MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT A STUDY OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY SOCIETY. Lt. Chet Merta / Dearborn Police Department Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, Michigan

Transcription

1 MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT A STUDY OF CONTRIBUTIONS BY SOCIETY Lt. Chet Merta / Dearborn Police Department Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, Michigan An applied research project submitted to the Department of Interdisciplinary Technology as part of the School of Police Staff and Command Program August 19 th, 2004

2 2 ABSTRACT This research project was an attempt to identify the problems law enforcement has faced in the past twenty years and what has been done, particularly from the automobile companies, to prevent the crime of motor vehicle theft. After researching government motor vehicle theft statistics from different levels, be it local, state or national, patterns were established to see if there was an increase or a decrease in motor vehicle theft. Personally, the Dearborn Police Department was very interested in preventing motor vehicle theft in Much so, that the department formed an auto theft unit, which at one time, manned around 20 sworn officers which comprised of approximately 10% of the force. As motor vehicle theft decreased, the unit eventually became smaller, and eventually disbanded. Research was then looked at the type of automobiles that were being stolen and what was being done to prevent certain makes and models from being stolen. And since at first that it did not appear that the automobile companies were doing enough, what was the government, law enforcement and other companies doing to prevent motor vehicle theft? After seeing programs enacted by the federal government, like the Watch Your Car Program, companies like LOJACK and The Club came along as a reaction to the rise of motor vehicle theft. Finally, in the early 1990 s, General Motors reacted by placing computer chip keys and Onstar in many of their vehicles. Ford Motor Company soon followed with their preventative security devices. The Chrysler Corporation still has a way to go. From doing personal interviews with experienced personnel at area

3 3 dealerships, I was able to get a first hand look at what the auto companies have done in recent years to react to motor vehicle theft. From looking at recent statistics, interviews and investigative news reports, results did show why in the last few years, the vehicle of choice by car thieves because of the ease of stealing same, is Chrysler Products. Though automobile companies are making great progress in preventing cars from being stolen, law enforcement must become more proactive in preventing motor vehicle theft presently and in the future.

4 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract.Page 2 Table of Contents..Page 4 Introduction...Page 5 Background and Significance...Page 6 Literature Review Page 22 Methodology / Procedures...Page 25 Results. Page 27 Discussion / Conclusion...Page 30 Recommendations Page 31 References Page 34 Appendix A..Page 36 Appendix B..Page 37

5 5 INTRODUCTION The past twenty years has seen many changes in the what type of automobiles are stolen in the United States, how automobiles are being stolen and what type of precautions and preventative measures the automobile companies and other companies have come up with to deter automobile theft. I was hired by the Dearborn Police Department in March of 1983 and became a sworn officer in April of 1984 and have watched automobile theft become a major interest in our department where we concentrated and were focused on preventing vehicles being stolen in our city and apprehending auto thieves. In the mid 1980 s, the vehicle of choice for auto thieves appeared to be General Motors products like the Oldsmobile Cutlass, Buick Regal and Grand National, Pontiac Grand Prix and Chevrolet Monte Carlo. This is not to say that Ford Mustang s, F150 s, and Chrylser Labaron s were not also stolen at a high rate also. During my career as a police officer, I have seen vehicles being stolen at an alarming rate by thieves stealing these vehicles in what most people would expect by punching the lock on the door or breaking out a window, then peeling the steering column or punching the ignition mechanism out and using a screwdriver to start the vehicle. Some automobile companies have come along way in taking preventative measures by installing alarm systems, coded chip keys and placing keyless pads on their doors to gain entry to a vehicle. Other companies seem to have not done enough to combat automobile theft and appear to have not progressed in the past twenty years. Because automobile companies in the 1980 s were not progressing enough to meet the demands of auto theft, many companies came out with various devices to

6 6 prevent a vehicle from being stolen. Prevention devices like The Club and LOJACK came out on the market and became successful as an alternative to automobile theft prevention. In some ways, these alternatives has put pressure on automobile companies to come up with their own preventative measures, though it seems that the makers of automobiles are not doing enough in the prevention of automobile theft. These companies seemed to be pressured by the government and the public to come up with higher safety standards, environmental issues and fuel consumption, especially from the recent rise in crude oil. This research paper will look at the problem of automobile theft in our country and closer to home in the past twenty years, determining what preventative measures the automobile companies have taken, if they have done enough and what they could do to minimize thefts abroad. It will also touch on what law enforcement can do to work with the general public on preventing auto theft. BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE Twenty years ago, it appeared automobile theft was a very prevalent crime in American society. Around the United States and here in the Detroit area, auto theft seemed to be a major concern. It was a given that somebody you knew or even yourself were a victim of auto theft. I joined the Dearborn Police Department in 1983 and my first police field report I remember writing was a stolen vehicle report. Since that time, I have written stolen vehicle theft reports that number in the hundreds and was fortunate enough to be an auto theft investigator from 1999 through The theft of motor vehicles always intrigued me. I was amazed how a car thief could get into a locked car door and peel a steering

