Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Shoplifting and looting becoming more common


Myles
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

But these same people who should rightly treat all media as untrustworthy will share stories from MSNBC and CNN and Politico and NYT and more and not even realise these organisations are peddling an equally biased narrative.

How do you know they are all 'equally biased'?  That's a much different claim than the obvious that they are all biased sometimes.  How are you measuring this equality and how should it be measured, because it sounds pretty complicated to me? Based on amount of airtime spent on biased stories?  Number of different biased stories?  The degree to which the stories are biased?  The effect of people believing these biased stories?

11 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Because they are all on the same political side and share similar ideologies, people make the unwarranted assumption that Fox News is "the right wing conservative news, while the rest of the mainstream news is the *real news* that everyone else watches".

And that is exactly what people on the right do also, most people who use the term 'MSM' are referring to left-wing media and they usually use that term as part of a criticism or complaint.

I don't know how you know that people make this 'unwarranted assumption' to any significant degree.  Most of the time I disagree with the argument that you need to live in the US in order to comment on US topics, for most arguments here people are getting their information not from their personal experience but from the same media/information that anyone in the world now has access to.  However when you talk about 'people' you are potentially referencing information that you are at a disadvantage as far as collecting since you don't encounter as many Americans as Americans do, and thus likely aren't familiar with the unwarranted assumptions they are making.

Edited by Liquid Gardens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Myles said:

For me it is the danger from criminals they are currently pursuing. 

Which apparently isn't as dangerous as the roads that truck drivers are driving, the trees and limbs that loggers are cutting, etc.  Police officers don't do an 'honorable' service for us they do a paid service for us, one that I'd like them to get paid a lot more for doing for many reasons.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

If you know it's a serious flaw you then you have some statistics on this?  How many cops are being assassinated by criminals they arrested?

My response to your questions is based on real-life interactions with real people, not from the Internet.
There are very few cops assassinated by criminals they arrested.
Go to a movie with a cop, and he/she will likely choose a seat in the last row where there’s a wall behind them. His/her favorite breakfast restaurant may be frequented by other retired cops, as well as on-duty cops who eat their meals while wearing their body armor. If the restaurant isn’t a cop hangout, they’ll sit in a chair facing the door so they can see everyone who enters. They may live in a condo community where other cop retirees live.
In other words, there are few assassinations of retired cops because they remain vigilant when out in public. Eye contact is often as effective as displaying a weapon to someone whose body language raises suspicion.


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, simplybill said:

My response to your questions is based on real-life interactions with real people, not from the Internet.
There are very few cops assassinated by criminals they arrested.

Then I don't know why you think there is a 'serious flaw', please explain.

25 minutes ago, simplybill said:

Go to a movie with a cop, and he/she will likely choose a seat in the last row where there’s a wall behind them. His/her favorite breakfast restaurant may be frequented by other retired cops, as well as on-duty cops who eat their meals while wearing their body armor. If the restaurant isn’t a cop hangout, they’ll sit in a chair facing the door so they can see everyone who enters. They may live in a condo community where other cop retirees live.
In other words, there are few assassinations of retired cops because they remain vigilant when out in public. Eye contact is often as effective as displaying a weapon to someone whose body language raises suspicion.

You should not refer to 'a cop' like it applies to even most cops, you mean 'some cops'.  Why you think you have had real-life interactions with a statistically significant number of cops to make assumptions about most of them I don't understand.  If very few cops are assassinated by criminals and there's no stats concerning attempted assassinations then you don't know if there are few assassinations because retired cops are vigilant and using their powerful eye contact to change the mind of would-be assassins, or if they are not at any significant risk for assassination and are just paranoid.  They may think they are at a greater risk than they are because they heard some story about one or a few cops this happened to which is how the media also fools people:  they report frequently for example on single crimes giving the impression that there's a 'crisis' when actually things could be safer over all from a violent crime perspective than it has been. That's why basing conclusions on a tiny insignificant sample of your real-life interactions as opposed to stats isn't usually the best way to get an accurate picture.

