CrimeRangers.com Uniting Platform

Dear, Private Initiative in Crime Control supporters,
Blog now has a member site with groups for every question. We started in lithuanian (after new hero Drasius Kedys inspiration to wake up about pedophilia and black groups in Justice system), but you can join and:
* write in main Forum
* create other Group for special questions,
* invite your known people,
* have a forum for your group
and of course to have your own page with blogs, video, photo, RSS, other widgets and more

www.CrimeRangers.com administration
Mindaugas A.

P.S. If you heard about pedophilia scandal and missing(from 5th Oct'09 till now) hero Drasius Kedys, please help by simply joining SOcial networks http://MySpace.com/DrasiusKedys, http://TWITTER.com/DrasiusKedys, http://NETLOG.com/DrasiusKedys, http://CrimeRangers/DrasiusKedys ...etc) mentioned here:

Please Digg this initiative


28 Arguments for Law Changes Involving Private Initiative in Crime Control

Decided to list arguments about Private Resources involved Crime Control in one place. Will be adding and refreshing time to time.

Why Law on Crime Control is so socialistic (monopoly and government owned)?

Results of Crime Control: only ~45% of registered crimes are solved. But in Economy only 1% of crimes are registered!

Principles of Private Resources involved Crime Control system:

  • To catch criminal need resources, which cost. Fine – should be price for catching. Now fines goes to budget. Similar like 100% Profit goes to budget in Socialism. Sharing fine between people, who assisted with sorting crime, is main idea of LTiCP. Criminals should pay themself, for what they do;

  • Think about this:
    * Socialistic Economy + Socialist Crime Control = COMUNISM (had before and have some example countries now);
    * Free Market Economy + Socialist Crime Control = so called WILD CAPITALISM (mostly have now);
    * Free Market Economy + Free Market (demonopolised) Crime Control = way to RESPONSIBILITY + FREEDOM further realisation;

  • While most economic industries moved to Free Market, Crime Control is still in deep socialism and belonging to governments. This is major problem for society to believe in further free market development. So Free-Market is not problem it self. The problems is insubstantial of Free Market in Crime Control. Do you keep Mercedes covered with faeces as a whole faeces? Or you trying to separate things and look into details, who covered Mercedes with faeces (the same problem exists with money);

  • We believe ratio 1000 : 1000 ((Potential Crime Stoppers : People) is more effective than 1 : 1000 (trained policeman : people) as it is now. This is how Real Crime Prevention should work. Criminal should never know, who can start stopping him or which window, what type of registry (video, logs, radars) can be threat to him;

  • Honest people, who still decide to help and spent time on stopping crime on voluntary, are kept as a not clever people in nowadays! To stop - means lose time. Most people choose to ignore what they see for beeing free of witnessing duty. Others are even more happy to assist criminals for better money. We should create alternative for such things;

  • Crime Control unbelievibly ignoring Private Initiative on financial motivation basis. Not to use Private resources (Information, Time, Money, Technique) and reward for stopping crimes is negligence it self. Every industry has it's own specific risks. Crime Control Industry is not exception;

  • Nowadays Crime Control only use voluntary help of private people and don't want to look in Financial reward prospective. Were Saturday Voluntary Aid works effective in USSR? The same socialistic thinking exist now for assisting in crime solving;

  • Presumption of Innocence will be kept better in new system, because every regulation brakes it, by keeping us possible law braker. It's a chance for less regulations, as society will self regulate;

  • ~1-5 % of wrong people are "precedent” for government to use these crimes for creating regulation. Regulation drops on innocent 95% people as well. Is it fair? Shouldn't we better concentrate on stopping these 1-5 % instead of creating new regulations? After Private Involved Crime Control system introduced, we will keep governments with week arguments for new regulations;

  • All problems between Private sides: Catchers and Criminal can be solved in court (arbitrage) as it is now, between government officer and Criminal;

