not trivial for those who are victimized.

I'm not saying this one issue is sufficient to have ALPRs installed, but comments like yours distort the facts and mislead commenters who didn't read TFA.

1: https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2022/10/21/will-new-laws-sto...

> You've conveniently excerpted the article to avoid showing that it wasn't two thefts randomly scattered across four decades, but four decades without theft and then two thefts that have just happened.

But the parent said just that in the third paragraph:

> does 2 thefts in a week, after 40 years count as a spree?

GP starts off with the claim that this is 2 thefts across 40 years, and saying this is not a problem. The later portion you reference conflates citywide rates with incidents affecting a single resident.

That is, no one would say that there wasn't a crime "spree" because none of the 20 people victimized was hit enough times to constitute a "spree". That word refers to the total number of incidents, not just the number of times a single resident was hit. His use of the word spree makes it seem as if only two converters were stolen across the whole city, which is of course untrue. Perhaps this was sloppy writing, but it seems more like he is trying to downplay the frequency and recency of these crimes.

Sounds like a California overly strict emissions regulation problem created through the production of a leverage point (presence of Catalytic Converter = effectively able to participate in society through realizable freedom of movement) which is an undesirable side effect of the regulation.

Who'da thunk it?

> I wish I lived in a city where 2 converter thefts every 4 decades was the bar for "serious theft problem".

I don't think this is fair at all.

If a couple pre-teens get third degree burns because an arsonist burned their (parents') house down, would you wish you lived in a place where one's home being an average of .02 degrees warmer over your lifetime was the bar for a serious arsony problem?

His complaint isn't about the Palo Alto of 1990, it's about the Palo Alto of today. What did or did not happen in 1990 is immaterial. Same as the pre-teens in the years leading up to the fire.

The problem in your analogy is obviously that you turned discrete events into something else entirely. The person you're replying to didn't do that.

I wish I lived in a city where 2 converter thefts every 4 decades was the bar for "serious theft problem"

There are about 100 cars stolen a year, so probably more than 2 converter thefts every 4 decades. If you don't want surveillance, don't diminish and ignore crime.

A tiny shitbox house in Palo Alto costs $3 million. Residents’ standard for quality of life is extremely high, like how clean you’d expect a $1000/night hotel room to be.

even with video evidence thats not enough to charge. this is equivalent to security system...deter criminals and encourage crimes be done in an easier area.

There are a few of these cameras in my neighborhood. I often think about having a Cool Hand Luke moment and cutting them all down. Silly string, a pipe cutter, and a couple of minutes...

Why do you need silly string?

To obscure the camera. I could just walk up behind it but vandalizing it first is more cathartic. I suppose a paint ball would do, maybe spray paint if I can reach it.

No way I'm going to try eating 50 eggs though.

> That's as likely as hidden photo radar slowing down drivers.

Of course it does. What a silly comment.

“Hidden”? What am I, a driver, slowing down for exactly? The camera I can’t see?

You get notified that you got penalty points for speeding and then you slow down everywhere because you don’t want to lose your licence.

Don't you need a ton of speeding penalties in a year to get your license suspended?

There are already lots of automated speed cameras and human speed traps everywhere. Everyone around me still speeds. I don't buy your argument that 20 cameras will fix that.

Don’t take your own word for it! https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/calculator/factshee...

Tickets ($$) are a deterrent.

What’s even better is designing the roads to naturally slow cars down.

Of course! But in the meantime, automated enforcement would be swell.

In the EU and UK, you get 3 (or 6 if you're significantly over the limit) penalty points on your license for speeding. They expire after 3 years. 12 points is an automatic ban.

Meanwhile in most of the US, you can get like 16 DUIs and still have a license.

Not that taking away a license is gonna stop someone from driving. They'll just now drive without a license. Probably without insurance, now that they can't get it.

In Australia you can reasonably expect them to be anywhere because they deploy lots and the locations change daily. As a result we don’t have anywhere close to the speeding problems the US does.

You are unlikely to be caught for once off speeding, but if you habitually speed, you are almost certain to start racking up fines which are enforced.

The idea is that if you can’t see the cameras you’ll obey the speed limit everywhere just in case.