Regardless, if you want to branch out to dangers and other negatives that come from having a job after you retire, I'm willing to bet that loggers and roofers have to live with the pain  of previous injuries on the job more-so than cops.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Which apparently isn't as dangerous as the roads that truck drivers are driving, the trees and limbs that loggers are cutting, etc.  Police officers don't do an 'honorable' service for us they do a paid service for us, one that I'd like them to get paid a lot more for doing for many reasons.

You seem to be a very hateful person.  

Police officers indeed do us an honorable service.  In many was, in fact.  The police officers I know go above and beyond to help people even when off duty.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Myles said:

You seem to be a very hateful person.  

You're one to talk, I know whenever you refer to black people, which is often, I can just feel the love... 

It's not 'hateful' to view police officers as just like every other profession, there isn't anything special about their profession that makes them more 'honorable' than most other professions.  'Honor' comes from how you conduct yourself within your profession, it's at an individual level not an occupational level.

18 minutes ago, Myles said:

 The police officers I know

Is a non-representative sample of all police officers.  There are good cops and there are bad cops, you know this.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

I agree. I'd also include a bunch of independent researchers and commentators rather than just the establishment media, but the general sentiment is the same. 

The problem that I see, though (and the reason why I post so much about "the mainstream media") is that everyone appears to know that Fox is biased. They ridicule its bias and many dismiss it as a source before they even look at what it says. But these same people who should rightly treat all media as untrustworthy will share stories from MSNBC and CNN and Politico and NYT and more and not even realise these organisations are peddling an equally biased narrative. Because they are all on the same political side and share similar ideologies, people make the unwarranted assumption that Fox News is "the right wing conservative news, while the rest of the mainstream news is the *real news* that everyone else watches".

Not everyone literally believes this, but the numbers are high enough to be statistically significant! Unfortunately that means a higher percentage of people uncritically accept what CNN says. They shouldn't, but the fact is they do. 

 

People accept the story that fits their perspective most closely.  Those that are polarized and zombified choose only one, those of us who recognize the bias in all of them choose none of them, and do research from multiple sources if we are interested in and event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Then I don't know why you think there is a 'serious flaw', please explain.

You should not refer to 'a cop' like it applies to even most cops, you mean 'some cops'.  Why you think you have had real-life interactions with a statistically significant number of cops to make assumptions about most of them I don't understand.  If very few cops are assassinated by criminals and there's no stats concerning attempted assassinations then you don't know if there are few assassinations because retired cops are vigilant and using their powerful eye contact to change the mind of would-be assassins, or if they are not at any significant risk for assassination and are just paranoid.  They may think they are at a greater risk than they are because they heard some story about one or a few cops this happened to which is how the media also fools people:  they report frequently for example on single crimes giving the impression that there's a 'crisis' when actually things could be safer over all from a violent crime perspective than it has been. That's why basing conclusions on a tiny insignificant sample of your real-life interactions as opposed to stats isn't usually the best way to get an accurate picture.

Regardless, if you want to branch out to dangers and other negatives that come from having a job after you retire, I'm willing to bet that loggers and roofers have to live with the pain  of previous injuries on the job more-so than cops.

The Internet is a poor substitute for real life. Spend some time with real-life cops and learn how they think. I’m not saying that to be demeaning in any way, I’m encouraging you to gain knowledge from real life and real people. By doing that, you acquire a perspective on life that isn’t biased by Internet opinions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, simplybill said:

The Internet is a poor substitute for real life. Spend some time with real-life cops and learn how they think. I’m not saying that to be demeaning in any way, I’m encouraging you to gain knowledge from real life and real people. By doing that, you acquire a perspective on life that isn’t biased by Internet opinions.