  • This is way to give possibility for people take responsibility on crimes and take off pressure from monopolistic government agencies;

  • Who wants more policemen, mostly can't answer, who will be paying for this. We can even reduce hourly paid policmens later and save money (it means lower tax rates) by introducing Law Changes for involving Private Initiative;

  • We can waste budget money for policemen on every crossroad, still will be no policeman in groups of people where criminal agreements can be made. We can create system, where every person potentially will be motivated destroy criminal agreements and take part of fine. Again this is how i understand Real Crime Prevention. It's about creating real risk to be caught;

  • Nobody knows better situation in environment, than people, living in that environment. Why not to employ them and their information about crimes, offering motivating part of fine for stopping crimes in future?;

  • Additional income source possibility for people like Private Security staff, students, sport club members, etc . See S. Korea industry http://lticp.blogspot.com/2008/11/lticp-examples-3-s-korea-catchers.html

  • What choices people have, while losing job or in recession? Let's create alternative possibility against choosing criminal activity. New Law system changes caused better prevention prevention is another reason, why criminal activity will not rise;

  • Better alibi/evidence chance vs no alibi or evidence at all. No evidence means chance to somebody lie in endless courts;

  • Multiple control is more difficult to bribe or shut off than than 1 link control;

  • Moral difficulties can be cleared by this: It is more ethic to earn from stopping criminal than ignore his criminal activity. Ignoring is Passive form of protest. Doing steps to stop criminal activity (service to society) is Active form. Afraid to earn (chosen Passive way) gives criminality problems and criminal money to rise. It's like leave solving cancer problem for future. While doing steps it's MINDFULL earning. And we should be proud of it. We shouldn't be proud earning from working or spending (MINDLESS voting with your money) in alcohol, tobacco industries and so on, because you helping these industries to rise. You thinking that you can't do nothing personally, when you see these industries? Ok, the same you can say while standing near 6m height. You can't jump over it now. But you can be minimum close to it, if 10years will be making steps (training) daily for this target;

  • Privacy difficulties of multiple privately collected registry information can be cleared by this:

    Do you afraid to be under CCTV in shopping centers? Should honest person afraid of cameras, creating registries? You think it gives you risk or safety? Nobody can use information about person, which has no facts about crime or no victims. The new law changes will be bigger safety to catch such people and put them to court for moral fine;

  • If we so much take care on Privacy breaches, means the same amount we don't care on Victim rights. Decision for this can be this. As all life is game, here can be created game as well. If person X decides to check person Y, so X should be ready to risk with some amount of money or gift to Y, if X will fail with his version. Monopolistic based Crime Control law is not taking care about this at all;

  • Positive “Side effects of neighborhood” of new law changes to others. (Example. Wouldn't you be happy to park your vehicle in apartments estate, where possibly somebody settled 3 cameras in different windows and some people more often looking through windows to see something suspicious for chance to stop criminals and earn for valuable information);

  • While developed Private Resources involved Crime Control will exist, very low arguments will be used on probabilities, that somebody earned by stealing or taking bribes;

  • Additional registry is part of quality evidence. 2 bad quality cameras from different places makes evidence more solid than 1 better quality camera;

  • Educational” charge can be implemented to cover part of catcher cost. For example instead of 100Eur fine on wrong parking, both sides can deal on 20Eur “Educational” pay, if situation is disputable. Sound similar to bribe? Let it sound. Prevention/Training is still done and no victims left. If Third party is left as a victim, then of course this is bribe. But then other people can take action on helping to victim;

  • It's like in Wikipedia Revolution - bunch of nobody can create much more better safety for World.

  • We can trust and let more people out of prisons ( 03/2009 Ireland had 105% occupancy rate. 3790 Prisoners. Each cost 90000 Eur/year). They will be on bigger chance to repay damages (restitution).

  • If we all will be additionally motivated, so will be steps done, and definately be results. Means better prevention. Means less damages. Means lower cost of insurances.

