All banks over here use this system. Still, there are armed bank robberies on occasion. That said, when I read a Paris local paper that report this kind of things, I’m puzzled at how little these people are robbing, considering the risks.
In fact, I’m generally puzzled by most local reports of crimes. Very occasionnally, I read about a smart crime (a freight car worth of designer clothes worth millions stolen) but it’s immediately followed by the idiotic manager of a post office organizing with several accomplices the robbery of her own agency for a grand total of some dozen thousands euros (so, she didn’t even have the excuse of not knowing of much money there was, she lost a secure, lifelong job probably correctly paid, and of course is going to jail over what, once shared with the accomplices, probably amounts to some months of her salary).
My LEO brother says that most criminals are idiots, including heinous ones (a murderer leaving his parking ticket with his name and adress on the crime scene, or letting in officers without a warrant when blood-covered cloths are spilled around his place, a guy killing his son’s friend for € 1500 worth of pot and the whole thing being figured out by the enquiries of…the victim’s 15 yo friends, before the body was even found).
I assumed that banks would be easier to rob in this day and time with the “no resistance” policy. Slide a note to the teller stating that she is being robbed, fill up a sack with cash, and then leave. The teller is instructed to comply.
And now the robber, if caught, doesn’t get an “armed” robbery charge.
If Jesse James handed a bank teller a note, the bank teller would have laughed and pulled a shotgun on him.
Bank robbery is still a fairly popular criminal pastime. In the Houston metro area there were over 50 bank robberies by June this year, around a 50% increase over last year. One day there were three in a 90 minute period.
The “do you really think I’m that stupid??” defence. Be careful what you ask…
The explanation was that people rob banks “because that’s where the money is”. If it is easier to raid an establishment, hold up a whole bunch of people and then bugger off - then crooks will start doing that. I’ve seen the trend that one easy business after another is targetted - self serve gas stations, convenience stores, video rental stores, drugstores,liquor stores, cabbies, etc. As each business realizes the risk and hardens up, the crooks move on to another.
The danger of robbing a well-populated establishment, there’s always the risk of someone who wants to fight; see the recent news footage of the 70yo pulling a gun and chasing some thieves in an internet cafe. (The scary thing is, there were bullets flying all over, and the only hit appears to be one thief in the butt… If you’re going to shoot - aim.) Or watch the Pulp Fiction restaurant moment. The more people, the harder it is to control. Late night alone places are easiest, I suppose.
Between bank cards, credit cards, and time-lock safes, there’s less actual cash in most businesses. The great thing about a bank is they have lots of cash, on purpose; and they tell the staff not to fight back but cooperate quietly. After all, in a place that makes millions a month, a $7,000 loss is a lot cheaper than even the worker’s comp claim they might otherwise have to pay. Leave it to the police to chase the thieves.
Was in a carpool, once, with a guy who did bank admin. He told a story about a robber who robbed a bank after failing to rob a donut store. Despite the gun, the donut store owner had told him to go to hell.
The guy probably would have been okay grabbing a big pink box of donuts off of the counter in pique, if he hadn’t kept carrying it through the bank robbery and after. It was kind of hard to miss.
He was walking down the street, still holding the box, when the call went out about the attempted store robbery. A patrol car spotted him and the cops were having a little chat with him when the call came out about the bank robbery. There was no word on whether or not he had at least gotten to eat a donut.
That’s the best I can find, although I’d like to find stuff that shows they are slowly ebbing. I can’t imagine 30 years from now it’ll still be going on - who’ll have cash?
That would be burglary, not robbery. “Robbery” means that force was used to coerce a person. If you’re just breaking into a building where there are no people and stealing, that’s “burglary.”
Going by that FBI page, a clarification has to be made. 89% of the crimes involved something being taken. So, that’s not really a success rate nor does it allude to one. However, as one reads further, 20% of the loot was recovered, partially or in full. But, wait, there’s more! 54% of the perp’s were identified! That pushes the success rate down to 46%.
6088 people were involved, 54% identified. Let’s assume, they were ID’d and then caught. That leaves 2825 people at large with the remaining 80% of the loot which is $30,674,801.57. Divide that by 2825, and you have a per capita take home of $10,858.34. So, a 46% chance of success, for $10k. If you fail, 10 years of prison. Not really worth it. I mean, you can drive around and pick things up via Craigslist for free and sell them and make that, if not more, legally.
What’s interesting though, is that of the ID’d people, 37% were narcotics users, 18% had priors. So, that leaves 46% (?!) of people who are not drug users and have no priors. Weird. Of the original group of 46% who got away, as in never ID’d, that sounds like an “organized” crime to me.
I used to have a job that involved looking at video surveillance from bank robberies.
I would get to see police, bank and new reports of these robberies.
This would have been US banks, mostly in southern states, and in the decade from 2000 to 2010.
It seemed like the hauls clustered around idiots who only got $700 and real pros who scored $7000.
I’m not doubting the FBI stats quoted before; perhaps the banks (or the criminals victimizing them) I was employed by were atypical in some fashion.
Indeed. I miss the good old days of bank robbery, when all it took was a pistol and some chutzpah. Nowadays, you practically need to have a PhD to get through all the security systems and whatnot.
I think the old type of bank robbery is pretty much dead - or at least close enough to it that I don’t recall hearing of any instances in recent years. And by that I mean where some guys with guns come in and force the bank employees to open the safe/vault and give them all the money in the bank.
What you have nowadays is people robbing individual tellers of a few hundred dollars, or maybe a few thousand. That’s not the same thing.