Cable locks versus u-locks

"?" <?@?.?> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Watch this short quick time movie to be entertained and to be alarmed.
Enjoy!
http://tinyurl.com/5mem2

Boowha haa haaaaw!!!

None of the above, indeed!

Cam said:

He would have had to just give it back if I could have found the serial
number while the cops were still there. Paying him the $80 (and
remembering where the # was) seemed easier after they were gone.
The morals of the story are 1) keep looking for your bike if it is
stolen 2) keep a record of the serial number 3) make note of where the
# is on the bike 4) don't let them steal it in the first place because
even if you get it back you're in for some heartache while it's gone.

This recently came up in the Dutch bike newsgroup, and apparently, with
us, if the new possessor bought the bike 'in good faith' (and can prove it
with a receipt), he also becomes the legal owner. The original owner then
has to be offered the opportunity to buy the bike back for whatever the
new owner paid for it.

In this situation ($80 for a good bike from a shady dealer), he would of
course not have been buying in good faith, so it doesn't apply, but it
still sounded like a very interesting wrinkle.

Jasper

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 15:35:36 -0700, "Mykal" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Thus, maximal bicycle security depends not only on good locks, but also upon
a good human presence around the locked bicycle.

But it must be the sort of presence you get at a busstop, *not* the sort
of presence you get at the Walmart entrance. posters here have observed
thieves calmly stealing QR saddles from bikes in plain view of several
dozen people at a time at such a high traffic area. In fact, the presence
there tends to obscure the actions of the thief, because it's too busy.

Jasper

Jasper Janssen said:

This recently came up in the Dutch bike newsgroup, and apparently, with
us, if the new possessor bought the bike 'in good faith' (and can prove it
with a receipt), he also becomes the legal owner. The original owner then
has to be offered the opportunity to buy the bike back for whatever the
new owner paid for it.

So, there is no concept of property rights? Or is it that bicycles are
the exception for some reason?

-Mike

41 said:

The real key is not the lock but the rack. There are several
manufacturers who make racks consisting of two large steel horizontal
arms with steel projections, the arms closing around the bike, the
projections going through the wheels and main triangle. You then use
only a padlock to lock the two arms together, inside a shielded housing
that can only be accessed from the bottom, near ground level, or else a
U-lock to keep the two arms together. You need only carry a reasonable
padlock for very high security. These should be standard all over the
place, ESPECIALLY on ALL college campuses. There is no excuse.

Picture? The rack sounds like an extremely expensive proposition from
here, and possibly finicky if your bicycle is outsized in any way (like
all wheelbenders versus thick MTB tyres..)

Incidentally, padlocks are *crappy* security. In any size, let alone
reasonable. Boltcutters go through them like butter. Although from your
description it sounds like the rack may have features that prevent bolt
cutters being used in that area.

Still, very expensive, high-maintenance rack and difficult to figure out
what to do, that requires users to know of its existence beforehand in
roder to use effectively. Only a university campus could possibly justify
it.

Jasper

Jasper Janssen said:

Incidentally, padlocks are *crappy* security. In any size, let alone
reasonable. Boltcutters go through them like butter.

Huh? A padlock is just a very small U-lock, and therefore will be much
more secure than an equivalently thick, hardened U-lock.

-Mike

Jasper Janssen said:

41 said:

The real key is not the lock but the rack. There are several
manufacturers who make racks consisting of two large steel horizontal
arms with steel proj ections, the arms closing around the bike, the
projections going through the wheels and main triangle. You then use
only a padlock to lock the two arms together, inside a shielded housing
that can only be accessed from the bottom, near ground lev el, or else a
U-lock to keep the two arms together. You need only carry a reasonable
padlock for very high security. These should be standard all over the
place, ESPECIALLY on ALL college campuses. There is no excuse.

Picture? The rack sound s like an extremely expensive proposition from
here, and possibly finicky if your bicycle is outsized in any way (like
all wheelbenders versus thick MTB tyres..)

I searched the web but couldn't find one. I will try to find a brand
name next time I pass by one.

Quoted message said:

Incidentally, padlocks are *crappy* security. In any size, let alone
reasonable. B oltcutters go through them like butter. Although from your
description it sounds like the rack may have features that prevent bolt
cutters being used in that area.

Yes, you can use a crappy padlock and be secure from boltcutters
because it is in a metal shroud at the bottom. It just needs to be
secure enough to protect against a jack-type attack on the two
horizontal bars. Or, you can use your U-lock. Incidentally a good
padlock is a good padlock. In the test you posted a while back, didn't
it say that the Abus discus locks were never breached, only the chains
used with them?

Quoted message said:

Still, very expensive, high-maintenance rack and difficult to figure out
what to do, that requires users to know of its existence beforehand in
roder to use effectively. Only a university campus could possibly justify
it.