May you like to join my GlobalHealthConsciousTeam and get more valuable information in creating WIN-WIN situations on MOXXOR and AMWAY ? It's progressive way for supporting me.

MOXXOR: www.MOKSOR.com , www.MOKSOR.info

AMWAY (UK/IRL) : book products www.amway.ie press “Register as a Customer” (it's free, use ABO No. 8026563) to browse products. Ask why every of them are better (some i don't recommend). Do you know you can sponsor yourself, even if you work in other country? If you want to start with AMWAY in other country, let me know.


LTiCP examples 6) Citizen reports cop breaking the law. Cop retaliates.

This is video example about how private initiative can solve problems. Professional registry of law brakage made:

I believe people for such job should get part of fine recieved from law brakers (i wouldnt agree on first problem... i mean cops car on yellow line, because street is empty seems all day... so no victims. In such way i would expect similar non-robotic thinking from cops,when they stop us, as well).

In such case society will benefit from active crime stoppers. Criminals will experience bigger risk, because every people can be potential catchers! People will have chance to earn. Yes this is Crime Industry, where governments keep monopoly and we have problems, which stops free market to develop (Bad crime prevention, rises negativity on FREE MARKET in society). But this is what i talk in this blog: Problem is not in Free Market, but in Crime Prevention (which is in deep socialism). Please take a look article about South Korea http://lticp.blogspot.com/2008/11/lticp-examples-3-s-korea-catchers.html .

If you found interest, join me through motivational opportunities ( to create mindfull wealth and to have more power to work on this mission) www.moksor.com and let's discuss more on Libertarian Crime Prevention idea to create real steps for implement law changes.


LTiCP examples 5) USA Gov Fraud reward

    Great article from Hesch and Associates company about 3 fraud programs managed by Government:

    * Federal Reward Program;

    * State Reward Program (21 state adopted law to themselves and more expected);

* Income Tax Reward Program

Congress has authorized DOJ ( Department of Justice) to pay up to 30% of the amount of fraudulent payments recovered back. You can read article here:


Just want to mention results:

Having recovered over $20 billion ;

Paying out nearly $3 billion in rewards to citizens ;

The largest rewards for reporting fraud > $100 million ;

average reward is $1.5 million ;

4% cases get reward by more than $1million;

DOJ accepts 25% of applications;

A reward has been paid to 95% of accepted cases,

But 2 must criterion for cases on IRS Tax Fraud program makes it far from effective:

    * Company should hide taxes of $2 millions!

    * Person cheating from that company, must have had a gross income of at least $200,000 /1 tax year.

    Why? It states that reward program does not want to see it used as a weapon in family or neighborhood squabbles or for smaller tax fraud cases.

Ok. so it means, that:

1) Probably 95% of frauds are not even registered, what impact to crime prevention it gives? 19 of 20 cases are unprevented and can easy risk for 1million, which is still huge money :)

2) Big frauds starts from small frauds.Tree should be bend, while it is young.

Of course it still better than nothing...

I know Government of Lithuania had or maybe still having (just poor informational compaign) one similar Tax Claim Fraud law 5years ago as well. Law promised up to 100 000Lt (up to ~ 29 000Eur) for reported information. Law was administered

FNTT (Finantial Crimes ......

No news about Lithuanian program success, but will be interested how that was going on.

Would be interesting to here from other countries False Claims Act attorneys. Do law gives them enough possibilites to cooperate with people having information and to earn.

Please leave comments below..


