Beware, your WC GSA is VERY easy to steal.....
- Thread starter Dozer
- Start date
Ok we bought the bike and we can do with it what we like, but surely common sense and a passing acknowledgement of the fact that bikes do get stolen on a very regular basis demands that we take sensible precautions - I'll bet everyone is a little more careful not to leave their front doors unprotected. Anyone who leaves a bike unsecured has in part contributed to the loss should it be stolen ..... and I'm saying that as someone who until reading this thread has been far too reliant on the factory fitted steering lock.
If I walked by a bike that had a he keys in the ignition would I steal it ? No I'm not a thief, it's the bloody scum of society that's the problem, they are not dealt with appropriately by the law, it's as simple as that. Along with many other crimes. It's the law abiding people that suffer.
If I caught someone trying to steal my bike, they wouldn't think about stealing another one.
Terry
If I caught someone trying to steal my bike, they wouldn't think about stealing another one.
Terry
Two points I disagree on here.
1. There should be no 'risk'.
2. I don't consider it too good.
My bike lives in an alarmed garage with an Almax chain and a good ground anchor also disc lock.
If i wake up in the night to discover 3 big blokes and a van with tools trying to nick it I am going to call the rozzers and hope they get here in time.
AS much as I like to think that I am a hardened ex squaddie that will go out and give them a beating for their sins and keep my bike from their clutches, the reality is they may well be prepared to do more damage to me than I would to them, either in their need to get away or carry on with their crime.
A street theft of a bike is obviously a different thing but if a scrote or gang of scrotes wants it enough they will have it
If i wake up in the night to discover 3 big blokes and a van with tools trying to nick it I am going to call the rozzers and hope they get here in time.
AS much as I like to think that I am a hardened ex squaddie that will go out and give them a beating for their sins and keep my bike from their clutches, the reality is they may well be prepared to do more damage to me than I would to them, either in their need to get away or carry on with their crime.
A street theft of a bike is obviously a different thing but if a scrote or gang of scrotes wants it enough they will have it
You should become a magistrate the low life would love your ability to apportion blame on the victim.
I agree - in an ideal world we should be able to leave our possessions without fear of them being interfered with. However we all recognise that is not the case in reality and common sense precautions have to apply. Those that don't take steps to protect their bikes are potentially making themselves more likely to become victims. Can they be blamed for that? I think it's fair to say yes
The victim did take common sense precautions . He bought a bike with an onboard security system, he parked it in a visible location , deployed the standard security lock and removed the keys form the ignition. All common sense precautions so it is NOT fair to blame him for the theft. Could he have done more to prevent himself from being the victim rather than somebody else? The answer Is of course yes but how far should he have to go;
A disc lock? No you say because the bike can be lifted.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm . No you say because the bike can still be lifted and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm and a Thatcham approved chain . No you say because the bike can STILL be lifted and who notices an alarm .
A disc lock an alarm and a chain (both Thatcham) attached to post . No you say because who notices an alarm , the chain can be easily cut and cropped and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock, an alarm, a chain fixed to post AND a security guard riding pillion who can then stay with the bike? No you say , because the guard is not armed and the thieves will be .................
I mean , really how far does one have to go before you will say: Yep he is not to blame, he is the victim
Bollocks. A chain chained to somthing is standard. Your argument is flimsy. If the bike was chained he would be getting sympathy. A chain is the least basic requirement. Forget about the steering lock. This is wisdom for years and years. JJHThe victim did take common sense precautions . He bought a bike with an onboard security system, he parked it in a visible location , deployed the standard security lock and removed the keys form the ignition. All common sense precautions so it is NOT fair to blame him for the theft. Could he have done more to prevent himself from being the victim rather than somebody else? The answer Is of course yes but how far should he have to go;
A disc lock? No you say because the bike can be lifted.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm . No you say because the bike can still be lifted and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm and a Thatcham approved chain . No you say because the bike can STILL be lifted and who notices an alarm .
