[postmortembees]

This is a very engineering solution to a very not-engineering problem.

Would this deter thieves? Possibly! Would thieves eventually be able to work around it? Also probably! Would it increase the friction of getting in and driving? Definitely!

Today, your house keys are basically useless for security -- getting into your house is trivially easy both destructively and not. But we all use house keys because they feel safer. Ask people to provide biometrics or long passkeys or keycards and eliminate the existing locks? It's a hassle most folks won't tolerate.

Likewise, people are comfortable with the walk up, push button, leave nature of fobs. Replacing that with "walk up, scan fingerprint" or "walk up, type in password" is going to tick off a lot of people.

[hutzlibu]

"Today, your house keys are basically useless for security"

They are not useless. Only some people have the skills and tools to open them - so they are useful at keeping most people out, even though they don't provide perfect protection.

Most thieves are not professionals, but for example junkies who look for something easy. A simple automatic light, is already doing wonders to keep them away.

[postmortembees]

Raking house locks is a) not difficult and b) not expensive. You don't need to be a professional to do that.

But also, bricks through windows are equally not difficult and not expensive, though they do leave a bit more evidence. When my neighbors have been burgled, this is the preferred method of entry I've seen.

[hutzlibu]

"But also, bricks through windows are equally not difficult and not expensive, though they do leave a bit more evidence"

But that would be loud. You don't want attention when breaking in. (Unless you are a fucked up junkie not caring about anything anymore)

But yes, my parents for example are paranoid about always locking the front door 2 times(and get angry if I don't do it when I visit), but have a glass door in the back. There are also glass cutters.

"Raking house locks is a) not difficult and b) not expensive. You don't need to be a professional to do that"

But you do have to make some investment. They are illegal to purchase (in most places), I would not know, where to start looking. And then you have to learn to use them. And I know someone who did play with those a bit - yet he still could not enter my door at all. So it is a barrier.

[OkayPhysicist]

> They are illegal to purchase (in most places)

Lockpicks are legal almost everywhere in the US.[0] Even in places where they aren't legal, they're not exactly difficult to obtain, given that a perfectly adequate rake can be made from any key that fits the target lock, and there are only ~3 keyways in common residential use.

[0] https://www.toool.us/lockpicking-laws.php

[autoexec]

> They are illegal to purchase (in most places), I would not know, where to start looking.

amazon. Not much of an investment needed https://www.amazon.com/Stainless-Steel-20-School-Toolbox/dp/...

[hutzlibu]

Not avaiable. (at least for me from germany)

[velosol]

If you're interested they're also available on Amazon.de https://www.amazon.de/LockCowboy-Transparent-Practice-Beginn...

[brewdad]

> But that would be loud. You don't want attention when breaking in. (Unless you are a fucked up junkie not caring about anything anymore)

Pre-Covid, it didn't matter if you were loud. You and your neighbors were all off at work all day. So long as a thief felt confident there was no alarm to trigger, they could make all the racket they wanted and no one would hear.

Today, it's a little more risky but of the half dozen houses on my street I'd probably only hear one getting broken into and that's only if I were downstairs. Our homes aren't on especially large lots either (7-10k sq ft).

[hutzlibu]

But a thief does not know, if no one is there in the neighborhood, unless he is indeed professional and scouts the area in advance. Also in my area, there are plenty of old people always watching and listening ..

[jrockway]

The best locks offer is that you have to plan a break-in in advance; i.e., you have to have your lockpicking tools with you. That said, you can pick master locks with a paperclip; I've done it. So it's not much of a barrier.

That said, just because people have low-security locks on their house doesn't mean that better options aren't available. I have Medeco locks. They are harder to pick than what you get at the hardware store. So far, no break-ins from lockpickers! Also, I'll sell you a rock that keeps tigers away.

[maratc]

Number three is binding, we've got a nice click out of three!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fh6IHCr7uo

[jrockway]

It has a couple of spools. Step above the no-security-pins hardware store locks.