7 7 column or punch an ignition, usually in less than a minute. I often wondered what preventative measures the automobile companies were taking to deter or at least curb vehicles from being stolen from their respective corporations. Since I was working in the home town of Henry Ford, I was not aware what the foreign automobile companies were doing as much as I was interested in The Big Three. When working the dayshift back in the 1980 s, I remember either taking or hearing dispatch giving out a stolen car report run several times each morning, usually in the neighborhoods that border the city of Detroit. I also remember making several recoveries of stolen vehicles, mostly in the dumping grounds, like along railroad tracks, in desolate fields and in seldom-used alleys. Many of these stolen vehicle reports and recoveries were General Motors and Ford products with every so often a Chrysler product being stolen. It appeared that the car thieves were attracted to the more expensive vehicles and in general, Fords, Buicks, Cadillac s and Oldsmobile s were more elite and expensive than a Chrysler or a Plymouth. It also appeared that everything being equal, a thief is going to steal a vehicle that they can get more for parts or sold to be re-tagged. And it appeared that the automobile companies were not doing much, if anything, to stop their vehicles from being stolen. First, looking at the City of Dearborn, it appears that recently, automobile theft has not been a problem and it does not seem to be a priority to our department s administration as it once was in the past. In 1985, the Dearborn Police Department instituted an Auto Theft Unit which comprised of two detective sergeants, three patrol sergeants and fifteen officers transferred from the Patrol Division whose duties were to

8 8 work exclusively surveillance on auto theft with support officers in uniform to act primarily as back up, stopping prospective stolen vehicles and possible re-tags. These uniform officers did not handle any runs or work any traffic duty. The Dearborn Police Department s administration decided to start this task force because of the alarming amount of vehicles being stolen from our city. In 1985, the entire Dearborn Police Department staffed 197 sworn officers (Dearborn P.D. Annual Report. 1985) and twenty of these officers worked just on auto theft. This comprises of just over 10 % of the department, which was by far, the largest specialized unit at the time. Compare that unit s number to that of 2003, where the Dearborn Police Department did not have an auto theft unit or even a detective primarily working on auto theft cases. In the mid 1980 s, I was fortunate to be temporarily assigned to this unit, even though it was only for a brief period of time. I was also the last detective / sergeant to be assigned in the Investigative Division to auto theft in 2002, before it was disbanded by our department. The general consensus was that investigations of computer related theft and domestic violence were of a priority and units were formed regarding these types of crimes. I first did research on if there was a downward trend in stolen vehicles in Dearborn to justify the disbanding of the auto theft unit. I wanted to see if there was a downward trend annually of stolen vehicles in Dearborn during the past twenty years and could this possibly correlate with the auto companies or other auto theft prevention devices putting out a better effort of preventing vehicles from being stolen. The city of Dearborn could be looked by many as your average, suburban community with just less than a population of 100,000 people. Taking in account that it

9 9 is one of the larger cities in Michigan, Dearborn consistently ranked third behind Detroit and Flint in the state from 1997 through 2001 in motor vehicle thefts. (Michigan Automobile Theft Prevention Authority, 2002) Research was done on statistics of the past twenty years from Dearborn Police Department s annual reports. (Dearborn P.D. Annual Report, ) From 1983 to 1984, motor vehicle theft rose from just over 1200 stolen vehicles to over 1600 vehicles. At this time, the Dearborn Police Department realized that there was a problem and an auto theft unit was instituted. The trend of 1400 to 1600 motor vehicles being reported stolen from Dearborn continued through 1992 where the thefts began to decrease to around 1200 motor vehicle thefts per year except for 1997 where it drastically rose back to 1600 motor vehicles stolen. The statistics show that the numbers came back down to around 1200 motor vehicle thefts per year and has continued around that number. (see Appendix A / Dearborn P.D. Annual Report ) With an average of a 25% decrease in motor vehicle thefts, the Dearborn Police Department has concentrated their efforts on other crimes as previously noted. Is the decrease in thefts because of good police work, efforts by auto companies to install security devices or maybe other companies capitalizing on auto theft prevention devices to deter auto theft? Nationally, it should be noted on what type of trend occurred in regards to motor vehicle theft. I researched motor vehicle theft in past years by looking at statistics through the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report and National Crime Information Center. The statistics are intriguing and in some similarities follow the Dearborn Police Department annual statistics.

