Difference between revisions of "Security issue: Vehicle theft"
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
===Mobility impact=== |
===Mobility impact=== |
||
| + | Vehicle theft is more likely to occur in areas where the thief is well-known in order to be able to flee quickly. Therefore, as for [[Robbery|robbery]], the risk will be reduced when there are few fleeing possibilities and when [[Accessibility|accessibility]] of the area is bad. |
||
| + | |||
| + | An anti-theft gps tracking device can be placed in a car in order to locate the car after robbery. |
||
===safety impact=== |
===safety impact=== |
||
Revision as of 17:52, 4 March 2013
Vehicle theft is the crime of theft, or attempt of theft of or from a motor vehicle (automobile, truck, bus, motorcycle, etc.).
Contents
Description
This category includes both theft of and from vehicles in the same category, because the measures against it would be very alike from the viewpoint of an urban planner.
This category does not include: carjacking/joyriding, theft with access to keys, fraudulent theft, or opportunistic theft
Contributing circumstances
- location (attainability of theft)
- Deserted car parking lots, quiet junctions and residential areas are often targets. In addition, vehicles stuck in traffic are often targets for a 'smash and grab' incident where an item of value is clearly visible (e.g. handbag, purse, stereo, etc.)/
| Location | Thefts per 100,000 cars per 24 hours |
| Home garage | 2 |
| Home carport/drive | 40 |
| Home street | 117 |
- attractiveness of vehicles or items in vehicles
- proximity to known area with car theft
Impacts
Social impact
Economic impact
In terms of economic impact, the costs of vehicle theft, the parties on whom those costs fall, possible secondary economic impact, and a cost-effectiveness analysis of prevention measures should be assessed.
Although vehicle theft is not as intrusive as violent crime, it is both quite common and costly for society.[2] The direct costs of vehicle theft are for about 16% attributable to costs in anticipation of vehicle theft (e.g. anti-vehicle theft measures and insurance administration). Although this is considerable, the major part (almost 80% of the costs of vehicle theft are attributable to the consequence of vehicle theft, e.g. the value of the stolen vehicles (±45%), physical and emotional impact on victims (±15%), the costs of property recovered (±10%). The remaining 4% can be attributed to the costs in response of crime by the public authorities (policing and the criminal justice system)[3]. The average cost per event is with £4,000 (2003 prices), slightly higher than the average costs of a burglary[4]. This is mostly the result of higher preventive expenditures and the average value of the stolen vehicle and recovered vehicles.
Vehicle theft does not just create direct costs, but also creates secondary economic effects on society-at-large. First of all, victims of vehicle theft have to deal with opportunity costs as a result of the necessary administrative activities and a temporary unavailability of their vehicle (including companies who own transport vans or trucks), which could lead to a reduction in working time hours.[5] Secondly, there is the opportunity costs of police and other public services. On top of that, there will be some very minor effects for the market for vehicles since there will be more demand for new vehicles and more supply of second-hand vehicles. In total, however, the secondary economic effects of vehicle theft are not that significant in comparison to for instance burglary of a dwelling. Theft from a vehicle that leaves broken glass, on the other hand, can have more negative effects on the neighbourhood since it negatively influences the perception of security for people living in the neighbourhood.
Security measures mitigate the economic costs of vehicle theft, but also demand investment in time and money (which are quite significant compared to other types of property crime such as burglary). In general, though, standard anti-vehicle theft measures make sense from a social-economic point of view[6]. Note, however, that since most victims are insured for vehicle theft, some experts argue that there should be "government-mandated standards" of security applied to all vehicles because an individual incentive is lacking[7]. One has to bear in mind, however, that vehicle thieves will adapt quickly to preventive security measures in accordance with the the economics of criminal behaviour, including how to deal with immobilisers and VIN numbers[8].
Mobility impact
Vehicle theft is more likely to occur in areas where the thief is well-known in order to be able to flee quickly. Therefore, as for robbery, the risk will be reduced when there are few fleeing possibilities and when accessibility of the area is bad.
An anti-theft gps tracking device can be placed in a car in order to locate the car after robbery.
safety impact
Measures
- surveillance
- reaction force
- target hardening
- access control (parkings)
- deflecting offenders
- Education (don't leave valuables in car)
Footnotes and references
- ↑ http://www.popcenter.org/problems/residential_car_theft/
- ↑ In 2006, about one million vehicles got stolen in both the United States and in the European Union. Source: Barham, J. (2011). Europe’s Car Thieves Go Upscale. Security management.
- ↑ Home Office, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate (2005). The economic and social costs of crime against individuals and households 2003/04.
- ↑ Ibid.
- ↑ See, S. Field. Crime Prevention and the Costs of Auto Theft: An economic analysis. Home Office Research and Planning Unit.
- ↑ Ibid
- ↑ Ibid
- ↑ http://www.securitymanagement.com/article/europes-car-thieves-go-upscale
