With increased local armed robberies, I’m no longer wearing Rolexes

Posts
184
Likes
238
Removal of limbs and other body parts seems like a better deterrent as they just join a scumbag club inside where more crime = more clout.

This does not even work as a deterrent in countries that have this as the punishment for theft.
 
Posts
376
Likes
450
A few years ago I posted a thread about a BWW owner that ran over a thief that had stolen his Cartier (the thief had shot towards the owner a few rounds before). Obviously, it was controversial and there were diverse opinions on the matter.

Curiously enough, the BWW owner, is now a politician after he become well known.
 
Posts
457
Likes
150
With so many homages and decent replicas, how would criminals know at all what's real? I mean there are even superclones and I doubt anyone could tell if a watch is fake without literally staring up close, I can't see the font at all when someone with a watch passes by me. I would probably recognize a sub from afar, but whether is a homage or not... not really. And ads these days are full of replicas, many even coming with fake boxes and certificates. Or even receipts.

I mean it's ridiculous when I see a listing that with a receipt from Singapore/Hong Kong that says bought for 10k $, but the listing is priced at 800$ and the watch is brand new.

I think maybe this whole issue is more prevalent in countries where people don't wear homages/reps.
 
Posts
104
Likes
586
Robert Heinlein: “Well, in the first place an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
 
Posts
5,074
Likes
17,650
We have an armed society in the states. Manners not so much.
 
Posts
9,060
Likes
47,051
Robert Heinlein: “Well, in the first place an armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”
This is a quote from a science fiction novel about a utopian society and, in my opinion, taken very much out of context. Heinlein was saying that peace at the end of the barrel of a gun isn’t really peace at all. If the current state of affairs in the United States demonstrates anything, it is this: being the most armed nation per capita on Earth has done very little to deter violent crime. In fact, if one considers the number of mass shootings and gun deaths that occur in the U.S. with astonishing regularity, you can make a convincing argument that the number of guns in private hands has been a major contributing factor to the surge in violence in the U.S.
Edited:
 
Posts
104
Likes
586
This is a quote from a science fictional novel about a utopian society and, in my opinion, taken very much out of context. Heinlein was saying that peace at the end of the barrel of a gun isn’t really peace at all. If the current state of affairs in the United States demonstrates anything, it is this: being the most armed nation per capita on Earth has done very little to deter violent crime.

Ok,….lolz
 
Posts
2,103
Likes
6,086
This is supposedly an Iranian finger amputation as punishment. I prefer not living in Barbary.

 
Posts
9,060
Likes
47,051
hen hen
This is supposedly an Iranian finger amputation as punishment. I prefer not living in Barbary.

For those in favor of retributive punishment, is this really what you want your country to become? Think hard before you answer because it’s a slippery slope. It’s no surprise that practices like this come packaged with restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and repressive authoritarian policies that keep women in subservient roles and which have spelled genocide for many religious and ethnic minorities.
Edited:
 
Posts
457
Likes
150
hen hen
This is supposedly an Iranian finger amputation as punishment. I prefer not living in Barbary.

The problem is always false positives. And such punishments have no proper reversal. In an ideal world this could work, but alas our world is not ideal.

There's always a trade-off. On one hand, if a suspect is proven guilty of murder beyond doubt(multiple witnesses, video footage, evidence), it's only human to want maximum punishment. And then if the person reoffends, even capital punishment. I mean, why would you give that person the chance to murder even more people?

But if things are muddy and you ain't sure without doubt, then would you want a severe punishment for a potentially innocent person?

Sci-Fi thought: Removing body parts may be civil in the future, if there's a perfect way of restoring them in case you prove innocent. And ideally you could also choose to serve time and get your parts reinstalled afterwards. But... people will probably just get replacement parts from a black market somewhere. Still it sounds funny to think you can be then prosecuted for possession of illegal thumb replacement while your thumb has been removed for say a duration of 5 years because of theft or something.
 
Posts
2,053
Likes
4,172
hen hen
This is supposedly an Iranian finger amputation as punishment. I prefer not living in Barbary.

Soooo, don't live there and don't steal anything. Profit!
 
Posts
2,053
Likes
4,172
Sci-Fi thought: Removing body parts may be civil in the future, if there's a perfect way of restoring them in case you prove innocent. And ideally you could also choose to serve time and get your parts reinstalled afterwards.
Reminds me of William Gibson's neuromancer, but they swapped body parts for fun. "cheap plastic replacement parts"
 
Posts
2,103
Likes
6,086
Soooo, don't live there and don't steal anything. Profit!

Ohfffff why didn't I think of that?
 
Posts
9,060
Likes
47,051
Back to watches. Common sense remains the best defense. If in doubt, leave the expensive watches and jewelry at home. In a safe. Bolted to the floor. Or in a bank safety deposit box.
 
Posts
5,074
Likes
17,650
Back to watches. Common sense remains the best defense. If in doubt, leave the expensive watches and jewelry at home. In a safe. Bolted to the floor. Or in a bank safety deposit box.