A disc lock an alarm and a chain (both Thatcham) attached to post . No you say because who notices an alarm , the chain can be easily cut and cropped and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock, an alarm, a chain fixed to post AND a security guard riding pillion who can then stay with the bike? No you say , because the guard is not armed and the thieves will be .................
I mean , really how far does one have to go before you will say: Yep he is not to blame, he is the victim
No he didn't.
He left it with just the shitey factory steering lock on.
Which we've all known since our very first days of riding to be completely useless.
Yep. For anyone with sense. To accept and trust as "security measures" (in an effectiveness sense, rather than in a label sense) anything other than securing a bike to something solid is gullible, naive, foolish, deluded, lazy, stupid, irrational, and oblivious to reality.
The risk of theft shouldn't exist. Of course it shouldn't. But it fucking does. So just accept that and cop on.
Which victim of bike theft is more deserving of sympathy - the canny lad who chains his bike to something, maybe has a discreet secondary switch wired in to allow the bike to start, is wary of where he parks, and accepts that if he's complacent his bike will be taken? Or the naive guy who trusts manufacturer's security devices, parks the bike unsecured in a theft-prone area, and spouts, "the manufacturer failed me, the police failed me, the system failed me"?
Two of the most fundamental elements of owning and riding a motorbike - whether we like it or not - are getting wet and theft. To enter bikerhood ignoring these elements is just stupid or naive. I guess Rukka, Klim, etc are cooler and look better than Almax and Abus, so the clothing never gets neglected...
When it rains, you wear waterproofs. Don't, and you'll get wet. Will you then blame god or the weatherman, or the climate in your country? You KNOW rain is wet. The onus is on YOU to take measures to stay dry.
When you park your bike, you lock it to something. Don't, and it'll get stolen. You KNOW bikes get stolen. The onus is on YOU to take measures to prevent that. At least until thieves no longer exist.
IMO, victims of bike theft are never "to blame" per se, but they absolutely are responsible for securing their own bike. If an owner believes that "securing their bike" involves employing no security measures other than the manufacturer's built-in devices (which to any thinking biker equates to ZERO security), and a notion that thieves shouldn't steal bikes so they won’t, then the level of responsibility for his bike's theft is much higher.
Steptoe and others have said it elsewhere, and I agree - even the best chain is really no more than a deterrent. Each device or measure is no more than a deterrent. But if my bike has two chains, two ground anchors, a U-lock, a disc lock, the horn button taped on, a basic movement alarm, has a cover over it, is parked in plain sight under good street-lighting in a busy area, and has a visible CCTV camera aimed at it, then I'd have some confidence that a thief will be sufficiently deterred to look instead to the bike with nothing more than a steering lock and immobiliser.
But who wants to "go to all that trouble"? It's really only after having a bike stolen, and experiencing all the trouble that that causes, that going to "all that trouble" to prevent your bike being stolen is actually worth it and preferable.
... So what's your view on ladies wearing attractive clothing, lip stick maybe even a wonder bra. Should they get harassed are you saying they should carry some of the blame.
An ignition and steering lock is fair security to prevent casuall theft to suggest people need to take steps and responsibilities for those intent on stealing things is ridiculous. I often use my GS for local errands do you really think every time I stop I should get a chain and padlock out?
For some biking is a means of transport, you're sounding like someone who has one for special occasions that you plan meticulously - next you'll be suggesting ATGATT should be law
Yes...I at least think you should.
Maybe you live in a smashey nicey place where everybody knows everybody else and all is sweetness and light and you all think nothing's ever going to be tampered with or nicked.
Much like how MMC was shocked and stunned seeing me produce two locks for my bike when I stayed at his place in the Cotswolds....when his back garden gate and kitchen door were left unlocked.
Lovely and sweet as it may seem to live like that...it isn't the real world and it isn't always just smashey nicey people to be found in these places.
Not a bad idea in my book.
At the very least those injured when not wearing ATGATT should be wholly financially responsible for their treatment.
You're turning into a grumpy old fecker... I've just returned home on the bike I was wearing shorts, I'd popped down the stables to roll the sand school. It's about 1 mile away I've cycled down there faster in shorts and a tee shirt before, I can tell you I'm safer on my GSA in shorts doing 30 mph than I am on a pushbike.