10 10 Nationally, statistics attained from the National Crime Information Center, the top ten motor vehicles thefts for 2002 are as follows: (National Crime Information Center, 2002) 1.) 1989 Toyota Camry 2.) 1994 Honda Accord 3.) 2000 Honda Civic 4.) 1992 Chevrolet Full Size C/K Pickup 5.) 1997 Full Size Pickup (150/250/350) 6.) 1993 Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee 7.) 1986 Oldsmobile Cutlass/Supreme/Ciera 8.) 1994 Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan 9.) 1996 Ford Taurus 10.) 2001 Toyota Corolla These figures are basically consistent in regards to the same type of make and model in the past five previous years. The top three vehicles are foreign car makers and then listed are pickup trucks, an S.U.V., a mid-1980 s General Motors product, a popular mini-van and the Ford Taurus, a popular sedan. Except for the 2000 Honda Civic and the 2001 Toyota Corolla, most of the motor vehicles listed are from the mid to late 1980 s through mid 1990 s vintage. As we see from the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report, as a whole, motor vehicle theft take a decline in the mid-1990 s. Research was attainable from the Uniform Crime Report for the past ten years, though reported motor vehicle theft statistics went back since Back in 1983, just over 1,000,000 (1,007,933) motor vehicles were reported stolen in the United States. By

11 , that figure went up approximately 250,000 to 1,246,096. (F.B.I Uniform Crime Report, ) In between this time, just as the statistics went up and back down in Dearborn, the reported motor vehicle thefts followed this trend nationally also. The low figure was in 1983 and the high figure was 1,661,738 in After 1991, the figure did drop several thousand thefts per year for nine years straight, until the figure went up for two years straight in 2001 and (see Appendix B / F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report ) It should also be noted that the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report lists every year that anywhere from 58 % to 67 % were committed by persons under the age of 21 years of age. (F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report, ) This figure shows that arrested parties are younger persons responsible for stealing motor vehicles and preventative measures should be aimed primarily at this age group. Some type of deterrent on the column, ignition, door lock or an alarm would focus on stopping the car thieves in this age group. Do these figures mean that the automobile companies were finally taking preventative measures on their vehicles to stop thieves from stealing their cars? Were other companies like LOJACK and The Club helping these figures go down, even if it was just a very small part of the answer to motor vehicle theft? Maybe even other factors, like, education to the general public reminding people to park in well-lighted lots, not leaving running vehicles unattended and simply locking your car factored in on the several years of decreasing motor vehicle theft statistics. I personally remember a public service announcement commercial approximately fifteen to twenty years ago showing a scenario of a car being stolen by a young car thief and at the end of the ad, a voice stating, Lock your car. Take your keys. This commercial was shown thousands of

12 12 times in a several year period and this ad also could have had an effect on motor vehicle theft during that decrease. In 1984, the Motor Vehicle Theft Enforcement Act attempted to improve law enforcement s ability to stop car thieves. (F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin, April 2000) The 1984 law directed the Department of Transportation to develop a vehicle prevention standard, which required automobile manufacturers to affix or inscribe an identifying number or symbol onto parts of passenger cars that the D.O.T. deemed to be a high theft risk. This appeared like a good idea, but many labels were easily removable and without proper training and exemptions to the law, many felt that these factors hindered the programs effectiveness. Still, this act was one step in the fight against motor vehicle theft. In 1994, the National Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act was authorized by the U.S. Attorney General to develop, in cooperation with the states, a national voluntary motor vehicle theft prevention program. (U.S. Dept. of Justice, July 2000) This Watch Your Car Program was designed as a cooperative initiative among states, local governments, and the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The program provided decals for motor vehicle owners to voluntarily display on their vehicles to alert police that their vehicle is not normally driven between the hours of 1 a.m. and 5 a.m.. Motor vehicles owners may also choose to display another decal to signify that their vehicle is not normally driven across international borders or in the area of ports of entry. The purpose of this program was that many auto thefts are committed during the early morning hours when the owners are asleep and unaware that their vehicles have been stolen. In many instances, the stolen car can be driven to a chop shop or across state lines before the

13 13 owner awakens to discover the theft. The purpose was to focus the attention of law enforcement personnel on vehicles that are not routinely driven during the early morning hours or near international borders. The decal enables proactive investigation of a theft of a motor vehicle before a stolen vehicle report is filed. In addition, states enrolled in the Watch Your Car Program maintain a database that is instantly accessible to law enforcement officers at all times and contains the names of the owner and other authorized drivers and the owner s work, home, pager and cell phone numbers. This enables the dispatcher to contact the owner to determine if the driver has the owner s permission. The owner signs a consent form and obtains decals authorizing law enforcement officers to stop their cars if it is being operated during the two discussed conditions. These decals are very distinct as it shows an outline of an automobile with two eyes as wheels. The Michigan State Police was contacted and Dan Wilbert of MSP LEIN said as of June 16 th, 2004, Michigan, Illinois and New York are three of the leading states that still use this program as a way of preventing auto theft. No facts or figures were available to see how successful this program has been in the past ten years. It appeared by the mid to late 1980 s, automobile companies were not doing enough to combat motor vehicle theft. As a police officer, I could see that it was obvious that Ford, General Motors and Chrysler were not making their columns or ignitions antitheft proof. During this period, columns could be peeled easily by prying away the plastic. Ignitions did not even need a slam puller to take out an ignition. All that was needed was a screwdriver and maybe a hammer if the thief could not jam the screwdriver in far enough to turn and crank the ignition. Since it appeared that the Big Three were not giving much effort into making their cars more theft proof, other independent

