iPods - Not Video Games - Causing Crime?

iPods - Not Video Games - Causing Crime?

March 6, 2008

Forget the nonsense that says playing Counter-strike causes shooting rampages or firing up Bully leads to dishing out swirlies. When it comes to pop culture, iPods may be the real cause of crime.

At least, that's the conclusion of the Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. As reported by the Associated Press:

They argue that the tantalizing gadgets are perhaps the main reason U.S. violent crime rose in 2005 and 2006 after declining every year since 1991—although a close look at the findings suggests the hypothesis has holes.


The AP notes that robberies - the taking of something by force - which had been in a longterm decline, surged in 2005 and 2006. During that same time period, the iPod went mainstream. Annual sales jumped from 5 million in 2004 to 90 million by 2006:

One widely accepted theory holds that crime happens when three things come together: A motivated offender encounters a suitable victim and perceives a high chance of getting away with it. And the Urban Institute researchers believe the sudden prevalence of iPods increased all three factors...

 

Anecdotal evidence bears out a lot of this. Subway officials in New York, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., reported big increases in iPods being stolen from passengers. News reports cast the iPod as the latest must-steal item for some thugs, following in the footsteps of things like Air Jordan sneakers.


Jack McDevitt of Northeastern University's College of Criminal Justice, however, was skeptical:

There has been a lot of anecdotal evidence of cell phones, iPods, GPS systems that have been targets for theft... I could sort of understand and buy that in... a short spike for a few months. But to suggest that that's driving the crime numbers in any major way, I don't think so.


Via: Engadget

Comments

"Cell phones and GPS systems too, because people leave them in their cars."

But that's part of the problem. Say you steal my cell phone, what do you get? You can't use the SIM card because that would lead the authorities right to you, so you just have the phone, which is useless without a contract. And most of the time when you get a contract they ask for a serial number off the phone which, you guessed it, will come up as stolen. Much of the same stuff applies to the GPS systems as well.

The reason iPods are *such* an inviting target is that they don't require a subscription or registration. You just need a copy of iTunes, which is easy enough to get, and an internet connection. And that's if you want to use it as your own personal player...you could just as easily sell it for a quick $150-$200 depending on the model, or use it offline with the music already loaded onto it.

As I said before, I don't believe that they *cause* theft, which even the study shied away from actually saying (unlike JT, they understand the difference between correllation and causation), but it's a might big coincidence considering the high ratio of value to ease of procurement/use.
let me get this straigt they are blaming ipods on the thefts. thats like blaming money for a bank being robbed. or blaming jewellery for a jeweller store being robbed. this is just ridiculus. i guess there is one good thing about this, its not video games fault this time...
This is just as ridiculous as blaming the vidya.
Anecdotal evidence? Whoopty freaking do, who cares? Let's see some actual numbers. I agree with the dissenter, it sounds a bit like they've just seized on one explanation and said "Look! Here's the cause!"
As much as I hate IPods and its fadness I can't but wonder this simple question.

Whatever happend to people causing crimes without trying to find rediculous scapegoats?

Maybe back in the 1920 that new indoor plumbing could of been a rise in crime because it was the newest technology back then.
This is so half-assed that I'm not even laughing too hard. Hey, "researchers", mp3 downloads went up recently too. Is My Little Pony OST album to blame for terrorist attacks?
Uh... 'kay?
@ King of Fiji

I can see a surge of break ins around the time of indoor plumbing. After all, even early toilets were better than an outhouse. ;)
I seriously wonder who thought of this as a hot-button topic for election votes. ..

It's the only explanation as to why someone would come to such a conclusion.
Honestly, I kinda have to agree with the study. iPods are easy targets to steal. They are valuable, easy to grab, and easy to hide. iPods can go from anywhere from $150-$250, wouldn't you buy one for $100 if some came up and asked? The way people handle iPods also make it easy, leaving it coat pockets on accident or forgetting it somewhere. It can happen. Finally when some does steal one, so many people have the same iPods with the same stock headphones that it would be near impossible to find your by visual recognition alone. There you have it, motive, method, and the getaway.

