Bitcoin Forum

If your Bitcoins are stolen, why should the police help you?

because stealing is wrong

wait..... police actually help you?

Because stealing is criminal*

It may be fraud though, check your local laws.

private property is an illusion

Why would I even ask the police to help me? I'll ask an IT expert, thanks.

OH NOES!
http://i52.tinypic.com/2w2ng5i.jpg

for great justice

Seems pretty real to me when I walk on it, eat it or drive with it.  Still, Bitcoins are not physical, so when you call the cops about being scammed in an online bitcoin trade ask yourself, "would the cops do anything if I had been scammed out of cash on the street?" and if the answer is "probably not" then the next question then becomes "should I invite the cops into my life if there is little chance of recovering my losses?"

Some people think of the cops with admiration, but they are not there to "serve and protect" the individual citizen.  They "serve and protect" the state.  If you really believe that would include yourself; are you happy when you see police lights in your rear view mirror because they are enforcing the law, or do you tense up and check your speed?

Seriously have the police been helping you a lot?

Also, if Bernake keeps printing dollars until we we all suffocate are the police going to come help you?

Sting was awesome ... bit greenie now for my liking though ... Andy Summers was pretty cool too.

Because the government hates competition.

It probably depends on how they steal them, many (most?) countries have laws against unauthorised access to computers so if you're talking about a technical attack on your wallet.dat file they've probably broken other laws and you might or might not get someone interested in pursuing it if you have decent evidence.

Fraud's another possibility, but more likely they couldn't be stuffed with it for small scale stuff especially if they get two different sides to the story, so they'd probably tell you to take civil action against the other person.

Good thing to know. If I should ever need a vital organ transplant I'll look you up and just take your organ. Since private property is an illusion you wont mind, right? Retard.

Private property is mutual agreement backed by force.

If someone stole them through deception, then you could file a lawsuit using fraud as the cause of action, if they stole your wallet.dat you'd have to press criminal charges - whether either would be possible depends on having the person's real ID.
Plus this assumes that bitcoins don't at some point get outlawed, which could happen - in which case the state will not help you.

Your sentence doesn't make any sense to me. Mutual agreement, by it's definition, does not require force. It's when someone uses force to break that agreement (initiation of force) that force first enters the equation, in which case a response of force is appropriate (and optional).

Let's say:
We can agree that you own your bike and I own my bike. No force required.
If you try to take my bike, I can either let you (in which case I agree it's not my property).
Or I can stop you (in which case I disagree and I'm simply responding to your initial force with force in return).
You are the initial actor in trying to take my bike (you do not agree that it is my bike and are acting on that idea).
You bring force into the equation and accept it as valid.

If you claim there is no right to private property and use force to take what is mine, you respect the use of force, so you accept force to be used against you in return.
 

I work in network security, and some of us have been discussing this recently.

Because Bitcoins are traded anonymously, they will be extremely easy to steal once the malware community begins to take notice unless something is done to secure how we access Bitcoins. At the moment, we simply turn on the program and go. We can even rip them straight from the computer. There's a tutorial on this very website on how to rip your Bitcoins and back them up to DropBox. Obviously, there needs to be an additional layer of security. Files need to be secured with passwords, the program needs to require a password that CANNOT BE RETRIEVED (if it is retrievable, it is possible for an exploiter to remotely retrieve it) IF LOST, and everything needs to be encrypted.

Here's what I mean.

With programs like ZeuS and SpyEye, the former of which now available free to the public, and both of which are STILL not detectable by any of the current anti-virus programs, having unsecure "money" sitting on your computer is almost inviting somebody to come steal it. With a normal person, I have to wait for you to log on to your bank account, so I can then save your information, log in myself, transfer your money out to a money mule and have them transfer the money overseas where it won't be affected by U.S./international law. With Bitcoins, I just need to access your computer, send the BitCoins (which is, as Bitcoin often touts, anonymous), and I'm done. You can't call up your bank and have them protect you. You can't get insurance on your Bitcoins. You can't "freeze" your Bitcoin account (considering it's your computer I'm accessing, and not an actual account). You're just shit out of luck.