14 14 companies developed devices to help curb motor vehicle theft and capitalize on a much needed area. Two companies who capitalized on motor vehicle theft prevention in the late 1980 s were LOJACK and The Club. The makers of these products saw an opportunity to attempt satisfy the demand for a product that the consumer wanted in which the automobile companies were not giving. Some type of product needed to be placed on the market to appease the consumer who was frustrated by the disinterested automobile companies. Now, there were many products and gimmicks put out on the market at that time to lure the consumer into believing that their product, either because of price or reliability was the best product on the market to prevent their car from being stolen. But LOJACK and The Club were probably, by far, during that time period of being an alternative way of preventing automobile theft. LOJACK Corporation has been used in the United States by Federal, State and local agencies for almost twenty years. LOJACK has maintained a 90 % recovery rate during the seventeen years it has been available to the consumer. Globally, more than 100,000 vehicles worth over $2 billion have been recovered using LOJACK technology. (LOJACK, 2003) The patented LOJACK stolen vehicle recovery system includes a small radio frequency transceiver that is hidden in up to twenty places in the vehicle at the time of installation. When the vehicle theft is reported to the police, the unit is automatically activated, which causes silent radio signals to be emitted from the transceiver. Each LOJACK System has a unique code that is tied into the Vehicle Identification Number. When a theft is reported to the police, a routine entry into the state police crime computer results in a match of the LOJACK System s unique code

15 15 against the state Vehicle Identification Number database. This automatically activates the LOJACK System in the stolen car which emits an inaudible signal. Law enforcement authorities who are equipped with LOJACK tracking system in their patrol car are able to follow the signal to locate and recover the stolen vehicle. LOJACK offers a money back guarantee and many motor vehicle insurance companies like CNA, Farmer s Insurance and others offer discounts for insurer s who install LOJACK in their vehicles. Another popular, aftermarket anti theft device is The Club. Several other companies have their own versions of this device but The Club is the one that most people are aware of when referring to a steering wheel security device. James E. Winner Jr. began marketing The Club after his Cadillac was stolen despite its factory installed alarm. (Winner, J., 2002) Winner was an Army veteran and he remembered his tour of duty in Korea and how he secured his vehicle s steering wheel with a chain to prevent a theft. Winner s concept was if you cannot steer it, you cannot steal it. Winner International was formed and incorporated in1986. This period of time we saw how motor vehicle took a rise nationally. The Club is very basic and simple innovation and is easy to install on a steering wheel. Unfortunately, car thieves have found ways to overcome The Club in the past by sawing the steering wheel if it is rubber or plastic and pulling the U bracket away from the steering wheel. This extra step takes a little extra time but if the thief wants the vehicle bad enough, he will go to extreme measures to steal the vehicle. Different renditions of The Club have been put on the market to overcome sawing the steering wheel, like locking onto the column to deter the car thief even more. Winner International claims to work with law enforcement to promote community awareness in reducing the nation s automobile theft problem.

16 16 Researching automobile companies and their anti - theft preventative measures they have taken in the past was most productive by responding to dealerships. At the dealerships, interviews were conducted with salespersons and service managers to get a first hand look at how far the automobile companies have come along in the past fifteen to twenty years. Kevin Will, a salesperson at Les Stanford Chevrolet in Dearborn, Michigan was interviewed on what General Motors has placed on the market in regards to preventative anti theft measures to their vehicles. Will explained that General Motors has gone to great extent to make their vehicles more difficult to steal since the 1980 s when a car thief could unlock a door and crack a steering column on most of their models within a minute, and starting the vehicle by just pulling up on a lever located on the left side of the column. Will has worked for G.M. dealerships for over twenty years and remembers when this method was very common in stealing G.M. vehicles like Cutlasses, Grand Prix and Monte Carlo s. The first anti theft device General Motors came out with was the computer chip key in The computer chip key began to be installed on the Corvette for obvious reasons and was installed on other higher end S.U.V s and luxury cars later. Today, almost every model is installed with a computer chip key except for the lower end models like the Cavalier and base model Malibu. Chevrolet has even gone a step further with their mini van, the Venture. The Venture s computer chip in the key is not exposed so it cannot be tampered with by a prospective thief. General Motors chip keys are unique in that if the wrong key is placed in the ignition and turned, the computer system in the vehicle is shut down for fifteen minutes and the vehicle cannot be restarted,

