STOLEN from my driveway this morning! New Jeeps are crazy easy to steal apparently...

[ShadowsPapa]

now i need to dig through the schematics... there is (or was) a disconnect on the gladiator such that with the doors locked, even if there were no doors on it, the engine would not start, even with the key until you unlocked it... wondering how they bypassed that

Yes, when you lock it with a fob, it activates the security system and it's locked, won't start, until unlocked with the fob.

But they didn't necessarily have to bypass it because if they captured an unlock signal or if it was passive entry and they had the fob frequency/code in store, no problem.

So if they got it started, they most likely also had the code to unlock it. It's not like you need a pin or password. The fob does both. So go ahead, press that fob button to lock it with the doors off........ if they have the ability to start it, likely they have your unlock signal already.
It's basically like 30 years ago when the same key did both - key to unlock door, key to start vehicle.

There's another whole thread on the topic of how that works. Locking it with doors off is not really going to stop anyone. They might even laugh.

That YT video on the topic of locking a doorless Jeep is a hoot "you can't start it eve with the fob" well, you have the freaking fob, just hit the unlock button! DUH.

Sponsored

 

[joeym7]

Garage fitment is one of the reasons why I chose the Gladiator in the first place. I live in a pretty nice area in Orange County and even last week my street (which is pretty hidden) got hit with two CATs stolen from driveways. Both were on camera.

These dudes are brazen and don't give a sh$t because at least here in CA, it's a slap on the wrist if caught.

Yea, I would bet car thefts are more rampant in good neighborhoods...Just like the old saying when the Bank Robber was asked why he robs banks, "Because that is where the money is".

 

[IanNubbit]

Sorry that I’m not reading all 10 pages from the past 24 hours. Just wanted to came and say what hopefully other have, more alarms aren’t going to help you in these cases. Thefts have been using repeated boxes on vehicles equipped with passive entry systems. Pull handle, vehicle sends search request for fob, repeater box applifies signal to find key signal (heard some go 100s and 100s of yards), and key signal gets repeated to the truck, doors open, repeat the same process to start. Truck thinks it’s a completely normal interaction. Best thing to really do is get a small faraday pouch for your key when your at the house. Or go like me and get a full manual locks and windows. And make your key only work with contact lol

 

[PyrPatriot]

Sorry, tough guy, this is a fantasy. You can legally shoot someone who breaks into your home while you are in your home. This doesn't mean you can shoot someone for trying to steal a vehicle. Don't get me wrong. I wouldn't lose any sleep over thieves getting shot. The law has a different perspective; even in Florida.

The fact is if professional thieves want your Gladiator, there's nothing you can do. Although it does help to make it more difficult to steal.

Your statement may not be entirely accurate. Some states MAY allow for use of deadly force to prevent theft of personal property such as a vehicle. Other states MAY allow use of deadly force for feloneous or violent crimes - such as a stranger armed on someone's property trying to steal that owner's car and getting confronted by the property owner, who ends up shooting said thief due to being in fear for their lives (thief shows their weapon, makes a threat, etc). It COULD be justified. You might lose sleep over a thief getting shot if you did the shooting, likely being brought down and questioned by police, indicted by a grand jury if the prosecutor was so inclined to bring even a righteous kill to charge.

I had the same opinion of this post. This “tough guy” thinks it’s ok to murder someone who is stealing a THING?! After all, a car, truck, etc is stil just a thing and while I hate the idea of thievery the murder of a person is waay beyond the pale.

I’m very clear an experienced and determined car thief will likely get whatever they target. I’m willing to try to reduce their chance at success but I’m not going to spend thousands to do so. Yes, my JTR is stock other than a tonneau and a bed mat, and that’s the way it’ll stay in part because mods are inducements to thieves and a stick JTR s already highly capable. I don’t need to bolt every damn thing listed in a catalog to prove it to anyone.

Why shouldn't someone die for trying to steal something of another? The owner worked hard and contributed to society in their acquisition of the property. Thief clearly considers the item worth more than their life, and considers the efforts of the owner to be worth less. The thief doesn't want to be part of a decent society, then that society should allow that thief to be removed from it. Now, a car may be just a "thing". What if that car is the only way the sole breadwinner for a family can get to work. That person loses their job from not being able to get to work, family becomes homeless, etc. Why shouldn't some thief die to prevent that from happening? Is it really murder simply because someone dies? Or is it the death without a justification? Some states allow you to kill someone raping your wife, or breaking into your home. Why should theft of a means to your livilihood, your hard earned money, be any different? Some states allow use of deadly force to defend against car-jacking, that is essentially vehicle theft. Why shouldn't that extend to someone stealing your vehicle while you are not in it? Why not allow these people to be killed before they escalate and kill someone during the commission of another crime?

 

[Klutch]

Your statement may not be entirely accurate. Some states MAY allow for use of deadly force to prevent theft of personal property such as a vehicle. Other states MAY allow use of deadly force for feloneous or violent crimes - such as a stranger armed on someone's property trying to steal that owner's car and getting confronted by the property owner, who ends up shooting said thief due to being in fear for their lives (thief shows their weapon, makes a threat, etc). It COULD be justified. You might lose sleep over a thief getting shot if you did the shooting, likely being brought down and questioned by police, indicted by a grand jury if the prosecutor was so inclined to bring even a righteous kill to charge.