I never bought one so I don't know the cost but they were popular, easy
to use, and worked with all sizes of bikes and tires. No maintenance.
Unfortunately they are only at stores, government and business office
buildings and the like, never saw one on a university campus. They use
the cheapest, most useless [censored].


Per Mykal:

Quoted message said:

Powered cutting, on the other hand, makes a lot of noise (and sparks) that
may deter thieves as it alerts people in proximity to the crime in progress.

Somebody I know lost their Kryptonite key. Took a battery-powered grinder to
it in broad daylight on a working day. No problems at all. His theory:
somebody with such a tool looks legitimate enough that people make the
connection "he must've lost his key...".
--
PeteCresswell

Jasper Janssen said:

41 said:

The real key is not the lock but the rack. There are several
manufacturers who make racks consisting of two large steel horizontal
arms with steel proj ections, the arms closing around the bike, the
projections going through the wheels and main triangle. You then use
only a padlock to lock the two arms together, inside a shielded housing
that can only be accessed from the bottom, near ground lev el, or else a
U-lock to keep the two arms together. You need only carry a reasonable
padlock for very high security. These should be standard all over the
place, ESPECIALLY on ALL college campuses. There is no excuse.

Picture?

Here's a drawing:
<http://tinyurl.com/axnkh>

This variant doesn't have the padlock shroud, but it's the basic idea..

Check this out:

http://neistat.com/pages/video_holding/bikethief_holding.htm

none said:

Jasper Janssen said:

This recently came up in the Dutch bike newsgroup, and apparently, with
us, if the new possessor bought the bike 'in good faith' (and can prove it
with a receipt), he also becomes the legal owner. The original owner then
has to be offered the opportunity to buy the bike back for whatever the
new owner paid for it.

So, there is no concept of property rights? Or is it that bicycles are
the exception for some reason?

Oh, yes, there are property rights. It's protection (apart from not being
prosecuted for receiving stolen goods) of a good-faith buyer. Good-faith
usually being defined as having bought it from a real shop for a
reasonable price and having the receipt to prove it. The original owner
can then complain to the store owner aka fence.

One thing it does do is encourage secondhand buying -- in the US (I
think), even if you buy something from a perfectly reputable store for a
perfectly normal secondhand price, if it turns out to be stolen you're
screwed.

I really don't know where I stand on the issue, cause, really, both sides
have a legitimate beef, in a way. Making the original owner the one who
has to go complain to a fence, though.. It sounds iffy to me.

Jasper

I can confirm the comments on the ease of cutting cables. I had a
Moulton folder locked to a lampost with what appeared to be a fairly
beefy cable lock, circa 0.5in OD. I popped into a shop, the bike being
out of my sight for no more than two minutes, when I can out there was
the coiled cable on the ground, with no bike or thief in sight. The
cable had been cut clean through, no hacking required. This happened on
a main street with people continuously walking past, so nothing too
conspicuous could have been used. At first I figured they all must have
been in on it,the people in the shop, the folk on the street watching
me through the door of the shop, waiting for me to finish up and turn
round, but I guess not, sometimes I'm a tad paranoid.

So now I'm in the market for some serious advice on locks, chains,
cables, visible deterents, and booby traps. I read the other thread
about disguising your bike, and it sounds like good advice, except that
I don't like the idea of riding around on ssomething that looks like it
belongs in a dumpster. Is that ok, or is it something I need to look
into ?

Per [email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

So now I'm in the market for some serious advice on locks, chains,
cables, visible deterents, and booby traps.

Somebody else posted this:

http://neistat.com/pages/video_holding/bikethief_holding.htm

I think it says it all.
--
PeteCresswell

Quoted message said:

Oh, yes, there are property rights. It's protection (apart from not
being prosecuted for receiving stolen goods) of a good-faith buyer.
Good-faith usually being defined as having bought it from a real shop
for a reasonable price and having the receipt to prove it. The
original owner can then complain to the store owner aka fence.

Heh heh... that just made me think... maybe it's better to plan a heist to
steal your own bike back from the third party (and kick the second party's
ass in the process if possible) if you're in Holland. Then sell it to your
brother or sister for retail price and all is well 😉

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

Squid-in-Training said:

Heh heh... that just made me think... maybe it's better to plan a heist to
steal your own bike back from the third party (and kick the second party's
ass in the process if possible) if you're in Holland. Then sell it to your
brother or sister for retail price and all is well 😉

If you knowingly do that and get caught, though, it's theft and selling
stolen goods, which is a not unserious offence.

However, since if you see your stolen bike somewhere you can't possibly
know whether or not the current possessor is a good faith buyer, I'd
definitely say that taking it back first might be the most effective way.
If you just call the cops, the current possessor will be allowed to have
his say, and you could be screwed.

Jasper