LTiCP examples 4) Business self-prevention

* LT: sena blogo versija http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (tik lietuviškai). Jei sudomino blogo idėjos, pakomentuokite čia arba NETLOG nariai junkitės į http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP
ENG: old blog version http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (only in lithuanian). If you interested in these ideas, pls contact me here or in http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP

Today example, how business should evaluate after reward-based law will be more practically developed. This is copy of email, which i recieved 2 months ago from one tipster team (betting business service provider) :


£1,000.00 CASH REWARD
Just to let you know that I've received quite a lot of feedback about our WinnersToLosers system.
It seems, despite favourable reviews at a number of independent websites including... www.bettingsystemreviews.co.uk/ and www.cash-master.com/blog/, most of you are still very sceptical about the past results.
Although, we do guarantee that the past results are 100% accurate, it has occurred to me that we may have made a palpable error. If that has happened I do sincerely apologise but assure you that any such error is totally unintentional.
Anyway, just in case there are errors we have not spotted, we are offering a £1,000 Reward to anyone who brings any errors to our attention. Full details are on our website at the link below...
Should any errors be brought to our attention, we will correct them immediately and post a clear notification on the website.
Thank you for your help.
Kind regards,
The Alternative Punters Syndicate
WinnersToLosers "

After few days i got another email, in which was described, how somebody found minor mistake (unfortunately it is not about results) :

"----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:51 PM
Subject: [Bulk] Sincere Apologies! There is an error in our results!!

I regret to inform you that an error has been found in the past results displayed on our WinnersToLosers website.
This was spotted by someone scrutinising all our results in order to claim the £1,000.00 CASH REWARD I told you about the other day.
...a tiny mistake was a horse name and that's SRIKUANTAN (in the result page on 26/01/2008) which is actually SRI KUANTAN (sorry for it but I only wanted to show you that I am doing some "research")...Fodor
The mistake is a simple typing error (the space has been omitted between the "I" and "K") and does not affect our reported profits in any way. Therefore Fodor does not qualify for any reward but I am very grateful to him for bringing it to my attention. The mistake should not have happened and I apologise unreservedly for any confusion this may have caused.
I can fully understand why so many of you are sceptical about our reported results. After all a clear profit of £40,520.53 in the first eight months of this year is very hard to believe!
Hopefully, the fact that so many people are now scrutinising our results to such an extent will reassure you that those profits are 100% genuine.
If you still have some doubts then by all means read the independent reviews at various 'system testing' sites such as... www.bettingsystemreviews.co.uk/ and www.cash-master.com/blog/.
If you still disbelieve our results then show us an error that proves the profits are not as good as we are claiming and we will give you £1,000.00 in CASH! Full details available on our website.
(If the above link doesn't work then simply copy and paste it into your browser)
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me personally.
Kind regards,
The Alternative Punters Syndicate
WinnersToLosers "

This Tipsters Team understand trust value and introduced self-prevention rules themselves, involving people to report mistakes to them first, but not to Government regulators.
Let's say i don't want to check their mistake, but still (because of possibility to earn for somebody) i feel more safe in such type of control (multiple tied control), which is much more realistic, than government agency control
( one tied control) alone.
I got benefits from such new type control for free, like all others people! Wouldn't you be happy to leave your vehicle, where maybe few not clear visible cameras are spotted from different windows? Now other request: Imagine you are theft... :)

After Private initiative introduced in Crime prevention, all business will be motivated to introduce self-prevention systems in order:
* to get feedbacks first;

* not to be penalised by government and heard to others as bad service providers. if you can, pls read in Lithuanian my blog about Lithuanian Food Retail Network "Maxima" which has rule in one small aspect (to give 5Litas ~1.45EUR for buyer, if goods were calculated in bigger price. I heard they still continue this practice, but not clear, why they take off ads about such type prize near every checkout or cashier "

LTCP examples. 1) ''MAXIMA'' 5 litų premija"

http://lt.netlog.com/LTCP/blog/blogid=8799#blog )

In other words reward-based crime stopping, will make fines transformed in prizes. Additional benefit would be better realationship between deeling sides (stronger feedback, bigger service provider trust, less customers angry, avoid misunderstandings, product orservice development, better customers loyality, earnings possibility for testers etc. )

If you have desire to work on similar ideas, projects, Please don't hestitate to contact me from any country.