I'm sure iPods alone aren't the cause, but they are a major factor.
"following in the footsteps of things like Air Jordan sneakers"

lol :)
Oh, and I don't think that they are too far off on this one. Their statement:

"A motivated offender encounters a suitable victim and perceives a high chance of getting away with it"

is fairly accurate. Of course, the iPods only contribute towards two of these factors (i.e. 1. identifying a suitable victim easily - iPods are easy to spot on people. 2. High chance of getting away with it - iPods easy to identify on a victim (headphones) and easy to conceal after stealing (small casing)).

This doesn't attempt to explain why the thugs are "motivated to steal" the iPods in the first place though. And the iPods are only a "contributing factor" and the amount that it contributed cannot accurately be calculated.

So as long as that is all they are saying, then i agree :)
I suppose it's too easy to blame the causes of crime on the offenders?
You know, this explains why I get this strange urge to kill every time I see an iPod or iPhone...

...Wait, what?
iPods and crime.......lol. That's funny. I guess people who steal expensive jewelry, and cars(oh wait, of course that's GTA's fault) and cell phones, and any other conceivable object under the sun are just normal criminals, but people who steal iPods are special cases. The ipod is definitely a crime causer. XD
I haven't read the study, but the economics of this make sense.

Two guys are walking down the street; one has white ear buds in his ears. Assuming that I'm going to rob someone, will my choice be to rob the guy with the iPod and a wallet or the guy with just a wallet?
Who is more likely to have more cash in his wallet, the guy who has apparently spent several hundred dollars on a tiny jukebox, or the other guy?
Who is more likely to be distracted and thus an easier mark, the guy jamming to some beats, or the other guy?

I don't know how much one can make fencing an iPod, but I'd bet it's better than $30-40, which is more than most people carry in their wallets anyway.

In fact, mugging iPod users may prove so lucrative that more people start doing it. I certainly have no data that this is actually happening, but it makes sense that it could.
@ Arlen -

Tis pretty much what I was thinking...

It makes sense that iPods could attract muggers. But my main point is that iPods are not *causing* the crime. They are simply attracting it. There is a big difference :)
My God, we've come full circle.

First it was Rock 'n Roll, then it was movies, then it was TV, then it was video games, and now it's...Rock 'n Roll again...

People aren't interested in stealing iPods in particular, they're interested in stealing valuable items. iPods are valuable, so they get stolen.

Jack McDevitt said it himself: "There has been a lot of anecdotal evidence of cell phones, iPods, GPS systems that have been targets for theft..."

All of those things are valuable items. That's what robbers go for. The more iPods there are out there (90 million as opposed to 5 million), the more likely it is that they'll get stolen. It's simply because there are more of them out there.
I can see it. The number of iPods I saw when I was on the Metro (DC's subway) was astounding. And with the number of people bumping into each other as the doors open and close, it wouldn't be hard for a good pickpocket to get one, unplug the headphones, and conceal it.

I don't think it's an issue of "iPods makes you steal!" issue as it is "iPods are easy to steal and valuable; therefore, they are stolen more".

-P
"I don’t think it’s an “iPods makes you steal!” issue as much as it is “iPods are easy to steal and valuable; therefore, they are stolen more”."

My kingdom for an edit button.

-P
well, if there are more concealable high price electronics around, im assuming that people are gong to stea them.
This article is a reminder of how to avoid being a target. If you leave a cell phone or iPod on the seat of your car, the chances of your window being smashed is greater. Thieves are more bound to go for the "sure thing."
[...] That’s my take on it, read the original article here. addthis_url = 'http%3A%2F%2Fblog.gamerpk.com%2F2008%2F03%2F06%2Fa-reason-for-high-crime-rates-personal-gadgets-not-video-games%2F'; addthis_title = 'A+Reason+for+High+Crime+Rates%3A+Personal+Gadgets%2C+Not+Video+Games%21'; addthis_pub = 'gamerpk'; Tagged with Computer Games and Crime, Crime, Crime Rates, Crime Studies, Criminals. [...]
I don't think this is really trying to scapegoat anything... my dad works at Urban Institute, and he always emphasizes that their objective is to look at trends in a non-partisan way. Basically, all the document does is point out that the two things happened at the same time, and after all, it's nice and small so it's easy to steal.
Other than the sort of minor stuff that happens when you're a kid, I've only been stolen from once. That was last year when I was in Knocksville, Tennessee with my wife because of a court case.