I think I told someone else in this thread that.   The difference is that one lumps all cops as the same, but @Liquid Gardens has not done that.   A lot of people know cops, are married to them, were married to them, live next door to them, etc.   None of them are clones or even have the same attitudes or fears.   You were lumping them all into one clump as if they are all the same, they aren't, they are human and if we are lucky they are trained well.  I have known some who were trained well, and some who weren't.  There is a big difference between their attitudes.  Some can walk in a crowd like a normal person and some need their badge and gun to feel safe anywhere.   Some are good cops and lousy humans to their families and some are good cops and good people, then there are some who are lousy cops and very charismatic.   Just like any other profession. And the danger, is known in advance and accepted.  It would be rare to find someone who wanted to or agreed to be a cop who thought it would just be sitting in a car eating donuts and writing speeding tickets.  No one ever thinks that is what the job is, so they do  not go into it confused about whether it could be dangerous or not.   Some want to help people, some want the authority.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Liquid Gardens said:

You're one to talk, I know whenever you refer to black people, which is often, I can just feel the love... 

It's not 'hateful' to view police officers as just like every other profession, there isn't anything special about their profession that makes them more 'honorable' than most other professions.  'Honor' comes from how you conduct yourself within your profession, it's at an individual level not an occupational level.

Is a non-representative sample of all police officers.  There are good cops and there are bad cops, you know this.

Not surprising you start screaming "You are a racist" again.  It is your go to move.   You are a very hateful person.   Try being kind, it is wonderful.

Yes, I go mostly from personal experience with police officers to help form my opinion.    Being a police officer IS an honorable profession whether you like it or not.  Yes there are some bad cops, but not as many as the media would have you believe.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, simplybill said:

The Internet is a poor substitute for real life. 

That entirely depends on what the subject is.  I made comments about the relative dangers of professions, your real life interactions are a terribly poor basis for assessing that question.  I encourage you to look into what 'statistically significant' means and why it is important.

14 minutes ago, simplybill said:

Spend some time with real-life cops and learn how they think.

Why, to what end, why is that relevant?  If you spent time with real-life cops and how they think you may come away thinking that cops have had bad chemical reactions merely from touching or being in the presence of a quantity of fentanyl, there are videos I believe of cops fainting after touching it.  Yet chemists and doctors have stated that this is psychosomatic because you don't get fentanyl in your bloodstream from merely touching it.  "How cops think" is only relevant to statements that rely on 'how cops think'; I don't think I've made any of those statements.

17 minutes ago, simplybill said:

By doing that, you acquire a perspective on life that isn’t biased by Internet opinions.

I'm not looking for a perspective on life, I'm looking for facts. The ranking of dangerous jobs isn't based purely on opinion and 'how cops think' is utterly irrelevant to that question.

Anyway, since you didn't address it here I'll assume that you can't back up whatever 'serious flaw' there was in my statement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Myles said:

Not surprising you start screaming "You are a racist" again.  It is your go to move. 

What are you talking about, I didn't say that here let alone 'again'.  Maybe it's your reading comprehension that needs work.

20 minutes ago, Myles said:

You are a very hateful person.   Try being kind, it is wonderful.

You are a confused one. Pointing out that cops are as fallible and are no more honorable on the whole than people in most other professions isn't 'hateful', Mr Kindness...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

You know I love you like a sister.

I'd be happy to take care of that.

Love you too, buddy. I'll have the guest house ready and the fridge full of beer when we have another domino effect of trees come down. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I made comments about the relative dangers of professions

The severe flaw in your example:

Trees and fish don’t pull out a gun and shoot at you when you approach them.

Or as Bruce Lee famously said:  “Boards don’t hit back.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, simplybill said:

The severe flaw in your example:

Trees and fish don’t pull out a gun and shoot at you when you approach them.

Or as Bruce Lee famously said:  “Boards don’t hit back.”

And there is a flaw in your logic, police know what they are getting in to, and it doesn't happen every day for every officer in every city.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, simplybill said:

The Internet is a poor substitute for real life. Spend some time with real-life cops and learn how they think. I’m not saying that to be demeaning in any way, I’m encouraging you to gain knowledge from real life and real people. By doing that, you acquire a perspective on life that isn’t biased by Internet opinions.

The funny thing is that all your purported life experience could just as easily been gleaned from crime fiction.

If there's no reputable research you should be aware of what your collection of tales from your life sound like.