Why shouldn't someone die for trying to steal something of another? The owner worked hard and contributed to society in their acquisition of the property. Thief clearly considers the item worth more than their life, and considers the efforts of the owner to be worth less. The thief doesn't want to be part of a decent society, then that society should allow that thief to be removed from it. Now, a car may be just a "thing". What if that car is the only way the sole breadwinner for a family can get to work. That person loses their job from not being able to get to work, family becomes homeless, etc. Why shouldn't some punk die to prevent that from happening? Is it really murder simply because someone dies? Or is it the death without a justification? Some states allow you to kill someone raping your wife, or breaking into your home. Why should theft of a means to your livilihood, your hard earned money, be any different?

Indeed, I've heard it all before. To repeat, I wouldn't lose any sleep over thieves getting shot. But actually shooting thieves will get you into a lot of very hot water with a jury. You'd better hope that jury is merciful.

No kidding, years ago a guy not far from where I live shot an intruder breaking into his basement. The intruder was his teenage step daughter who was returning after sneaking out one night. That guy actually was within the law, but it's likely he wishes he was dead.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...er-mistaken-for-burglar-idUSBRE9BN03620131224

 

[PyrPatriot]

Yea, I would bet car thefts are more rampant in good neighborhoods...Just like the old saying when the Bank Robber was asked why he robs banks, "Because that is where the money is".

People in nice/wealthy neighborhoods are also less confrontational in the face of violence. The criminals in my city have explicitly started going to the "nice" areas of town because people won't fight back there. As reported to me by law enforcement being told that by said types of criminals.

 

[PyrPatriot]

Indeed, I've heard it all before. To repeat, I wouldn't lose any sleep over thieves getting shot. But actually shooting thieves will get you into a lot of very hot water with a jury. You'd better hope that jury is merciful.

No kidding, years ago a guy not far from where I live shot an intruder breaking into his basement. The intruder was his teenage step daughter who was returning after sneaking out one night. That guy actually was within the law, but it's likely he wishes he was dead.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...er-mistaken-for-burglar-idUSBRE9BN03620131224

You may be wrong again. A law may state that a person has a right to shoot someone in their home who does not have the right to be there. Examples may include someone repossessing your home, a tenant, etc. The option for claiming self-defense may not be available to such individuals. Yes in many states the standard is something along the lines of was it reasonable from the perspective of the person claiming self-defense, often exclusions can apply. As for a merciful jury, mercy may have little to do with it. It is how a case is presented to them. Example: theft of a personal property vs depriving a single mother of providing for her family - both being vehicular theft.

Simple solution to increasing the avoidance of such tragedies: stop demonizing tools of protection and encourage users of such tools to get more training. Alot of people I know who avoid getting more training (even as simple as looking to add a light to their firearm to avoid misidentification) do so because they don't want neighbors thinking they are "extremists". My experiences however may be too narrow for some to accept as being a credible interpretation of societal circumstances. That said, it is a tragedy and I wish they could be avoided.

 

[Dan in Pasadena]

Your statement may not be entirely accurate. Some states MAY allow for use of deadly force to prevent theft of personal property such as a vehicle. Other states MAY allow use of deadly force for feloneous or violent crimes - such as a stranger armed on someone's property trying to steal that owner's car and getting confronted by the property owner, who ends up shooting said thief due to being in fear for their lives (thief shows their weapon, makes a threat, etc). It COULD be justified. You might lose sleep over a thief getting shot if you did the shooting, likely being brought down and questioned by police, indicted by a grand jury if the prosecutor was so inclined to bring even a righteous kill to charge.



Why shouldn't someone die for trying to steal something of another? The owner worked hard and contributed to society in their acquisition of the property. Thief clearly considers the item worth more than their life, and considers the efforts of the owner to be worth less. The thief doesn't want to be part of a decent society, then that society should allow that thief to be removed from it. Now, a car may be just a "thing". What if that car is the only way the sole breadwinner for a family can get to work. That person loses their job from not being able to get to work, family becomes homeless, etc. Why shouldn't some thief die to prevent that from happening? Is it really murder simply because someone dies? Or is it the death without a justification? Some states allow you to kill someone raping your wife, or breaking into your home. Why should theft of a means to your livilihood, your hard earned money, be any different? Some states allow use of deadly force to defend against car-jacking, that is essentially vehicle theft. Why shouldn't that extend to someone stealing your vehicle while you are not in it? Why not allow these people to be killed before they escalate and kill someone during the commission of another crime?

Disagree with nearly all your post.

I don’t EVER want to responsible for taking a person’s life. No, not even if they’re breaking into my home. I’m not saying wouldn’t do it to protect me and mine but I don’t EVER WANT TO. Has nothing at all to do with “getting in trouble”.