We were staying in an upscale hotel right down the street from the Univerity, my truck was parked in a parking garage under the hotel. Someone picked up a huge cinder block and smashed my window and stole my wife's 30BG iPod and the docking station it was plugged into, as well as her jacket. We had a bag in the back seat with our checkbooks in it as well as some jewlery, it was untouched.

I have no doubt in my mind that the person who broke into my vehicle did so with the intention of taking the clearly visible iPod, and just grabbed the jacket because it was convenient. They didn't search the vehicle, and there were other, more expensive vehicles around (it's an '03 Toyota Tacoma, there were Escalades in the garage) that didn't have visible iPods in them.

I'm not saying they're 100% right, just that it's strange that this never happened until we were out of town with an iPod plugged in.
I don't think ipods are to "blame," but they sure make easy targets (small and expensive, and people carry them around everywhere). Cell phones and GPS systems too, because people leave them in their cars.
iPods huh? Well, at least the blame is getting passed around to pretty much everything now.
Don't wanna get mugged for your iPod? Take those white headphones and throw them in the bin, then get a decent pair of black headphones. Instantly your iPod is disguised in your pocket.
Anyone who walks around with white earbuds is just asking for it, imo. The first step to preventing this is to get some other kind of earbuds or headphones other than white ones, so that a crook doesn't automatically assume you are wearing an ipod. Non-white earbuds would cost you like 10$ and could save you from theft. Because if one guy is walking down the street with black earbuds and one guy is walking with white ipod earbuds the crook will automatically pick the person with the white earbuds since there is a 99% chance of getting an ipod from that person. You would think that people would have caught onto this now and everyone would be wearing some other color of earbuds but no, apparently people are so stupid that they MUST wear the white earbuds.

Personally if I am out and wearing an MP3 player (now keep in mind I own a sandisk player thats worth about 15$) I wear old sony headphones from the 1990's. I assume people just think I am listening to a walkman.

There is also the distraction element, in that people who listen to ipods are distracted, so that makes them easier targets.

Then there is the fact that ipods are not linked to that person in any way, its just a music player, its not like a cell phone that can be traced back to a company and it cannot be deactivated or bricked by the company if you call and report it stolen like a cellphone can. Even certain GPS units have software locks on them now so that they cannot be stolen as easily.

Honestly if you leave your valuables in sight in your car while you are out and about you are just asking for it. If your carrying around items that have a high resell value and a high demand you should be very cautious while using them in public and while carrying them around.

Between the ease of selling, the high resell value of ipods,, huge demand for the item, the fact that they are not connected to the person using them in any way, the fact that people are distracted while listening to them, and the fact that wearing white earbuds is like holding up a sign that says mug me, it creates a recipie for disaster and theft!

With that being said I wonder how many incidents there have been of people ripping Nintendo DS units out of the hands of the children that are playing them. Easy, resellable, not connected to the person, and in-demand..
This is why I carry my iPod in my hand most of the time...that and I'm a bit picky of the music I'm listening to...
Stupid is as stupid does
@Sara:

"Honestly if you leave your valuables in sight in your car while you are out and about you are just asking for it."

So I assume that if I were to go over to your house I won't see a car or TV/Computer through your windows? Cuz if I do, well, you couldn't hardly blame me for robbing you, could you? And if you're actually a woman, you wouldn't press charges if I had my with you after seeing in club in a suggestive shirt, would you?

I thought not... The idea that me leaving an iPod plugged in somehow means I DESERVED to have a brick thrown through my window which resulted in a $300 repair bill (and that's BEFORE the cost of the iPod and jacket they stole) is ridiculous. Yes, I could have taken more steps to protect myself, and I will in the future, but the only person at fault here is the asshole that decided he was entitled to take MY stuff.
I can see their point and I have a solution. Encourage people to watch their i-pods closely.

