There was a story on CBC Radio this morning about a woman in Gatineau who got a ticket from a municipal by-law officer for not locking her car doors. For those not in the know, the CBC is Canada’s semi-public national broadcaster (supported by the government, but also collects ad revenue) and Gatineau is the city directly across the river (in Quebec) from Ottawa, Canada’s capital.
The story irritated me, or rather the content did, because my initial reaction upon hearing it was that it seems absurd to me that you could ticket someone for not locking their car doors. The rationale presented was that there have been car thefts in the past (yeah, that’s happened everywhere) and this by-law would ideally force people to remember to lock their doors. I call bs to that rationale, though, because locked doors don’t deter thieves. They will get in and get what they want regardless of what you do to stop them. The only thing that might deter a thief is the fear of getting caught. I very much dislike laws like this which place the burden of crime or wrong-doing on the potential victim, almost blaming them if something bad happens.
So my question for debate is, do you think it’s reasonable to fine someone for not locking their car doors? And further, to what extent can we create these sorts of laws? Should people be fined for forgetting their purse or wallet in a public area? Should people be fined for not having an alarm system in their home? Should someone be fined for not locking up their bike? I’m curious what people think, and if someone can provide a solid reason for this sort of law that doesn’t place the burden on the potential victim.
Word. I’ve had car windows smashed twice so some low-life could steal something from the car. What they stole, a small handful of change for example, was worth far less than what it cost me to replace the windows.
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions. Homeowners associations (HOAs) down here in Unitedstatesland make you sign them before they let you buy property in their community.
Not every community, or even every neighborhood has them, but the implication that you can’t even ask the city government of Gatineau for information unless you’re a resident kinda suggests that there’s a level of control-freakness consistent with HOAs.
A by-law, as scule used it, is simply a city law. In Canada, the federal government and the provinces can pass laws, but cities pass “by-laws.” Really, they’re just like federal/provincial laws, just a lot more local. They typically address small violations (not picking up after your pet, for example), so if you violate one, you’d likely only get a ticket
This is not my understanding of how Canadian municipalities work. Certainly, non-residents can ask for, and receive information, from municipalities. Whether or not they choose to respond to a non-resident is, of course, another matter. So Scule, a curious member of the public from Ottawa, might not get an answer; but I’d bet that a resident of, say, Toronto who happened to be a reporter for a large-circulation newspaper or a TV network, would get one.
I’ll play devil’s advocate here… If something get stolen out of your unlocked vehicle, you’re likely going to call the police and ask them to deal with it. While they won’t actually go and look for your stuff, they do have to send an officer out, write a report and log that report. It seems reasonable to create ordinances that force people to exercise reasonable precautions against theft, those that are not costly (alarm systems, for example).
Honestly, I think it’s bullshit too but just thought I’d play.
When I owned a convertible, I left it unlocked at all times, because there was nothing inside that was worth as much to me as the top. I’d rather have someone open the door and steal my maps and sunglasses than have them slit the top and steal my maps and sunglasses.
Where I work if a citation is issued that is not a criminal violation, it is written as a violation of the civil municipal code.
It’s as wrong as a helmet law or a seatbelt law. I think they are all absurd, but as I get to explain stupid parking tickets as part of my job, I can’t always differentiate between the levels of stupidity.
Example: A code enforcement officer and a parking enforcement officer can only write civil municipal code violations, while a police officer can write either a criminal or civil violation.
Yes, this is a by-law and so not subject to criminal enforcement. I don’t think it’s similar to a seatbelt law or bicycle helmet law though, in that those seek to protect people from accidental damage to their person in a reasonable and non-intrusive manner, while this by-law places the burden for the deliberate wrong-doing of others on the shoulders of the potential victim. If they really want to encourage people to lock their doors, they should have some PSAs encouraging this behaviour. Don’t make me pay because someone else might try to harm me or my property.
Also, I could write to the city of Gatineau about this law, but my point was that I’m not a voter there and thus cannot impact it’s application or continued existence.
Don’t make me pay for the officer that files a police report for you or does any investigation when someone does harm you or your property, then. Can I have that in writing? Good.
You’re missing the point, Twinkie. With many cars (e.g., my aforementioned convertible), anyone who wants to break in will succeed in doing so. They’ll have to slit the top to do it, but they’ll get in.
So, do you want to pay for the police report and investigation on replacing my ragtop, or would you rather have me shrug off a few missing maps, a pair of sunglasses, and a $25 radio that I’m not going to report anyway (because replacement cost is less than the deductible on my insurance).
That law costs you MORE money when someone breaks into my car, not less.
Really? You think locked doors offer zero deterrent to car theft? Obviously locked cars get stolen/robbed, but I’m pretty skeptical that locking doesn’t prevent theft to some extent. Certainly having to break a window or sit there jimmying with a coat hanger makes life more difficult for a prospective thief, and makes them easier to catch if a cop/concerned citizen happens to be walking by.
I leave my doors unlocked (and the keys in the car!) when I’m back in my small hometown, but I’m pretty careful to lock it in larger cities with relatively high crime-rates. Obviously I do so because I think it provides some kind of deterrent to theft.
Do you leave your car unlocked when you’re in a city?
No, I always lock my car doors, where ever I go. I was more referring to the fact that the lock on the doors is not the biggest deterrent to theft. Fear of getting caught is. It really doesn’t matter what I do to protect my car, if someone wants to get in it’s really not that hard, so long as the windows aren’t made of clear titanium or something. They will get in. I count on basic human decency and the relatively low crime rate in Ottawa to protect me. I just think it’s wrong to make the victim the bearer of the burden.
As to YamatoTwinkie’s comment, if you don’t want to share the burden for policing, I’d suggest moving out of the country and finding some place where you don’t have to pay taxes. Maybe Somalia? Otherwise we’re pretty much stuck sharing the burden.
(This is all assuming that unlocked doors have a statistically higher % chance of being “broken” into - if it can be proven that there isn’t any difference, or that the % difference is so small that the cost of the window outweighs the stuff stolen + the officer’s time, I’m open to changing my opinion)
I don’t mind sharing the burden at all, as long as the person who I’m sharing the load for didn’t deliberately cause the burden to happen in the first place.
You don’t want to wear your seatbelt or your helmet? OK. Don’t make me pay for the ambulance ride and the emergency room visit.
You want to ignore the avalanche warnings from the park ranger’s office? OK. Don’t make me pay for your mountain rescue.
You want to sit at home in front of the TV all day and eat junk food? OK. Don’t make me pay extra for your special healthcare.
You want to store thousands of gallons of kerosene in your house, and then go around telling random people that if “someone ever lit fire to it, the whole thing would go up like the fourth of July!” Fine. Don’t make me pay for the fire truck dispatched to your area when an arsonist burns it down.
We live in a society where we expect our citizens to take basic precautionary measures to prevent burdens on other people in the first place. What do we do with people who willfully ignore that advice? Pay for their extra needs anyway? Spend even more money on public health/safety advertising campaigns that will mostly get ignored? Cut off their services? Or fine them? I prefer the latter.
Hey, if you don’t want to get a ticket for leaving your doors unlocked, I hear Somalia is a good place to live, too. Maybe you should move there.
