“Facts are the building blocks of knowledge.
Without a solid foundation, nothing can be built.”
Marie Curie
It is frustrating – if not downright alarming – to see contradictions and blatant errors in government press releases. When officials fumble the facts and fail to communicate with clarity, the result is not just confusion, it is chaos. Without a professional, consistent approach, policies become a tangled mess, leaving the public to navigate uncertainty while trust in leadership crumbles
- Is there a lawful purpose for ‘jamming’ apparatus or not?
- The offence of ‘going equipped’ (to steal), which extends to s12(1), ‘taking a vehicle without consent’ (TWoC) is contrary to section 25 of the Theft Act 1968, not section 5.
Extracts from the Crime & Policing Bill fact sheets that apply to vehicle crime (jamming & tracking) can be read here.
Is ‘jamming’ (electronic security bypass/keyless crime) the problem claimed? Was it ever?
- ‘we are seeing criminals revert to ‘old school’ methods to steal cars, such as breaking into houses or physically threatening and assaulting owners to take keys‘. (Express – Tracker quote 03/2025)
- ‘ …. vehicle crime-related offences, including burglary and theft of car keys which is an increasingly common tactic used by criminals‘. (NPCC September 2024)
- ‘When it comes to theft from vehicles, more ‘traditional’ techniques such as smashing windows and forcing doors are the preferred methods’. (motoringresearch.com – May 2023)
Are vehicles commonly taken by use of security-bypass or interference – who knows, who cares?
Responses to requests for security bypass or interference taking can be read here.