Oh and no one is blaming the ipods themselves on the crime that'd be like blaming money and/or wallets
@Doctor Procter
I think he was saying that if you do leave valuables in plain sight you're being very foolish, not that you deserved to be robbed.
In 2003. We noticed that there was an increase in shark attacks. The same year ice cream sales went up. There's our problem right?
Another junk study to throw onto the pile of junk studies.
oh how I love the blame culture..... everything its the cause of the problem but the problem....
Wow! So now I can't have something nice that I want because some asshole might try to steal it from me? That's what's coming next people, a guy a on trial for robbery, countersuing the victim because they had nice things, and the robber just couldn't help themselves.
Glen Haupt??

Is this the Glen Haupt who was in the Air Force stationed at Aviano between 1993-1995 with Matthew Alvey!?

If so I am his daughter and have been trying to get in contact with you...

Wb Kerin x

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 11/08/09 at 09:02am
DarkSaber: http://tinyurl.com/yez7jyo
Posted 11/08/09 at 09:01am
DarkSaber: Oh for gods sake, the Gearbox pres is gobbing off about Valve again
Posted 11/08/09 at 08:53am
JDKJ: But cheer up, Austin. If the unemployment rate continues to double-digit as predicted for the next few years, your half-dozen stands a better than likely chance of returning to power.
Posted 11/08/09 at 08:46am
JDKJ: @DS: If he had added the line about "or hiring illegals aliens under the table to work as nannies," it would have been a completely perfect descripition. And, yes, it's about the same difference between a six and a half-dozen.
Posted 11/08/09 at 08:31am
DarkSaber: My god, that description makes them sound almost Republican. Still what did you expect, Obama is only marginally more left than republicans.
Posted 11/08/09 at 01:07am
Austin_Lewis: Health insurance, brought to you by the same kind of bureacrats who couldn't, in timely fashion, investigate the comments of any of the men Obama appointed Czars. Or their past. Or their history of not paying taxes.
Posted 11/08/09 at 01:06am
Austin_Lewis: Yes, and what a piece of crap it was. Arresting and fining people just because they don't make a personal choice to buy healh insurance, creating over a hundred new bureacracies, and worse.
Posted 11/08/09 at 12:24am
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:the only trouble is a bunch of witless hacks wrote it....its going to be a train wreck....
Posted 11/07/09 at 11:33pm
JDKJ: BREAKING: In a photo-finish at the wire, House passes health care reform bill. Relatedly, in a fit of pique, Austin Lewis kicks innocent dog.
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:27pm
ZippyDSMlee: man I got alot of junk and dup files too >< god I need orginization...and no not the knee capping media mafia kind :P
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:26pm
ZippyDSMlee: replaced :P
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:23pm
ZippyDSMlee: beemoh:hey its like 60GB porn,400GB anime 100GB games and crap I have took from all my DVDs, I hate waiting on dvds to install stuff..... oh and 40GB of my porn was in the found.000 folder...mostly corrupted.... least I got names of wut needs to be repa
Posted 11/07/09 at 04:18pm
beemoh: @Zip: ...and you'd have to spend all that time re-downloading that porn?
Posted 11/07/09 at 03:34pm
ZippyDSMlee: ggrrrrr......vista lost one of my hard drives and I had a heart attack thinking I lost 1TB of data....
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:58am
JDKJ: Which could be explained by both (a) and (b).
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:56am
Austin_Lewis: JDKJ: You forgot C) the fact that, for some reason, every time he did something that would suggest he shouldn't be in the military, let alone an officer, higher ups ignored it or let it slide.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:51am
JDKJ: Part of the problem is, I believe, that (a) the Army had a lot of time and money already invested in him and which they were unwilling to simply write-off and (b) an increasing need for the type of skills and services he provided.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:48am
JDKJ: And that even if he was begging not to get cut loose, he was apparently a real good candidate for being cut loose, anyway.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:11am
JDKJ: @chada: And while Kennedy once noted that there's usually more than enough blame for everyone to get a slice, the possibility that the Army was unwilling to cut loose someone who was asking to get cut loose could be a factor.
Posted 11/07/09 at 10:07am
ZippyDSMlee: *noms on his feet*..nomnomnomnom*droooll* ...wuuutttttt uuu looking at?
Login or register to post shouts