[ddingus]

Wait until an awful rainy night, then rock through window changes! Dog hears it and begins to bark per usual practice.

Dog owner gets up, yells at dog to shut up... because rain!

[naavis]

At least here in the Nordics no one uses easily pickable locks for house or apartment doors. Those kinds of locks are mostly found in cheap padlocks and maybe bike locks. Doors usually have Abloy locks or similar.

[rkagerer]

It's funny, I have the opposite problem. I have a particular door lock for which three different locksmiths have all failed to cut usable keys. The originals work fine, but the copies don't. The last set barely works, if you wiggle it around a lot and ram to get it in, but then it gets stuck in there and is nearly impossible to remove.

They've tried various blanks, and I've never gotten a satisfactory explanation from any of them. It's possible all my local locksmiths are inexpert.

[StillBored]

Its just a schlage or kwickset?

The pins in new locks have pretty tight tolerances for the first couple years until they wear a bit. Its likely they are just using older equipment which isn't sufficiently precise to cut them. Get a key that is exactly right, and works with a bit of wiggling, use it as your primary key for a couple months and it will work just as well as the originals. The slight variations in the key ways/etc will knock the edges off the pins with enough use. Assuming the key is cut correctly from the right blank, you might just need a bit of lube/oil on the key. If you can see variations by eye in the ramps/etc its likely the key is just wrong.

[hutzlibu]

Yeah, I have the same problem with some old locks. Impossible to get a copy for a key, because it does not meet some modern standard.

[sleepybrett]

want to post a picture anonymously? it may be that the biting is difficult. It may also be that one or more of the locks pins is sightly out of spec.

[knodi123]

> Only some people have the skills and tools to open them - so they are useful at keeping most people out,

No, not really. A large part of the security of locks comes from most people not knowing that they have the tools and skills to open them. It's like if everyone taped their door shut, and we depended on most people not knowing that tape is easily removed.

My kid accidentally locked us out of the house the other day by twisting the knob lock on our garage door. Turns out we never got a key for that lock when we bought the house - oops! And we didn't have keys for the back door, for complicated reasons. No worries, I took my wife's key ring and used the key to her parents' house to open our back door. In my experience, most keys work in most locks, if you just apply a light turning force and then rake the key in and out a bunch of times, ending with the key sticking all the way out except for a millimeter or two.

[hutzlibu]

Erm, maybe the locks in germany(europe) are different - but what you describe I only know from very old or cheap locks, no one would use for a front door (insurance would not accept that).

[akira2501]

> (insurance would not accept that).

Which is always hilarious to me considering insurance has no problem with glass windows or fenced in backyards.

[knodi123]

haha, well in America, insurance has no idea what kind of locks you have, and the vast majority of home locks are "whatever was cheap at home depot".

My front door is a pricey digital lock with a key for backup, and I don't think I could pick it with this method. That's why my first instinct was to try on our cheapest door.

[hutzlibu]

Well, here they also don't know, but if a break in happens, they might check the lock and refuse to pay if it does not meet a minimum standard.

[SoftTalker]

I haven't had a key for my house in probably 10 years. I used the garage door opener PIN pad to get in. I recently replaced the front door lock with a new one that also has a PIN keypad, but I still mostly enter and leave through the garage out of habit.

[dharmab]

A friend of mine was bored and bought a Lishi tool online recently. Within 10 minutes and with no previous lock picking experience he was able to silently pick his house's deadbolt.

[zerkten]

This can be true while it still keeping most criminals out. It's going to depend on the location and context. I'd say an analogy for this is engineer thinking versus economist thinking. My observation is that criminals prefer the latter. Rather than doubling down on engineering, they try to move to a more lucrative venture. Getting better at burgling houses doesn't change the upside as much as other crime.

In my suburban area, the biggest problem is unlocked doors on houses and cars. Despite this problem existing for many years, doors are still regularly left open. The criminals don't attempt to exploit the same neighborhood repeatedly. They pass through in waves and then go elsewhere before returning when everyone has let their guard down. When they attempt forced entry, or anything more than casual theft, they get a lot of attention and caught.

