From the Bib to the Bip

How kids in Oakland get into the robbery and property crime business.

I’m wary of focusing too much on the In-N-Out (and now Denny’s) story. It is gross that in a city where it’s a common occurrence for family members to learn their loved ones have been killed, we chase stories of corporate upheaval. But, when In-N-Out management says their workers are tired of being victimized by robberies and thefts, I don’t doubt they’re being truthful. Many businesses around East and West Oakland are closing due to robbery, burglary and traffic violence making already marginal small businesses go under or employee retention difficult. It’s also traumatic for travelers to have stolen from them sentimental items, vehicles, or most of what they own by people with guns.

What the In-N-Out closure revealed is that organized theft rings target Oakland’s airport area because law enforcement there is weak. This has been known by local businesses and franchises for years around Hegenberger - 98th Avenue, but they don’t carry the media sway an iconic burger chain does. (Note the endless complaints about carjackings, thefts and robberies at area stores on Yelp and Google). Airport neighborhoods all over the country are targeted by organized crime because of the high volume of goods that move through them. As robberies and burglaries have spiked in Oakland since 2021, a significant amount has occurred along the Hegenberger - 98th corridor.

I’m guessing the weak spot in enforcement around the airport is due in part to the large retirement of police officers. The police, I believe, think staff time is better spent on violent crimes than property crimes. Still, it is ridiculous that police cannot get officers to catch these airport culprits, who operate in small numbers and strike very regularly on the Hegenberger corridor. Past news reports suggest that these organized burglaries and stick-ups are responsible for many robberies and burglaries around the region. Catching the airport criminals would do the rest of Oakland a favor.

There’s another angle to this post-shutdown crime spike not getting enough attention — the effects of the pandemic school closures on already at-risk students. I’ve noticed that these criminal theft rings usually operate by hiring or recruiting high school students through friend groups and social media. The teenagers and young adults involved in these property crimes are dropouts, frequently absent and from poor households. Oftentimes these kids are practically homeless. They had a recruitment spree during and after the “Zoom school” years, but the absenteeism to crime pipeline isn’t new.

Many kids start life in age-diverse friend groups or have relatives who teach and encourage petty theft. They grow up without enough money to even buy things from a liquor store or gas station and are taught how to snatch items. Over time, these same peers and mentors invite them to steal from department stores, porches and learn how to “bip” or break a car window. It’s embarrassing to be a kid and not be able to buy snacks or have a decent smartphone like your peers; stealing becomes a way to get those things.

Once they’re teenagers, they will get arrested a few times and eventually make it to juvenile court or juvenile hall if they’re mixed up in violent behavior. If being arrested and reported to their parents doesn’t change their behavior, then incarceration often won’t either because their households are fundamentally broken. These kids don’t have parents at home or the parents are abusive or unbearable. They drop out of school and stay away from home, making their third space among friends who get cash by stealing.

Because a lot of these kids are entrepreneurial (a talent that could aid the economy but is instead ignored), they learn to not only steal but resell stolen goods for profit. Juvenile Hall is, in many ways, a college for crime. Young inmates with limited experience share connections with older, more seasoned teens to learn about friends and group chats they can join to "make money" with once they are released. It’s usually nothing sinister like a “gang”, it’s just their friend group or a cousin that happens to steal things and resell them. They teach younger ones who to sell stolen goods to or the older ones buy their loot from them.

The youth criminal justice system fails to rehabilitate here because it cannot address fundamental problems in these children’s households. They have “Scared Straight” programs — ex-cons trying to tell these juveniles their future is dim — but the kids think it’s corny. Like any teenager, the ones in juvenile hall believe they have a lot more agency over their lives than they do, and vague predictions about going to prison aren’t changing their abusive households, their homeless conditions or their lack of money back home.

Upon release, they return to friend groups that were stealing but are extremely behind in literacy and education despite the state giving them diplomas for job purposes and lack social development leaving them socially stunted. As they pass 18 years of age, stealing plays a psychological role in their risk and reward system. The pathway of completing remedial classes for a GED or attending junior college, leading to a decent job eventually, is more distant compared to the immediate gains from theft. The proper pathway demands that they endure indefinite periods of both poverty and self-discipline, two challenges that many middle-class kids cannot handle.

