Bag and phone snatchers targeting Dulwich areas

[Dimelda]

To: Woman of Dulwich. You're absolutely right ... men also chunter on endlessly on their phones in the streets & are just as likely to hv their phone snatched. I should hv said '... I regularly see men and women prattling on their phones.' Mea culpa.

[Dimelda]

To Heartblock: 'Misogynistic language' ?!! Men are also victims of phone snatching. But the OP related to a woman whose phone was snatched. My post pointed out that women, in particular, need to take care when on the street, i.e. they need to hold on to their bag tightly, & to avoid using their phone. It's a no-brainer. If you yourself are a woman, you need to heed that advice. If you don't and, as a consequence, become a victim of phone/bag snatching, then - yes - part of the blame lies with you.

[Dimelda]

To: Woman of Dulwich (again). Entirely concur with your point abt people using SatNav just to get around the corner. I feel sorry for them. Why not continue to print a map off? I do ... 100 times more accurate than those rubbish Google maps.

[SpringTime]

Dimelda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To Heartblock: 'Misogynistic language' ?!! Men

> are also victims of phone snatching. But the OP

> related to a woman whose phone was snatched. My

> post pointed out that women, in particular, need

> to take care when on the street, i.e. they need to

> hold on to their bag tightly, & to avoid using

> their phone. It's a no-brainer. If you yourself

> are a woman, you need to heed that advice. If you

> don't and, as a consequence, become a victim of

> phone/bag snatching, then - yes - part of the

> blame lies with you.

The blame should never lie with the victim.

[Mystic Mog]

Dimelda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To Heartblock: 'Misogynistic language' ?!! Men

> are also victims of phone snatching. But the OP

> related to a woman whose phone was snatched. My

> post pointed out that women, in particular, need

> to take care when on the street, i.e. they need to

> hold on to their bag tightly, & to avoid using

> their phone. It's a no-brainer. If you yourself

> are a woman, you need to heed that advice. If you

> don't and, as a consequence, become a victim of

> phone/bag snatching, then - yes - part of the

> blame lies with you.

Could you tell me what part of the blame lies with the victim? Thanks.

[Rockets]

Just to clarify - my wife was wearing her bag across her body (she spent many years living in cities around Europe where bag snatching is rife so is always on her guard and never carries a bag on one shoulder or just in the hand). This didn't stop the thief from trying to rip it from her (she had a mark on her neck for a few day where he tried to pull it to rip the bag strap).

People get their phones out to do a plethora of things nowadays. I had one snatched a few years ago outside an event as I went to book an Uber as I left. The security guard I spoke to after it happened said every time an event is on the thieves descend as they know the moment people get outside they reach to book an Uber etc. These thieves are not opportunists and are, unfortunately, very good at what they do - they also know that knocking into someone when they are not expecting it causes a momentary distraction where they can pretty much take what they want. And they revel in what they do - apparently as a few of the Kwik Fit team gave chase the thief rode off waving my wife's phone in the air as he was safe in the knowledge no-one would catch him.

Just be careful everyone.

[Dimelda]

I?ve already said (& won?t be repeating) that people, on the streets, should take precautions as to their personal belongings, in particular their phones. Everyone knows that phone snatchers abound. Those who chat on their phones, oblivious to everything around them, are clearly taking no precautions. They?re a moving target for thieves, & when their phone (and/or bag) is snatched, there?s no point in wailing about it afterwards. Part of the blame for that lies with them. The villains will always be there ? hoping for a time when the streets will be devoid of them is fanciful. It ain?t going to happen.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Dimelda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I?ve already said (& won?t be repeating)...

...and yet there you go repeating it...

[Dimelda]

You're absolutely right! Correction needed .... what I should hv said was '... I won't be repeating it again' !

and I won't!

[Earl Aelfheah]

Saw this happen in Kennington last night. Kids on electric bikes. Awful.

[Pugwash]

I tend to wear my bag across my body and under a coat or cardigan. I never use my phone in street - mainly with traffic noise etc cannot hear conversation.

[Dimelda]

To Pugwash: Spot on! You're one of the sensible ones out there. Everyone - particularly women - should heed your advice. Wear an across body bag and never use your phone in the street. It's a no-brainer.

[teddyboy23]

There's going to be occasions when you will need to use your phone when your out and about.sadly its a sign of the times people are engrossed in their phones and are oblivious to what's going on around them .if there are 10 people at a busstop seven or eight will be messing with there phone .people walking on to work or the shops engrossed with their phones .sitting outside cafes engrossed in their phones its the same allover the world.some places are safer than others .years ago my late wife had more jewelry than Argos.but would only wear some if she was out with me.dimelda is right in saying be careful.

[womanofdulwich]

we could all be safer by only using one headphone so we are more aware of those around us, and keeping our phone in our pocket and using the headphones/ microphone.Of course I rarely do this, apart from the one headphone.

[ken78]

Dimelda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're absolutely right! Correction needed ....

> what I should hv said was '... I won't be

> repeating it again' !

>

> and I won't!

go on do it again

[Dimelda]

To: Ken78. No - I've said more than enough on the subject. Two more excellent posts today (by Teddyboy 23 and Woman of Dulwich). By now, the penny must surely have dropped.

