Oops! . . . I did it again. Upset a group of readers. This time, a consortium of pawnbrokers angered by my comments on money being paid for stolen items.
Offering insight into a recent fuss over police snapshots of a Vancouver property crook, I'd voiced support for the team taking him off the street. The man's drug habit was costing people a fortune based on how much he bragged of using, and how much property he was stealing to buy it.
"Selling loot to pawnshops brings 10 cents on the retail dollar," I said, "meaning theft to the tune of $1,000 a day to support a $100 crack habit." This led to aggravation and annoyance for Michael Isman, director and media liaison for the B.C. Pawnbrokers Association.
In his e-mail, Isman claimed to know of no pawnbroker paying so little, insisting that most give 15 to 30 per cent. My 10-point figure was challenged, with a request to share my sources.
I talk to the people on the street -- the clients, if you will. They're the ones ripping off people, and they say they're getting 10 cents on the dollar. While it is true, they say, that once a relationship is established, the percentage can climb, sharing examples is irresistible.
A $60,000 collection of pearls recently netted $50 from a local pawnshop. A $1,000 mountain bike was pawned for $15, while a $900 guitar was given up for $30. A man presenting an Inuit Caribou carving worth $4,000 walked away with five bucks.
So, forget arguing over 10 cents on the dollar. Some people are seeing less than a 10th of a penny. Whatever the routine rate might be is difficult to pin down. There is no reason to take the word of a pawnbroker over that of a street person, if we're being open-minded and non-judgmental.
What might be termed a "relationship" with a pawnshop I can only guess at -- perhaps good behaviour inside the premises, perhaps the provision of untraceable goods. I'm sure even that will be seen as an unfair remark by Mr. Isman, who maintains that almost none of the property passing through pawnshops is tainted.
Where are the charges, I was asked. Where are the successful court cases? While I can't quarrel about Mr. Isman's shop, I don't think his logic holds water for the rest of the industry. As I see it, the numbers laid claim to -- the close-to-zero stolen vs. legit property rate, the rarity of pawnbrokers being charged criminally -- are largely due to a lack of accountability.
It's an immense amount of work for police to visit shops and check logs for stolen items. In 2001, Vancouver police launched a program called Xtract to monitor the flow of property through pawnshops and second-hand stores. Property is immediately entered into a networked database, along with the identity and description of the person from whom it's received.
We're able to monitor those who show up repeatedly, with the same type of suspicious property in hand. When we know of distinctive items which have been stolen, we're able to watch for their appearance.
Right from the start, Vancouver's recovery rate for stolen property jumped by 300 per cent. The Vancouver Police Department was able to redeploy several officers who had been checking the 1,000 or so daily transactions manually. This is seen as unkind and invasive by some, a list which I dare say includes Mr. Isman.
New Westminster police recently tried to become involved in the Xtract program, hoping to assist in fighting a cross-jurisdictional trade in stolen loot. It turns out Mr. Isman runs a pawnshop in New West, and is heading a legal charge against the program. He maintains that city council lacks the authority to make participation in Xtract mandatory. Also, that the program is unconstitutional, in that it forces shop staff to become agents for police.
The legal challenge against Xtract recently met courtroom failure, though I'm told an appeal has been launched. Either way, motivation for contesting it is difficult to understand, coming from an industry said to handle "almost no stolen goods" at all.
Call me crusty, but it's hard to buy into this as a freedom fight. Legitimate individuals pawning property to pay rent may not be eager to have their names made public. Yet the Xtract program is not an exercise in public embarrassment. Names of those down on their luck are not about to be fed to the press.
This is simply part of an attempt to turn the tide on an out-of-control property crime problem. If the pawn and second-hand industries are as clean as claimed, what harm can a little extra light bring?
Sgt. Mark Tonner is a Vancouver police officer whose column appears biweekly in Unwind. His opinions aren't necessarily those of the city's police department or board. Contact Tonner at marcuspt@shaw.ca.
© The Vancouver Province 2007
You can read Michael Isman's rebuttal
here.