You mean well, but people who got robbed weren't robbed for lack of common sense.

You can't defend yourself by staying constantly alert. If a group is watching you in a crowd, they will have the advantage.

You can't be big enough to fight back. Professional boxers have had watches stolen in public by much smaller guys.

You can't stop a robbery with a gun or a knife, unless very lucky. You'll have to be attacked before you get a weapon out. If the robber has a gun, you're shot, or the person you're with is shot, or the stranger behind you is shot. If the thief grabs your watch and runs away, if you shoot him in the back, you used deadly force when your life was not in danger and you're screwed.

More policing, tracking and catching thieves and putting them in jail seems the only defense. Or like you say, stop wearing watches in higher crime areas, but that seems like victim blaming, even if it might be the safest action.

Safes are a whole other topic. There was a thread or two on them. One negative is that if a robbery happened while residents are home, a thief might threaten viloence to get a person to open the safe. If that person doesn't know the combination or refuses, that could be bad. There may have been other downsides but that one stuck in my head.

Safety deposit boxes have downsides, but that's another thread.

Edit: I understand and share the feeling that these thieves need to be similarly treated roughly. In this case, they contributed to or even caused a man's death. Our house was broken into and it's a horrible feeling of being victimized. Worse yet was talking with my young daughters who had things stolen from their rooms. If I could have shot those robbers I probably would have. So I don't want to sound preachy. It's good to collectively vent, but just not make public policy based on how what we'd really want to do.
Edited:
 
Posts
376
Likes
450
If in doubt, leave the expensive watches and jewelry at home. In a safe. Bolted to the floor. Or in a bank safety deposit box.
IMO, to always leave watches in a safe is a bit too radical. And, it means they won and have control of you (the bad guys, thieves, etc.). Why buy watches in the first place if they will not be worn and enjoyed? We could just leave them with bubble wrap in safe, and in theory they will be "safe" (I do think a hiding spot works better sometimes over safes, or using a decoy safe, etc.).

Don't think wearing a blingy, full 18k gold watch in the roughest neighborhood is a bright idea, either.

I go somewhere in the middle wearing watches. Covering your sleeve when you are in a tough neighborhood; putting the watches in your front pocket while you pass through a certain area; changing a watch to a NATO or leather (in my neck of the woods, a metal bracelet seems to scream $$$). All of these things I've done. But, I will never just keep a watch in a safe all the time, or use it around the house here and there.
 
Posts
9,060
Likes
47,051
Both of the posts preceding this one from pdxleaf and reverbtime seem more than reasonable to me. Obviously, one cannot safeguard against every contingency and if trying to do so eclipses any enjoyment that we get from our collections, then what's the point in having one. I wear a nice watch every day. If I'm going to be in a sketchy neighborhood or a public place where my watch might be openly visible to people I don't know, I either don't wear one or make sure that it's under a sweater or a long sleeve shirt. I don't travel internationally with a nice watch and my entire collection is not kept in my home. That's what I do. Your mileage may vary.
 
Posts
16,307
Likes
44,907
IMO, to always leave watches in a safe is a bit too radical. And, it means they won and have control of you (the bad guys, thieves, etc.). Why buy watches in the first place if they will not be worn and enjoyed? We could just leave them with bubble wrap in safe, and in theory they will be "safe" (I do think a hiding spot works better sometimes over safes, or using a decoy safe, etc.).

Don't think wearing a blingy, full 18k gold watch in the roughest neighborhood is a bright idea, either.

I go somewhere in the middle wearing watches. Covering your sleeve when you are in a tough neighborhood; putting the watches in your front pocket while you pass through a certain area; changing a watch to a NATO or leather (in my neck of the woods, a metal bracelet seems to scream $$$). All of these things I've done. But, I will never just keep a watch in a safe all the time, or use it around the house here and there.
It’s not the sketchy parts of town that we need to worry about. If you get mugged there it was a crime of opportunity and you looked like a target (not victim blaming but we should always be conscious of how we appear depending on environment). It’s the tony parts of town where the thieves are actually targeting- where most people let their guard down and the pickings are rich for the criminals.
The criminals have become more emboldened and far more clever than in years past. They know most people won’t fight back so they have become more aggressive- and if you do fight back be prepared to lose since you don’t know what form of weapon they have.

They have also become more web savvy. They can scout social media to see who’s in their area flexing their new bling at a local restaurant for an Instagram post. It’s not that hard to piece together someone’s location by the bread crumbs they leave behind on the web.

We just need to be more vigilant about our privacy. I always wear long sleeve shirts (sleeves rolled up in the warmth months) but if I’m on public transit or in a crowded place- I make sure my sleeves are down and if I’m holding the grab bar on the train I am mindful that my watch is under my sleeve. I don’t do social media so that’s not a problem for me and my wife never posts anything on her socials about where she is (as a woman it’s a completely different concern of targeting than just watches).

The idea of common sense is not out of line- if you are advertising your wealth/good taste to others, be prepared to attract attention from everyone.