And to migrate back to the main topic at hand, good luck getting the police to help. First off, you have to be able to convince them that Bitcoins have real value. Anything under $20 of damage is, by law, not dealt with by the police/courts. Second, you'll need to find the person who took it. Since Bitcoins are transferred anonymously, that means you'd have to get a professional cryptographer to decrypt my ZeuS and find where I'm accessing you from. And then, after all of that, you have to hope that I still have your Bitcoins. Chances are, by the time you actually figure out what's happened, I've already sold them, or transferred them to somebody else.

Responsibility is a bitch, but I'll take it over the alternative.

An encrypted wallet.dat file as default is in the todo list for the bitcoin client.  Feel free to jump into the fray and help if you have the skills.

Showing the current exchange rates should be enough to demonstrate market value but you're absolutely right that the bigger issue is finding who stole them - that's an issue with "cybercrime" (I dislike that word, it sounds a tad pretentious) in general. Part of the price we pay for privacy is having to defend ourselves against criminals, personally I think it's worth the price.

:D http://youtu.be/aENX1Sf3fgQ :D

I once had a roomate that lived with me that decided to move out while I was at work and steal about 8 grand worth of stuff from me. Funny thing was I know his full name and know where he lives till this day but cops did nothing but file a report and said the only thing I could do was sue him. Love how my tax dollars never do anything for me ever.  ;D

And you didn't go get your stuff? Were you afraid of the police or something?

What do you mean by "should"?

I think that people should help other people because it's the right thing to do, whether from a moral position or because it's in everyone's long-term best interest. But in their role as The Police, there's not really any reason why they should do anything other than crack your skull when you aren't serving the state's interests (which are always immoral and short term). Considering the threat bitcoin poses to state power, I wouldn't expect much in the way of help from the police.

Until bitcoins are declared illegal the police still have a duty to enforce the laws against fraud and trespass which would apply to stolen bitcoins. Believe me, individual police departments/officers will never go through the thought process of "this goes against state interests", they're more likely to think "wtf is this bitcoin thing? someone stole some pretend money? what?"

There is no duty to protect. Not in reality and not even in legal fantasy land.

The police do have a duty to enforce the law - if you report a crime they have to make at least some sort of effort. It's true they have no duty to protect you from becoming a victim of crime in the first place, but after the fact they do have a duty to respond even if they can be incompetent.

you guys are all nuts (most of you)

if you can show that you we're fraudulently deprived of something of value of $5,000 (862 btc at mtgox current) dollars or more across state lines this is a federal felony.  As long as you can show that the object stolen has the above mentioned market value it is a felony.  The cops will not care about the details.  All they need to know is that the item stolen was of enough significant value that it is worth their time.

10 btc == a report with no results (don't bother calling the cops)
1000 btc == someone could go to jail for a good amount of time

Hope i'm not in the "most of you" category ;)

Bit of advice for everyone: government as an entity is made up of lots of people, many of whom aren't all that interested in some sort of grand conspiracy to protect state interests - most police officers from what i've seen care most about how soon they can get off duty while 1 or 2 rare ones actually have some ideological thinking about upholding the law etc. Same as any profession really.

Do you consider the person behind the till at mcdonalds to actually care about defending the interests of mcdonalds above all else?

Thank god my brain is safe, doesn't seem like a vital organ in your case.

You already have this.  In fact, if you think about it, you already have as much security with bitcoin as you choose to have.  The public keys that correspond to the bitcoin addresses are the passwords that can't be retrieved.

Well which is it? Do they have to enforce the law or just make an effort? Is standing up enough effort? Do they actually need to find a suspect? Think about it for 30 seconds? If they fail to meet this requirement you imagine then what happens? Do the police investigate the failure? Or try to investigate it at least?

P.S. Do I get my money back if they fail to deliver?

They have to at the very least make an effort - if they literally do absolutely nothing then the very same government that gives them their power is likely to be the one that takes it away from them unless there is EXTREME corruption - and that level of corruption is far more rare than paranoid libertarians imagine.

Ahh yes. When logic fails you need to seal the deal with an ad hominem attack. Bravo sir. You truly are a special one.