17 17 even with the correct ignition key. Of course, most models come with remote key pads to lock or unlock the vehicle. Ignitions have also been placed in the dashboard on the more prestigious models like the Corvette, Monte Carlo and Impala to prevent tampering with same. Instead of a car thief peeling a steering column, he would have to take apart the entire dashboard to tamper with the ignition. Another concept that General Motors has come up with is to stop installing a door lock on the passenger side of most vehicles. This concept has been implemented on most vehicles in the past three years to prevent thieves from punching out the door lock which when parked in the street, is usually on the curb side where a thief is most likely to work on a door. The passenger door lock is seldom used now that many models have remote pads and it saves the company several dollars during manufacturing from installing the lock. Many General Motors vehicles and other makes are installed with Onstar. Onstar has several different features, yet, one of the more important features is when a vehicle is stolen that is equipped with Onstar, an Onstar advisor can track the vehicle and will help the police determine its whereabouts. (Onstar, 2004) Onstar has been around since 1996 and has recovered thousands of vehicles for owners of stolen vehicles. Onstar works as the same concept as LOJACK with a hidden tracking device installed n the vehicle to assist law enforcement in recovering the stolen vehicle. Like LOJACK, Onstar charges a monthly service fee for use of its product. At the dealership, the business has taken precautions on having their inventory stolen. Each key has a non removable strip. In the past, prospective buyers would

18 18 come into the showroom for a test drive. After showing fake credentials, they would come back into the showroom, with a switched key on the tag. Unknown to the salesperson, the key was placed back onto the board. The thief would then come back after hours to steal the car. Now, the key is identified by the non removable strip. Finally, most General Motors dealerships are set up with a computer provided by Wilson Technologies. A prospective buyer s magnetic driver s license is slid through the computer like a credit card. Within seconds, results are revealed on the buyer to show if it is a fake identification, if he or she have been in prior fraudulent activity or any other type of criminal activity. Identity theft is one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States, with an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 victims per year. Within the auto industry, the Federal Trade Commission and the Social Security Administration received about 1,700 complaints in 2001 where identity theft victims learned that a car loan or lease was taken in their name, without their knowledge. (Henry, 2002) Needless to say, this computer by Wilson Technologies is a major step in combating identity theft. Paul Anderson, a salesperson at Village Ford in Dearborn, Michigan was interviewed regarding preventative security devices installed on Ford vehicles. Combination codes to unlock doors have been an option on Ford vehicles for several years. On the driver s and passenger doors are buttons numbered one through six. The owner has to punch in a code before opening the door and entering the vehicle. This has been an option for many years on the more luxurious models. Like General Motors, in 1996, Ford integrated a Passive Anti Theft System (PATS) which uses a special ignition key with a miniature transponder containing an antenna and integrated circuit in the key handle. It uses radio frequencies for

19 19 communication between the key and the car. When the key is placed in the ignition key slot and the cylinder is rotated to the on position, RF signals are sent from an antenna ring in the ignition switch to the transponder in the key. The transmitted signal includes power to operate the IC in the key so the transponder can transmit its code back to the antenna ring. A code, which is previously stored, sends signals through the vehicle s multiplex wiring system which allows the engine to start. If a bad key is used, the engine will shut down electronically. Should an encoded key be lost, uncoded keys can be encoded at Ford dealerships. (Siuru, B., April 1996) Ford also has not been installing door locks on the passenger side of most vehicles for the same reason G.M. has been discontinuing the passenger door lock on their vehicles. Anderson informed me that in the past ten years, door lock buttons have been placed on the inside door panel of most models instead of on the top of the door panel to deter thieves from opening door locks with a coat hanger device. Also, many of the S.U.V. s like the Expedition, have a metal plate cover above the lock to prevent slimjimming. Most vehicles have flexible cables connecting the door lock to door lock button instead of rods, like in the past, to make it more difficult to slimjim. Ford dealerships push to install extensive alarms on their vehicles and will pick up part of the cost at time of sale. Like the other automakers, Ford has replaced their alarms from a siren to a beeping horn. Most models come with remote key fobs. Finally, Ford has placed a tailgate lock on all of their trucks to deter thefts from the payload area. Finally, Jimmy Kinsler, a salesperson at Westborn Chrysler in Dearborn, Michigan was interviewed. Kinsler said that currently 90 % of their current models have Chrysler s chip key installed in their vehicles. Unlike General Motors and Ford Motor

20 20 Company who have been using some sort of computer chip key for the past ten to fifteen years on many of their models, Chrysler has only began to install a computer chip in their ignition key for the past three to five years on many of their models. This is maybe why we still see late model Chrysler products very popular with car thieves. Kinsler said that Chrysler products door locks still have not been perfected. When vehicles come for repairs to their service department, car thieves gain entry by popping a very small hole underneath the door lock. The hole is so small, that the average person may not see it at first. The thief jimmies the door lock open and proceeds in the vehicle where the ignition cylinder is pulled out and a screwdriver is inserted and twisted to start the engine. Kinsler said that many vehicles still come into the service department needing this repaired. Chrysler products like the Jeep Liberty, Wrangler, Chrysler Sebring 300 M and PT Cruiser still have a chip key as an option. Kinsler further said that the 300M and Crossfire are the only models that have the ignition installed in the dash. Car alarms with remote key fobs are an option on most vehicles. Chrysler does not have their own vehicle tracking system like General Motors, but their dealership pushes prospective buyers to install LOJACK through their dealership. Which brings us to a recent Fox 2 News problem solver report by Scott Lewis. The report, which was aired February 23 rd, 2004, touched on the topic of why Chrysler products were the easiest vehicles to steal. (Lewis, S., February 24 th, 2004) Lewis did a segment where a 13 year old boy had stolen a Jeep and had killed another woman driver in Detroit. He was so short, he needed a child s booster chair to drive the Jeep. These youths only need a brick and a screwdriver to steal a Chrysler product and it is usually