They could improve their takings by developing some lock picking skill, but it's also higher risk since they have to spend some more time on each target which increases the risk that an observer will actually notice them. I could easily imagine a dog walker ignoring someone entering a home through an unlocked door, or making it look like they are checking a door is locked when entry fails.

[Ekaros]

Being in country that uses proper locks... Yep, people aren't picking them in field.

Good locks are expensive, but they also last a long time. And nearly unpickable is good enough. There is wall of window next anyway that then becomes much easier.

[mrweasel]

> This is a very engineering solution to a very not-engineering problem.

True, the solution very obviously to reduce poverty. It's a social problem, not an engineering nor a policing problem.

[postmortembees]

Agreed. It's surprising how often we are great at post mortem analysis in engineering contexts (asking "why" five times), but we find it uncomfortable to do the same in social contexts. We jump straight to "How" rather than "why", and build locks that inconvenience people in hopes of stopping that one "how" rather than investing in fixing the root causes.

[teach]

Land Value Tax would fix this!

[bagels]

We already have a land value tax. It's called "Property Tax"

[postmortembees]

Property tax is not land value tax. Property tax is a tax on both the improvements and the base value of the land.

Land value taxes are only taxes on the value of the land.

A land value tax would tax a giant residential building and the parking lot adjacent to it the same, which encourages maximizing the value of the lot rather than leaving it for parking.

[talldatethrow]

Another reason you have locks is to show intent to keep others out.

You can't shoot someone that walks into your home through an open door.

You can shoot someone that rams your door to open it.

[neilv]

I imagine some Non-Americans reading this are horrified.

But Americans know that this (a pre-shooting checklist) isn't a reason for door locks for every American. And I'd guess it only is for a small minority of Americans.

[vouaobrasil]

I'm not American and I'm not horrified...if someone breaks into your house seems quite fine to shoot them if you can.

[master-lincoln]

WTF? Do you mean that you can't shoot someone without legal consequence in some US jurisdiction if you have an open door? You can still shoot them...

>You can shoot someone that rams your door to open it.

So somebody destroys a door and that entitles you to take their life?

I think in both situations you should just refrain from shooting at all. Seems to work in most of the rest of the world..

[talldatethrow]

No, you can't legally shoot someone that walks in through an open door. You can ask them to leave, but youre going to have big problems if you shoot them and all they did up to that point was not leave instantly when asked, if they walked through an open door.

If the door is locked, and they break in, you are not shooting them because they broke a lock. You are shooting them because theyve shown criminal intent by forcibly making their way through a locked door.

[wizofaus]

I'm curious in how many jurisdictions simply "showing criminal intent" is sufficient to mean they're legally a target to be shot at, potentially fatally. I'd be pretty horrified to know I was living in such a jurisdiction. Whereas somebody walking through my open door while clearly posing a threat to my life, or the life of family members (e.g. holding a weapon) I would have no hypothetical qualms over aiming a gun at, and should they continue to approach, firing. Mind you if that did result in their death I'd still expect to be required to provide evidence that it was a reasonable course of self-defence given the circumstances. Are you saying that isn't the case wherever you live?

[mynameishere]

Are you sure you can run all those calculations while breaking and entering is occurring in your home? It varies quite a bit from place to place, as you can see...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine

But the basic idea is that the natural right of self-defense extends to certain areas, including one's home. (That is, you do not have to wait until the intruder has his hands around your neck in order to defend yourself.) If you would prefer to not be allowed to defend yourself, that's you. In many countries (not just the US) invading people's homes makes for a dangerous and short career, as it should.

[wizofaus]

Thanks for that link, that is pretty interesting and I can't honestly say I know exactly what the law is where I live (in Australia, but not in the state that gets a special mention in that article). And absolutely, if I happened to have access to a lethal weapon and I was sufficiently fearful I might well be tempted to use it on an intruder even well before they posed an immediate threat. But if I really were responsible for taking an intruder's life and the courts determined that they were never a realistic threat to anyone, nor was there any good reason for me to believe they were (e.g. I had a clear view of them, could see that had no weapon, and they weren't acting in any sort of hostile manner), I'd fully expect to go to jail for it.