But you gotta admit, it was a pretty damn classic one ...  :)

Yeah, accept my apologies, that totally came out of nowhere.

Apology accepted.

He called you "retard"; you're entitled to make a witty riposte.

Yeah well, I still feel bad about picking on the socially challenged :D

Hmm yes I did do that. I also apologize. I sometimes fail to contain my frustration with oh so many irrational statements I often come across on teh internetz.

Private property is not something obvious and universal.

Are your organs private property ? You seem to imply so, but in most, if not all, countries you can't legally sell or rent them. Still private property ?

There are multiple theories of property, and multiple conceptions of it that vary vastly through time, culture and countries : human beings could at some point be owned as "private property", owning land means different things in the US, France and the UK etc.

So my point is that private property is imaginary in the way any mental construct is.

Just be nice to others, and whatever your views are, you'll have a good time here :)

If anybody hacked into your computer and stole something of great worth, the police and/or relevant authorities would definitely be interested in such a thing.

I don't want to further derail this thread so this will be my last reply on the topic of private property.

If you were trying to clarify where the concept of private property came from, you are right. It was conceptualized in our minds. But.. that doesn't make it an illusion but rather a concept and there's a big difference between the two, the main being one being a figment of an imagination and the other being a real thing in our reality.

Also a group of people not sharing the knowledge or respect of the same concept does not it make any less real. Even if a country outlaws the concept of private property through a decree it doesn't make the concept of private property any less real.

Also even if the understanding of the nature of this concept may vary from one group of people to another, and it does as you correctly pointed out, it again does not make it an illusion.

I suggest you watch this: John A. Allison, "Leadership and Values" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDAn51D_YxY) if you really want to understand where I'm coming from and where you might be making a mistake within your thought process.

just order T-shirt with "retard and proud" label  and start riding unicorns/dragons then, ignoring trolls/offenders.
note: neurons don't recover
/pop-corn

please accept this picture of a potato as a token of friendship
http://transitionculture.org/wp-content/uploads/potato.jpg

That's just insulting, not even roasted! Also a touch of sour cream and sprinkle of paprika would go a long way to proving the authenticity of your jesture :D

This is not true in the United States. The U.S. Supreme Court has said in numerous cases that police have no duty to provide service to anyone and therefore suffer no consequence for failure to do so.

Can you cite actual cases?
I'm deeply skeptical if you're essentially claiming that the police are not required to do anything at all. They may not do their job well (and often are incompetent - like in any profession), but you're claiming that they don't even have the job of law enforcement?

Also, even if you cite US case law, i'm in the UK ;)

As I said, there are numerous cases; a simple Google search turns up pages and pages of them, such as this list (http://www.endtimesreport.com/NO_AFFIRMATIVE_DUTY.htm) and this discussion (http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html).

The most infamous of these cases is Warren v. District of Columbia (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia).

garethnelsonuk they have to enforce laws, just not protect and serve the people. Don't mix up those two.

There are laws against rape, murder, theft, assault and various other crimes against individuals - i'd say enforcing those laws de facto protects people. Whether the police do their job well is up to debate, but what their job actually is isn't up to debate.

While they are required to enforce the laws, in general, there is no obligation to any particular individual.

Bottom line is this: They don't come and help you because you are in trouble they come and enforce laws against those who are breaking them. That's their directive. Do not confuse their directive with the consequence of them following their directive. You might say well they still helped the victim and I would agree accept that them following this directive often creates victims when they enforce laws that punish victimless crimes such as drug use. The police do not protect and serve the people, they protect and serve the state, period.

They also enforce bad laws, true - but the argument that you should not report crimes against yourself because the police would also be the ones to take action against you if you break a bad law is just silly. Taking advantage of them for handling crimes against yourself does not mean respecting laws you disagree with.

As a personal example:
I suffered an assault a while back - I pressed charges, the police were pretty useless at handling the case (they only bothered to do anything serious beyond filing a crime report after I got a journalist involved to give them negative PR). At the same time they didn't instantly find all the copyright infringement i'm guilty of even if they did fail a bit at handling the assault.

I was talking about their legal duties and not their actions or consequences of actions. Is it really so hard to distinguish between the two?