21 21 just for transportation. A Detroit P.D. surveillance unit videotaped a youth stealing an Intrepid in only 43 seconds. Lewis stated that any Chrysler product without a security system is fair game. He had shown a recent list of the ten most stolen vehicles in Michigan and eight out of ten are Chrysler products. The list of vehicles are as follows: 1.) 2000 Jeep Cherokee 2.) 2000 Dodge Intrepid 3.) 2002 Dodge Status 4.) 2002 Chrysler Sebring 5.) 1999 Dodge Intrepid 6.) 2002 Pontiac Grand Am 7.) 2001 Dodge Neon 8.) 1994 Plymouth Voyager 9.) 2001 Dodge Status 10.) 1989 Chevrolet Caprice Just recently, a company called Steadfast Armored Ignitions came out with a product that is a metal collar which is placed around the current Chrysler ignition so a car thief cannot pop the cylinder out of the steering column. This item cost around $90. Chrysler told Scott Lewis that by 2005, every model will have a computer chip key. Currently, it is only an option, while on most G.M. and Ford models it is standard.

22 22 LITERATURE REVIEW My findings began where I felt information would be relevant by researching locally from annual reports of the Dearborn Police Department. Twenty years of data would set the tone of an average mid level police department with approximately two hundred sworn police officers. Also, statistics from the Dearborn Police Department s Annual Report reflect suburban life where most people live, travel through and work. Dearborn is not a city like Detroit where there is a shortage on manpower, yet, it is not a rural suburb where motor vehicle theft seldom occurs. Research began in a city that that is most familiar and where motor vehicle theft has definitely been a problem for many years. Through the state, research was noted for some type of comparison and to obviously show that there is a similar trend and motor vehicle theft is a problem that the state of Michigan is faced with. These statistics were obtained from the Michigan Automobile Theft Prevention Authority (2002). This entity releases annual reports on automobile theft, including statistics from the last ten years, grants that were awarded to law enforcement agencies and various task force highlights. Again, also noted, the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report statistics from the last twenty years show a consistency of motor vehicle theft and a trend that coincides with the Dearborn Police annual report. The pattern shows an upward trend in the mid 1980 s and a decline in the 1990 s. The trend has a slight upward effect during the past few years. The Uniform Crime Reports also show statistics of the most popular stolen vehicles, which reveals a different list than the most popular stolen vehicles in Michigan,

23 23 which is revealed later in a Channel # 2 problem solver report done by reporter, Scott Lewis. After looking at motor vehicle theft statistics from the last twenty years locally and nationally, patterns were seen how thefts decreased through the 1990 s after a high in the late 1980 s. Research was looked at first what the government contributed to preventing auto theft, then independent companies other than the automobile companies contribution to the prevention to auto theft and finally what the automobile companies have contributed in the last twenty years. Most of us remember the public service ad of Lock your car, take your keys which reminded the public of always being cognizant of where someone parks their car and making it secure before leaving it. In 1984, the Motor Vehicle Theft Enforcement Act attempted to improve law enforcement s ability to stop car thieves. F.B.I. Law Enforcement Bulletin in April, 2000, reported that this prevention standard which had been in effect for sixteen years, was an attempt to curb auto theft by the government. Directed by the Department of Transportation, this act required automobile manufacturers to affix or inscribed parts of passenger cars that the D.O.T. determined to be high risk. This article goes in depth of the pros and cons of labeling high risk automobile parts. After the 1984 Motor Vehicle Law Enforcement Act was an attempt to force automobile companies to curb thefts in this country, ten years later, the government took another angle and attempted to get the consumer involved in preventing motor vehicle theft. An article from the Bureau of Justice goes in detail of the National Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Act of This act, called the Watch Your Car Program,

24 24 authorized the Attorney General, with cooperation of the states and the federal government, to provide decals to automobile owners to voluntarily display the decals on their cars. These decals alert police that the owners do not normally drive during the hours of 1 A.M. and 5 A.M., nor, do they drive across international borders or ports of entry. Again, the Bureau of Justice goes in great depth on how this program works. Independent companies not affiliated with the automobile companies like LOJACK, The Club and Onstar have had an impact on motor vehicle theft in the past twenty years and inquiries were done on their websites. Obviously, these companies are going to attempt to sell their products by presenting statistics in a positive manner. Though, information given in the Bureau of Justice Fact Sheet about the Watch Your Car Program, the government does mention how owners can make use of these aftermarket products which can deter car thieves and discusses these types of products in a positive manner. Not much information was given on the automobile companies websites regarding preventative security measures that are installed on their current models as well as models in past years. Interviews were conducted locally at three dealerships, Les Stanford Chevrolet, Village Ford and Westborn Chrysler. These interviews were done with experienced salespersons who have been in their profession for at least fifteen years. These three salespersons were very knowledgeable in their auto companies security systems. They also pointed out other preventative measures that their companies have taken in which the average person takes for granted. These three interviews looked at a different perspective and a more in depth look at what the auto companies have done to prevent motor vehicle theft.