A lot of these young thieves and robbers also have a masculinity problem. Young boys want the stability, wealth and self-sufficiency of an adult man and use property crime as a shortcut. Young women, even with juvenile criminal records, are far less likely to be in organized crime because they are more inclined to ask for help to get jobs and complete their education. Moreover, they don’t have this “I have to be a provider” mentality young boys do. They grew up with these boys, see how self-destructive they behave and don’t want to depend on them.

What many young women realize that these young guys don’t, is that in the long term, they make more money with a bi-weekly check of $500 at a retail or restaurant job, than they would stealing and getting over $1,000 per decent haul. Young guys aren’t factoring in the Bayesian risk of law enforcement getting closer to catching them, every time they steal or rob someone. They’re losing whatever profit they’ve made in fines and restitution when, not if, they get arrested. There aren’t any rich, middle-aged burglars and robbers for a reason (unless they’re white-collar criminals).

Eventually, these young men hit a junction for one of three off-ramps: the first is they become habitual re-offenders and spend most of their adult lives in prison or on probation. They get too old, have no Social Security or savings and become homeless. Another is that they’re killed because as a byproduct of not having their life in order, they’re swimming in pointless disputes with other young guys who pull triggers liberally. The third is they get well into their 20s and 30s and realize that racking up criminal records and risking their life is not worth it. But they’re so caught up in this lifestyle that an out is difficult — it’s how they make money, it’s how they get housing, the cops are searching for them, and they are not educated or have a resume so they can’t get a job.

The hard truth about property crime is that cops need to start busting these theft rings, but incarceration shouldn’t be anywhere as long as we normally sentence people. Criminology reveals that the increased likelihood of being caught and swiftly punished deters crime much more than prison. Theft rings thrive where arrests are least likely to occur. While cops should work on Oakland’s homicide problem, shootings and murder tend to be motivated by interpersonal conflict with immature participants, rather than random crimes, like domestic violence and young men arguing. These problems require social services (like Oakland’s Ceasefire program) and gun control. It’s difficult for cops to solve problems like conflict resolution before they become deadly.

However, Oakland Police are not good at arresting suspects and closing cases. Criminals are often apprehended when attempting their operations in neighboring East Bay cities, as demonstrated by those police departments having higher clearance rates. A major reason why I think Oakland police are ineffective at their jobs is the negative feedback loop between the department and the community it serves.

Most Bay Area police departments deal with non-traffic crime committed by outsiders at hot spots near freeways or commercial areas because their communities are wealthy enough that they don’t experience much homegrown violence. Whereas in Oakland, the police deal with crimes committed by outsiders but also the local effects of poverty like fatal domestic violence, guns, traffic violence and other social, parental and economic issues they’re tasked to solve and often cannot. Unsurprisingly, most cops would prefer to work around, but not in Oakland.

—

What’s the fundamental solution to robbery, theft and “bipping” beyond just reacting to the problem with law enforcement? Well, these youths are doing it for money so give them money. We should provide low-income children with allowances so that they can buy that smartphone, or those shoes, or those snacks from the liquor store — because that’s where it all starts.

I never needed to steal. I, like most Oakland youths, am from a middle-class household, with parents who bought me what I desired and provided me with what I needed. There was a sizable amount of kids within my friend group who did not have an allowance because their parents were poor or absent. I’d walk with my friends to the liquor store knowing I could buy what I wanted while they never had money so they would steal.

While the vast majority of students who drop out are uninvolved in crime, dropping out and low attendance increases the probability of getting sucked into these groups. Several public schools in Oakland’s flatlands have criminally high dropout rates. Starting in the 6th grade, we should identify the kids in every school districtat risk of dropping out and from poor households, and give them a general allowance card of $25 to $50 a week (I’ll leave a specific dollar amount to researchers).

A public allowance for kids won’t solve households wrecked by poverty, but it would take away many of the emotional incentives for kids to steal. Poor kids, like all kids, just want to buy snacks, tasty food, have a smartphone and a few pairs of fashionable clothes. Our law enforcement costs would be lower in the near future if we gave them a few bucks and let these kids live, now.