The victim did take common sense precautions . He bought a bike with an onboard security system, he parked it in a visible location , deployed the standard security lock and removed the keys form the ignition. All common sense precautions so it is NOT fair to blame him for the theft. Could he have done more to prevent himself from being the victim rather than somebody else? The answer Is of course yes but how far should he have to go;
A disc lock? No you say because the bike can be lifted.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm . No you say because the bike can still be lifted and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock and a Thatcham approved alarm and a Thatcham approved chain . No you say because the bike can STILL be lifted and who notices an alarm .
A disc lock an alarm and a chain (both Thatcham) attached to post . No you say because who notices an alarm , the chain can be easily cut and cropped and who notices an alarm.
A disc lock, an alarm, a chain fixed to post AND a security guard riding pillion who can then stay with the bike? No you say , because the guard is not armed and the thieves will be .................
I mean , really how far does one have to go before you will say: Yep he is not to blame, he is the victim
Summed up perfectly in my opinion. I will however buy additional security for my new bike, when it bloody arrives
BUT I pay for insurance and in the event of some scumbag nicking it, despite my best endeavours to avoid it, then I have to rely on that as the ultimate security device, if they pay out of course !!!!
If the bike was chained he would be getting sympathy.
From 50% on here probably, but the other 50% would be arguing that the chain was not as good as this one, no that one, or this one
From 50% on here probably, but the other 50% would be arguing that the chain was not as good as this one, no that one, or this one
Well I along with a few others on here park my bike in Sunny Whitechapel, in fact I have for the last 18 years. With nothing more than a disc lock. Darned if I'm going to change that. I just work on the principal, that if they want to take it they sure as hell will no matter what additional precautions you take.
Didn't a fella a few months back have his bike pinched from a secure swipe card access underground car park, with two or three chains and a disc lock. None of it helped him, once someone had decided they were going to pinch it.
Didn't a fella a few months back have his bike pinched from a secure swipe card access underground car park, with two or three chains and a disc lock. None of it helped him, once someone had decided they were going to pinch it.
Not strictly true though as it was also alarmed and immobilised. These are exactly the same precautions I have with my car, albeit it is more difficult to lift the car.
...what's of more interested to me is password security, it's clear someone is out to damage Tarka's free and easy live and let live reputation, they've somehow got hold off his UKGSer password and are posting opinions that would have those that don't know him better think that he's some beige wearing, grey out looking, energy draining, kill joy.
Steering locks aren't fair security. They never have been.
Accepting responsibility for taking measures to secure your own bike hardly constitutes or equates to taking responsibility for those intent on stealing it?
Effective security (which a steering lock and "immobiliser" are not) - for any bike, but particularly a £15,000 bike parked in a known theft area - should be considered as fundamental an element of biking as a helmet.
The smashey and nicey places are where the nice bikes are - the fuckers know where the nice bikes are, and they'll happily go there to get them.
I really hope that that continues to work out for you. Seems a lot like tempting fate to me.
I suspect that unlucky fella was just that - unlucky. The thieves presumably had the freedom to operate unhindered long enough to beat all his security measures. TBH, I have more sympathy for him than OP's mate (who I do actually have sympathy for) - he at least did a lot more to deter the thieves, and was stung despite his efforts. OP's mate's absence of effort (or his naive (IMO) presumption regarding the effectiveness of BMW's built-in devices) was arguably effectively contributory to the ease with which his bike was stolen.
Nope: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/immobilise - "to make immobile or immovable; fix in place".
Deffo - live & let live. A lad's approach and attitude to his own bike's security are his own business.
But if lads do decide to use minimal or token security measures when parking their £15,000 bikes in known theft areas, then when it gets stolen, at least own up and admit YOU could/should have done more, and don't try to divert/place all the blame and responsibility elsewhere.
Concerned about coming across as a dick here with all my pro-proper security posts on this thread, but again - I've been there; having a bike stolen sucks hairy festering leper balls.