25 25 Finally, the Channel # 2, problem solver report conducted by Scott Lewis critiques Chrysler Corporation on how simple and quick it still is in the year 2004 to steal a car. Lewis, who is a very critical reporter, is not easy on Chrysler and brings out several important points on how the auto company is still behind the times compared to the other companies. METHODOLOGY / PROCEDURES To determine first on what automobile companies have done in the past twenty years to prevent motor vehicle theft, statistics and information was needed to see if there was actually a significant theft problem and if there were any patterns to see if motor vehicle theft has lessened or has gotten worse. Statistics were researched locally from Dearborn Police Department s Annual Report from the past twenty years. This research found that motor vehicle theft skyrocketed in the mid s, then came down in the 1990 s and started to climb into the new millennium. Statistics were also researched nationally through the F.B.I. Uniform Crime Report which serves as the most accurate, compiled research in the U.S.. These statistics were comparable to the local statistics. This research can be looked into by other area police departments who may also find there results to be similar. Next, the general consensus in our country during the 1980 s was that the auto companies were not doing enough to prevent their vehicles from being stolen so companies like, LOJACK, The Club and Onstar came along as devices to prevent vehicles from being stolen. The intentions of these products were for the good of the automobile owner but also to make a profit in a demanding market. These aftermarket companies all mention at one time or another how they work with law enforcement to

26 26 prevent auto theft. Every department out there with any type of an auto theft problem has dealt with these products, usually in a positive manner, but, occasionally in a negative way. LOJACK and Onstar sometimes are not as reliable as many perceive. More research was done on what the government has done to prevent motor vehicle theft in the past twenty years. Since it did not appear in the 1980 s that the auto companies were contributing to motor vehicle theft, the federal government came up with at least two acts to attempt to curb the problem. Again, these acts, the 1984 Motor Vehicle Theft Enforcement Act and the National Motor Vehicle Prevention Act of 1994 attempted to assist law enforcement in preventing motor vehicle theft. Mandating auto companies to stamp vehicle parts and distributing decals are just two of the ways the federal government realized that there was a problem and were attempting to fix it. Interviewing persons in the field that they are most familiar with can be much more rewarding than looking up information through some other media source. By conducting impromptu interviews of the three car salesman, information was not scripted, yet, the salespersons being interviewed were very receptive and gave information that probably would not have been retrieved from different sources. This approach was significant in gaining research on the project on what actually have the auto companies done in the past to prevent auto theft. After looking at statistics to formulate a base, other entities were presented on auto theft and finally the auto companies themselves were researched on their involvement. To finalize the project, research was done from a different media source, a news report from Channel # 2 Problem solvers. This source is significant due to the its recent showing in February, 2004 and interviews with insurance agents and law

27 27 enforcement personnel. It also confirms results of the research done on the project on the actual involvement the auto companies have provided regarding motor vehicle theft in the past. RESULTS Beginning with the statistics of motor vehicle theft during the past twenty years in Dearborn and in the United States, there are two patterns that are seen as one takes a look at the rise and fall of this type of theft. Appendix A, which is the number of stolen vehicles in Dearborn, shows an increase of approximately 100 vehicles per year from 1983 through 1990, with a dramatic increase of 200 vehicles being stolen in At this time, the Dearborn Police Department implemented an auto theft task force comprising of several officers to combat the problem. The police department reacted in a timely manner from pressures from the public as in any type of crime. Appendix B, which shows the number of vehicles stolen in the United States, has a much more distinctive pattern that Dearborn s chart, though the charts can both be compared and there are some similarities of a peak in auto theft in 1989 and 1990 and a gradual decrease throughout the 1990 s. Both charts show a slight increase through the late 1990 s to The auto companies appeared hesitant in the mid-1980 s to do something about motor vehicle theft and aftermarket companies, like, LOJACK, THE CLUB and Onstar reacted. Since the Big Three were not advancing in the prevention of auto theft, all three of these companies, which were formed approximately fifteen to twenty years ago, came along into the auto theft industry to make a mark in history. These products, whether subtle or not, have made an impact and most likely support the