LTiCP examples 3) S. Korea catchers schools

ENG: old blog version http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (only in lithuanian). If you interested in these ideas, pls contact me here or in http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP

Today i continue new version of blog with amasing news. Have a great example which shows a lot elements of private crime prevention system, which i'm inspiring in my blog. We have country, which even have schools for training people to become crime stopping agents and get reward.
Welcome to South Korea!
Please check video before continuing to read: http://www.telerate.com/news/video?videoId=94037 (LT translation: http://tv.delfi.lt/video/5WNiWNq6/ )
and today (18/11/2008) Reuters news http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE4AH1BH20081118
and more info (what more type of infringements new system works)

South Korea has great law which let to rise private crime prevention industry:

* Schools (Mismiz Report and Compensation School, Posang (Korean for compensation) Club);

* State Agencies giving rewards for evidence;

* Students, housevifes and other people and their time, initiative and other resources.

The impact of law was, that "...Students range from housewives to college students, all prompted by a desire for extra cash as the South Korean economy slows".
So law created possibility to get another source of income. And when we know, that in times, than economies slows, crimes starts to rise. So, because of law which started attract private initiative and resources (crime stop industry demonopolisation), some people now can start opposite movement instead involving in crimes!

No needed additional money for government police! Needed just to change law and let people act! Probably that's why government officials (don't want to be named) start to speak about taking action to slow down this process. Can they answer this questions: If this service is needed for society (how many infringements was stopped by private people means the same amount problems Governement Police was unable to resolve... ) and works as best prevention (you never know who can stop you for doing wrong) for infringements and crimes, why they want to stop it? I think they still don't want to be out of monopoly business.

Why some people still shy on doing this? I think S. Koreans are getting huge impact from their neighbours-experiment victims country North Korea. Because of bigger or smaller realationships with northern people rumours sounds, that following on people is bad things. But why not to pay attention, for what "crimes" northerns probably hate reporters or detectives. Mostly for speach breaches, talking with abroad by mobile, any opposite minds or steps on dictator-"god" Kim Jong Il...etc Powerful regime control like in ex-Soviet Union countries gives impact in mentality, that people reporting something are bad, doesn't matter what they report. But i can add one more strange impact from comunism, that a lot people are getting stressed if they get a phone call from Police, doesn't matter what policeman say on that call.
People should imagine, that can be other way of tackling crimes, not only government monopoly. While most industries went to free market, Crime stopping service mostly in all world countries still sitting deep in socialism/comunism.

One more idea to think. Food producers business is not questionable, while crime stoppers business is. Now my question: Without which service people couldn't live: Food or Crime stopping? Could you still live without food? so why governments are not making steps to nationalise food industry, while Crime stopping is in deep monopoly owned by state.

I'm proud of South Korea! Yes,(with You) We Can!

One more bad moment about law which criminalise shopkeepers act of giving away plastic bags to customers. This is bad law, because it victimless! Shoppers decision to give basket for free is not making victims! The worse thing is, that this act is even not gives ecological (secondary) problems! Such law starts only in desperate needs to impact rubbishing things, while true fault is monopolised crime control inefectness. Involving private initiative in rubbishing control, such law should be canceled. Or quick recommendation to S. Korea schools, agencies would be implement self regulation not to act on victimless "crimes". Private people power to handle such "bad things" is much more bigger, but it can split society, because such crimes are similar to North Korea "crimes" mentioned above in this article..
The law should be concentrated not on bag sellers, but on buyers, who handling bags incorrectly (rubbishing them on streets and so on).

And last suggesttion for South Korea and other countries, that they should clearly state to people, that fine is price for catching!


Blog Purpose

http://netlog.com/LTCP/blog (18 blog articles from 02/06/08 to 30/09/08)

To promote reward-based systems in crime prevention. It is forgotten very problematic sector, which sits deeply in socialism, while gives problems to other industries:
* to go further to free-market
* to develope self-responsibilty, which could born from private initiative of financially motivated society