[Bony Fido]

womanofdulwich Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I regularly see men on their phones too! Its not

> just women.

What amazes me is the number of (mainly young) women who walk around with their phones sticking out of the back pockets of their jeans/trousers - sneak thief's delight.

[Penguin68]

There are clearly activities which are fundamentally risky ? sky-diving or pot-holing for instance and where caution, and appropriate clothing, are vital. But this should not extend towards walking around your own streets. The fact that posters are urging extreme levels of caution against the malicious acts of others ? as if ED was a war zone or an area of extreme danger ? like a favella or areas of lawless South Africa - speaks volumes to what we have been acclimatised to expect in the streets of a the capital of a civilised, first world country.

To put it very simply. No one should have to walk around our streets in some sort of defensive posture, and dressing defensively. We should be ashamed that we have let our streets become a hunting zone for criminals. We should be ashamed that women and girls have to sidle and creep through our streets as if they are the problem. If the safety of the people is not the primary concern of the police and the people who pay for them, that is us, then there is something fundamentally wrong.

And don?t hide behind, ?well it?s unfortunate, but that?s the most sensible advice we can give?. That way lies the duenna and the bourka.

[Nigello]

Should is doing a lot of work here. Humans will never eradicate baddies from our midst. To think otherwise is fabulist revery. Right now in this world there are hazards and it is necessary to acknowledge this and adopt ways of avoiding them. This is rational thinking and applies to all and it can exist alongside obvious and necessary sympathy with any victim.

[KidKruger]

Spot on Penguin, it's a dismal state of affairs and we should be ashamed as a society that this is the norm AND that the authorities can't be arsed / are not able to address it AND that criminals don't get punished severely for this kind of activity.

Taliban seem to not tolerate thieves, from what I read today (though I'd suggest that's a step too far).

[Dimelda]

Nigello: What a brilliant post. The pragmatist vs the many na?ve idealists posting on this subject! ?Fabulist revery?: LOVE it!

[Coach Beth]

Having followed this post for a while I'd like to point out a couple of things:

1. The OP said several times that his wife did have her handbag strapped across her body and it sounds like took all the correct precautions.

2. As the parent of a teenage boy, I know that many of the muggings around her are committed on teenager by older teenagers. He has been mugged about 4 times over the past three years, once he turned 13, it seemed like he was considered fair game. The last time which was a couple weeks his phone was stowed safely in his bag... approached by two young men on his way back from football training - they threatened, he thought they might have a knife and then chased him untill he dropped his bag. The first time he was mugged he was on his way back from school at 3:40pm and he was pushed to the ground and they took his knapsack. He was also mugged for his new bike once.

3. We reported every time to the police. The last incident we got a crime number but then an email saying they couldn't investigate as it was unlikely they could identify the criminals. Personally, I think that one of the reasons teenagers are the victims of crime so much is that the criminals KNOW that crimes agains teens are taken much less seriously.

I myself have been fortunate not to have been mugged - I supposed I could be smug and say it's because I do this or don't do that. And yes, I take a number of percuations as I had been pickpocketed many, many ago when I was new to London and fairly green. But I feel there is psychological mechansim that happens so we can protect ourselves from feeling vulnerable ... if we can find something that someone else MIGHT have done that resulted in something terrible... whether it be to become a victim of crime or to be a victim of cancer ('well, if people just didn't eat meat or drink milk, maybe their wouldn't have gotton cancer), we can feel less vulnerable.

What I find intersting is that we don't tend to blame shops or corporations for theifs or fraud that happens to them. We don't go. 'Oh well, of course people are going to nick from Sainsburys... what are they thinking, putting all those goods on display rather than under lock and key!'.

Finally, I have just come back from visiting family in Canada. They were pretty shocked to hear about my son's mugging and even more shocked when I explained how common place this is - that most teenagers in our area will be mugged at some point. I would be interested in more ideas of how as a community we can develop strategies to make our streets safer - particularly for those who are more vulnerable of crime.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Coach Beth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I think that one of the reasons

> teenagers are the victims of crime so much is that

> the criminals KNOW that crimes agains teens are

> taken much less seriously.

I'm not here to defend the police but around our way when there was a spate of after school teen on teen muggings, the Safer Neighbourhood Team did increase foot patrols after school. I have no idea whether it solved the problem or whether it continues today.

> I feel there is

> psychological mechansim that happens so we can

> protect ourselves from feeling vulnerable ... if

> we can find something that someone else MIGHT have

> done that resulted in something terrible...

> whether it be to become a victim of crime or to be

> a victim of cancer ('well, if people just didn't

> eat meat or drink milk, maybe their wouldn't have

> gotton cancer), we can feel less vulnerable.

There is a body of research (which tbf is not watertight and to which I can't now find the sodding link) that indicates that female jurors are more hostile to rape victims and believe the victims could have done more to protect themselves. The suggestion is that this is a form of psychological self-protection on the part of the jurors: "this awful thing won't happen to me because I know how to protect myself"...which is exactly what you're saying.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/feb/16/rape-blame-victims-women