28 28 hypothesis of what type of pressure was placed on the auto companies in the late 1980 s to become innovative in anti-theft prevention. The government has had a hand in this research with their various acts that it has instituted. These acts, as mentioned previously, (stamping auto parts, issuing decals to automobile owners) has had some sort of impact on the decrease of motor vehicle theft through the 1990 s and there appears to be some correlation with the decrease in thefts. Statistics were not available on the arrests made as a result of these acts, though, these instituted programs by the federal government is sure to have resulted in many arrests in the past twenty years and it will never be known how many thefts were deterred form these acts. An important breakthrough in the auto industry was in the early 1990 s with the computer chip which was first integrated by General Motors. During the 1980 s, the most popular stolen vehicles were G.M. vehicle like Cutlasses, Grand Prix and Monte Carlo s. When the chip key came into its own, these models were not as popular with the thieves. Remote control key fobs also became popular which helped curbed theft not only in G.M. models but in Ford and Chrysler products. Dashboard ignitions have been placed in more luxurious models which prevent car thieves from peeling columns or punching ignitions. Passenger door locks on many vehicles are not being installed anymore, which give the thieves less of an option if they attempt to slimjim a door. Several years back, Ford came out with combination codes placed on the doors that the owner had to enter a secret combination to open the door. Ford also place a metal plate above the locks of their S.U.V s to prevent slimjimming and also have bendable coil instead of rods going from the lock to the door lock button to also prevent the use of a

29 29 slimjim. G.M. installs Onstar on many of their vehicles which can locate stolen vehicles before they are stripped. These factors have definitely played a part in the reduction of auto theft in the 1990 s. This brings us to what the Chrysler Corporation has done to prevent their car from being stolen in the past twenty years. It appears that Chrysler has not been as progressive as the other companies. Chrysler will install LOJACK on vehicles as an option though this type of system is not as popular as G.M. s Onstar. At this time, Chrysler installs computer chip keys on very few of their more expensive models. The majority of their vehicles still use a conventional key to start the ignition. Also, only one or two Chrysler models have had the ignition placed in the dashboard as of this writing. Scott Lewis of Channel 2 s problem solver confirms all of the problems that Chrysler has had with their vehicles still being stolen at this day and age. He brought up several points in his report on how car thieves as young as thirteen are stealing Chryslers at an alarming rate with the auto company not doing much of anything to combat the problem. A company called Steadfast Armored Ignitions came out with a metal collar that wraps around the ignition of Chrysler products to prevent the ignition from being punched. As The Club became into effect because of public demand more than a decade ago, this metal collar invented by an after market company was needed to combat thieves from stealing Chrysler products due to the Chrysler Corporation not implementing a device to prevent their ignitions from being punched.

30 30 DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION The results of this research project were intriguing and a more in-depth look at motor vehicle theft in the past twenty years reveals much more information on why auto theft may not be a priority as it once was in the past. How come police departments like Dearborn shied away from concentrating on auto theft by disbanding their auto theft unit in the 1990 s? Obviously, statistics were looked at which was found to be on a decrease not only locally, but nationally as is seen in the appendix from Dearborn stolen vehicles and U.S. stolen vehicles. Was law enforcement responsible for the decrease by focusing on patrolling high auto theft areas or federally implemented acts like stamping popular automobile parts or assisting law enforcement personnel in placing decals on car windows of cooperating vehicle owners? Are aftermarket products like LOJACK and The Club an influence on the decrease of motor vehicle theft in the past fifteen to twenty years? And finally, how much has the automobile industry done in the past twenty years to reduce motor vehicle theft of their own products? Has the invention of the chip key, placing ignitions in the dashboard, changing the configuration of door locks or even Onstar really made a difference in the reduction of auto theft? It is the opinion that a combination of all of these factors have contributed to the reduction of motor vehicle theft, not only locally, but throughout the U.S.. The automobile manufacturers could have done much more to reduce motor vehicle theft in the past, and because of pressure from the government and the general public, the auto industry finally reacted in the early 1990 s by placing more preventative measures and devices on their models. Organizationally, the Dearborn Police Department disbanded

31 31 their auto theft unit when motor vehicle theft statistics decreased but have recently obtained an auto theft grant which is an obligation to this type of crime. RECOMMENDATIONS Motor vehicle theft is not going to disappear completely. In fact, as we saw in the two graphs that show theft patterns locally and throughout the U.S., that the last couple of years show a slight rise in motor vehicle theft. As stated in the beginning of this research project, the Dearborn Police Department became less focused on auto theft by disbanding their auto theft unit and discontinuing any investigators assigned to this type of crime. Investigations were concentrated more on crimes like domestic violence and computerrelated theft crime. And while much research is being done on Community Policing, less-lethal force topics like tazers, and problems with job stress, it is important for research to be done on the effects of auto theft and its correlation with police departments and society. Aftermarket devices like The Club and the metal collar designed by Steadfast Armored Ignitions may be beneficial, but sooner or later, car thieves find a way to overcome these security prevention devices until something else is innovated. What should be important is for police departments to stay involved in motor vehicle theft by creating units or continue to work with various task forces like the Michigan State Police unit. Medium to large departments, like the Dearborn Police who have just under 200 sworn officers, must be committed to concentrating on this type of crime. After auto theft units are established, officers not only must stay abreast of auto theft patterns, working high theft areas, locating chop shops and working with informants, but departments must think outside of the box.