[talldatethrow]

Instead of trying to catch me making a language error on exactly what criminal intent is... Why don't you think about this like a human.... You are at home with your wife and kids. A large man wearing all black with his face covered has broken your door lock and forced the door open. He is now making his way up your stairs where all your family is. Should you be able to legally shoot this man? If not, what is your plan for protecting your family members from this person?

[wizofaus]

Not a question of language error, I'm just interested in how different parts of the world have different takes on when taking a life can be legally justified. FWIW, in your scenario, if I simply shot the man and killed him, then I would fully expect to be questioned and possibly charged, and only acquitted if I could demonstrate killing him was a justifiable act of self-defense. I don't imagine whether he'd broken the door lock would be considered particularly relevant. As it happens, I've forced locked doors open with no criminal intent - I'd simply lost my key and needed to get back inside my own house. It's not impossible the man in question had got confused about which house was his and was doing the same thing.

[goodpoint]

You cannot shoot anybody in the largest majority of countries on this planet. Thankfully.

[pdonis]

How do you get criminals to obey this nice rule?

[master-lincoln]

By making it hard to obtain weapons. The US thinking to me seams to go along the lines of handing out nuclear weapons to everybody so forces are balanced...

[pdonis]

> By making it hard to obtain weapons.

If the legal rule is "you can't shoot anybody", which is what the post I responded to said, wouldn't that make it impossible to legally obtain weapons? Why just "hard"?

If, OTOH, you mean make it hard to illegally obtain weapons, where has this actually been done successfully? My reading of human history is that criminals who want weapons have always been able to get them somehow.

> The US thinking to me seams to go along the lines of handing out nuclear weapons to everybody so forces are balanced...

I don't know where you are getting that from. The US thinking is very simple: since it is impossible for governments to prevent all violent crimes or to ensure that police show up in time to protect citizens from being harmed by violent crime, citizens must be allowed to have the means of self defense. The best way to minimize the number of citizens that feel the need to have weapons for self-defense is to extirpate crime--but unfortunately the US in recent decades has been moving in the opposite direction.

[jtriangle]

For 500 bucks worth of crypto anyone in the world can get a reasonably competent full auto AK with a box of milsurp ammo.

If that's your definition of "hard", I'd say you're setting that bar far too low.

[bscphil]

And the overwhelming majority of people, including thieves, don't do this, because the raised barrier to entry makes gun crimes vastly less attractive. Combine that with a broad social safety net that reduces poverty, and you miraculously get homicide rates dropping through the floor: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_countries_by_...

[talldatethrow]

This is a lame response. A man with a knife or a bat has the tools he needs to easily kill your whole family. So what is the plan to protect a family since knives and bats will always exist?

[Minor49er]

Shinzo Abe might disagree with this

[master-lincoln]

He was right leaning so you are probably correct. But I would think his murder might have happened earlier if weapons were legal for most citizens as in the US.

[talldatethrow]

What do you do if two criminals break into your house and you don't have a gun?

[ddingus]

A few things:

The number one, by far most effective thing you do comes well ahead of those armed, home entry thieves, and that is you make your home scream "GO AWAY!"

Get a dog

Employ great lighting

Put the home alarm stickers on, actual alarm optional, [3]

Clean up.

Etc...

The criminals work on risk reward. You can bias that equation away from favorable meaning the baddies pick another home, not yours.

From there, should you really feel this scenario could happen, maybe consider a gun. But if you do, please get gun education. One bad scenario is to have a gun, and face experienced users. Your chance of getting you, and or family, hurt go way up!

I do mostly identify with the left, but am gun friendly having grown up rural and well educated about guns.

[3] - no joke! Neighbors had done the sticker thing for roughly a decade. That, plus the other suggestions work well.

