| I found this to be a fascinating article, and the problem is illustrative of problems in our society on a number of levels. The biggest problem is of course, societal. One anecdote from an anti-theft taskforce in the article showed that less than 5% of the thefts were prepretrated by organized groups, and the other 95% were from "passers-by or unhoused people living near the tracks in R.V.s or makeshift structures". People on the margins of society, who see an opportunity to make some money. Ideally, we'd fix the problem of unhoused people on the margins of society and we'd eliminate the vast majority of thefts like this. But of course, that's a much harder problem to solve. Much easier, then, to respond with bigger locks, and more security cameras, and GPS trackers and more security guards in vulnerable hotspots. While those measures might work (to an extent) to solve the immediate problem, they don't work to make the society that I'd like to live in. I'd much rather live in a more equitable society that works to eliminate homelessness, and the conditions that lead to this type of theft, then one that just prevents it with punatitive measures and thorough enforcement. |
I don't see any evidence of this.
The article did point out that only 5% of the arrests were organized criminals, but I would expect the organized ones to do more than their fair share of total thefts. I'd also expect them to get arrested less often than their amateur counterparts.
But more importantly, your proposal assumes that eliminating poverty would eliminate crime. That makes intuitive sense, but I don't think it's true. I've heard that many of the package thieves in my neighborhood are middle class people who just steal opportunistically.