I recall that you've described your research into the world of crime being of a recreational nature.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, simplybill said:

The severe flaw in your example:

Trees and fish don’t pull out a gun and shoot at you when you approach them.

Keep going, that's a flaw why exactly?  The chance of being crushed by a falling criminal are also vanishingly low, or cutting your arm off with a taser, etc. 

The severe flaw in your response here is that apparently the chances of a cop having a criminal pull out a gun and shoot them, or getting killed in a car accident or all other causes of death while in the line of duty, is less than a logger being killed in the act of cutting down trees. That's one of many reasons why actual data and stats, and not mere personal experience, are your friend.  

Edited by Liquid Gardens
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the one time I got pulled over late at night, in a medium bad part of town, the officer called backup before he ever got out of his car. Then the two of them pulled their guns and approached from both sides, yelling for me to show my hands.

I don't blame them.

They probably are killed less often, because of such over the top proactiveness/carefulness. 

I see a lot of garbage men, roofers, and others taking risk after risk. So I can see where those guys get killed more often. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I see a lot of garbage men, roofers, and others taking risk after risk. So I can see where those guys get killed more often. 

I would bet that loggers are plenty aware of and are proactive about the risks in their job, I'd bet in both of these occupations a lot of loggers and police have seen firsthand the results of carelessness and accidents which I think would be the biggest motivator for being cautious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I would bet that loggers are plenty aware of and are proactive about the risks in their job, I'd bet in both of these occupations a lot of loggers and police have seen firsthand the results of carelessness and accidents which I think would be the biggest motivator for being cautious.

I grew up in timber country of southern Oregon. They know what they are doing, but a lot of them grow complacent and that's when they get injured. Also there was a lot of young guys, and they're always willing to take risks.

You're right though, in that it only takes seeing one guy crushed under a log, or have an arm ripped off by a yarding cable, and people get a lot more careful suddenly.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

They know what they are doing, but a lot of them grow complacent and that's when they get injured. Also there was a lot of young guys, and they're always willing to take risks.

I watched three little guys roofing our neighbor's house and it's really steep. They were all carrying two pieces of plywood at a time, one in each hand, up the ladder to the second story. They just leaned forward, propped the plywood up against their shoulders and walked up the ladder. I nearly had a heart attack thinking about it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michelle said:

I watched three little guys roofing our neighbor's house and it's really steep. They were all carrying two pieces of plywood at a time, one in each hand, up the ladder to the second story. They just leaned forward, propped the plywood up against their shoulders and walked up the ladder. I nearly had a heart attack thinking about it.

We had a guy come to clean the moss off the roof and he just scrambled around up there like a raccoon, with no ropes or anything. And it's a three story home. It was scary. None of us could bear to watch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Keep going, that's a flaw why exactly?  The chance of being crushed by a falling criminal are also vanishingly low, or cutting your arm off with a taser, etc. 

Okay - I’ll post a link. Can we move on from the logger/police officer comparisons now?

As of Tuesday midnight, the FOP recorded 314 officers shot in the line of duty — 58 of whom were killed. "We are on pace this year to see the highest number of officers shot in the line of duty in one year ever recorded," FOP president Patrick Yoes said in a Wednesday statement. "We've already had more officers killed in the line of duty by gunfire this year than any other — and there is still one month left." Additionally, the FOP recorded 95 ambush-style attacks so far this year – a 126% increase compared to 2020 – that resulted in 119 officers shot, 28 of whom were killed.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/record-police-officers-shot-killed-2021

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

I recall that you've described your research into the world of crime being of a recreational nature.

Recreational is a good way to describe it, though that includes college courses and reading the books written by the people who teach and train Law Enforcement personnel. 

One book I highly recommend: “Inside the Criminal Mind” by Stanton Samenow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2022 at 11:34 AM, Desertrat56 said:

All of those look more like robbery than shop lifting.  If there is a weapon involved it is not shoplifting.

Hi Desertrat

In most instances  I agree that weapons are not used by shoplifters in general. It is possible that an individual does have a weapon and use it if caught. although based on how much is stole nationally on a daily basis and number of incidents is hardy significantly notable .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.