[talldatethrow]

I love that this got downvotes but no responses.

[HPsquared]

Security is always a trade-off. The most effective, and also most costly, way to avoid car theft is to not own a car at all (for example).

[radiator]

How is this the most costly way?

[gruez]

Opportunity cost of the additional travel time[1] that you have to spend because you don't have a car.

[1] Yes, I'm aware of european cities where cars aren't necessary or are actually slower than public transit. That's not applicable to most of the US though.

[postmortembees]

I wonder how many instacart/uber orders I would need to have to offset the cost of a car, assuming I can bike to most of my needs.

The only reason I have a car is because there are some specialized transportation needs (towing) that I cannot get from my bike. I use my bike for everything from hardware to Costco to groceries to child care to ... lots of stuff.

[gruez]

> I wonder how many instacart/uber orders I would need to have to offset the cost of a car, assuming I can bike to most of my needs.

Not that much. One site[1] lists the TCO of a compact car at around $33k/year if you drive it for 15k mi/year for 5 years. That works out to $550/month. Of course, if you're comparing this to getting ubers, there's no way that you'll be driving anywhere near 15k mi/year, so the TCO of a comparable car is probably $450/month. That's a lot of money to spend on uber/instacart, but keep in mind that if you have a modest commute of $20 each way, that only works out to 11 round-trips a month, or half the working days. So if your lifestyle is such that you don't need to drive to work most days, and you don't any other similar uses for cars (eg. picking up kids from school and/or driving them to extracurriculars), then by all means uber everywhere rather than owning a car.

[1] https://www.kbb.com/new-cars/total-cost-of-ownership/

[postmortembees]

I've got an ebike that takes me anywhere within ~10 miles easily, including picking up/drop off kids), and I'm a remote worker (though I could bike to the office easily.)

[SoftTalker]

You're in the minority. Most people cannot use a bike for this stuff. They live too far away or the roads and/or terrain are not suitable for bikes.

[thomastjeffery]

I have a friend whose only reasonable option to commute to/from work is uber/lyft. He spends more each month on that than I do on my car loan. He can't afford to make a downpayment for a car loan of his own, because he is spending that money on uber/lyft. This is a vicious and familiar cycle in America.

[EA-3167]

Most locks on most residential facilities are not about security so much as a "tamper evident" seal for insurance purposes.

[postmortembees]

I guarantee you I, or anyone else with ~30m of training can get into 95% of homes without leaving much evidence that the locks were tampered with. House locks are very easy to pick open.

[EA-3167]

Most thieves are not trained in covert entry, they aren't lock pickers, they're desperate addicts looking to get some things to pawn for a fix.

[postmortembees]

Of course. Most thieves break in use the time honored "brick + window" method.

But I was refuting the specific idea that house locks are a tamper evident seal. They are trivially easy to bypass in a tamper evident manner.

[talldatethrow]

If I know my door is locked, and you get in, I can still shoot you since I know I locked it, thus you'll have the tools somewhere near you showing you broke in.

If it's just a code, tons of legal ambiguity comes up. Can a gf shoot her exbf that she gave the keycode to last month?

[jjnoakes]

> Can a gf shoot her exbf that she gave the keycode to last month?

How is this different from a physical key?

[AnnikaL]

If anything, it might be easier to change a keycode than to change a lock.

[talldatethrow]

This a good point, except that I've found that people with keycode locks on door and garages hand out the keycode like candy for some reason.. way more than anyone else hands out physical keys.

[jerlam]

And yet, the universal way to break into homes is with brute force, by smashing a window or kicking the door in.

[Clamchop]

Evidence of what? I can't see how it would prevent fraud, the occupant can damage the "seal" just as well, and a burglary without damage is still a burglary and lock-picking is a thing so it doesn't have much to say about due diligence either.

[IshKebab]

> getting into your house is trivially easy both destructively and not.

Absolutely not the case. With toughened glass and modern reinforced doors it is very far from trivial. At least in the UK. I understand security standards can be much lower depending on the country.