Far too damn many people are horny to have a reason to shoot people. Like it’s some damn movie or video game. Count me completely out of that shallow gene pool. It’s still just a thing and I can live without any THING.

 

[PyrPatriot]

Disagree with nearly all your post.

I don’t EVER want to responsible for taking a person’s. No, not even if they’re breaking into my home. I’m not saying wouldn’t do it to protect me and mine but I don’t EVER WANT TO.

Far too damn many people are horny to have a reason to shoot people. Like it’s some damn movie or video game. Count me completely out of that shallow gene pool. It’s still just a thing and I can live without any THING.

Perhaps you misinterpret my postulation as my desire for myself to commit such an act. Even where I to be a federal prosecutor well versed in the laws of criminal charges in my area, I would not want to be on the receiving end of the criminal justice system, let alone be faced with that choice. I would also hate to have someone kill my child because they wanted their car (my child being the owner of the vehicle and being killed for it) when someone else could have stopped said carjacker sooner by using proper deadly force during another previous commission of a crime. Odd use of the term "horny" in connection with the topic of shooting. I have seen it used when some folks were called "ammosexuals". Shallow gene pool? For folks who simply want to stand up to evil? Sounds derrogatory of fellow countrymen to me. Anyway, I am happy you have the privilege of not depending on your vehicle as much as I exemplified previously. I hope that you live by your convictions and face any potential consequence for your views and choices with equal certainty and comfort of being on the correct view on the matter, no matter the ultimate consequences to you and your loved ones. Because at the end of the day, feeling good about our choices is what matters most, right? That being said, I hope no such circumstances of a negative nature befall you and you are granted some wisdom to reassess your views, on a variety of stances that you may hold.

 

[Klutch]

You may be wrong again. A law may state that a person has a right to shoot someone in their home who does not have the right to be there. Examples may include someone repossessing your home, a tenant, etc. The option for claiming self-defense may not be available to such individuals. Yes in many states the standard is something along the lines of was it reasonable from the perspective of the person claiming self-defense, often exclusions can apply. As for a merciful jury, mercy may have little to do with it. It is how a case is presented to them. Example: theft of a personal property vs depriving a single mother of providing for her family - both being vehicular theft.

Simple solution to increasing the avoidance of such tragedies: stop demonizing tools of protection and encourage users of such tools to get more training. Alot of people I know who avoid getting more training (even as simple as looking to add a light to their firearm to avoid misidentification) do so because they don't want neighbors thinking they are "extremists". My experiences however may be too narrow for some to accept as being a credible interpretation of societal circumstances.

I simply have a TV near my front window that plays Fox News 24/7. Potential thieves see this, assume I own at least one AR-15 and leave me alone.

 

[robinja]

Sorry, tough guy, this is a fantasy. You can legally shoot someone who breaks into your home while you are in your home. This doesn't mean you can shoot someone for trying to steal a vehicle. Don't get me wrong. I wouldn't lose any sleep over thieves getting shot. The law has a different perspective; even in Florida.

The fact is if professional thieves want your Gladiator, there's nothing you can do. Although it does help to make it more difficult to steal.

Doesn't matter what you think. These morons are almost always armed and they are dangerous. We don't have the types of problems in my county/state that wussified counties/states which fail to hold individuals accountable do. Our sheriff publicly says get armed and take action. I can guarantee you that if I catch someone committing a felony on my property and I fear they will do me or my family bodily harm, I am going to shoot them dead. You can count on it.

Florida Statute Section 776.012(2):

• A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

 

[Saharacane]

Yup. Sorry OP. This is a flaw on FIATs side. Too many challengers, hellcat a TRXS get stolen with repeaters or key cloners

A friend of mine is a salesman at a Jeep dealer, he told me that 3 cars have been stolen from them in just the last 2 weeks! All of them were either Scat Pack or Hellcats. One of the thieves was so bold as to test drive the car, and pulled the old switcheroo by giving the salesman back an identical dummy remote and then afterhours came back and just drove it off the lot!

 

[NachoRuby]

Sorry that I’m not reading all 10 pages from the past 24 hours. Just wanted to came and say what hopefully other have, more alarms aren’t going to help you in these cases. Thefts have been using repeated boxes on vehicles equipped with passive entry systems. Pull handle, vehicle sends search request for fob, repeater box applifies signal to find key signal (heard some go 100s and 100s of yards), and key signal gets repeated to the truck, doors open, repeat the same process to start. Truck thinks it’s a completely normal interaction. Best thing to really do is get a small faraday pouch for your key when your at the house. Or go like me and get a full manual locks and windows. And make your key only work with contact lol

The stolen jeep here didn't have the passive entry system. I guess the key is still the same on it though, since we all have push button start? My thought was they stole the signal from the fob, old school style, but it didn't require the passive entry system for them to do it.

 

[robinja]

Such tough guy fantasies get perpetuated in other forums. Unfortunately, it will ultimately result in tragedy. Example: Some tough guy sees someone trying to open the doors to his Gladiator, parked in his driveway, one night. He fires four 9mm rounds at the perpetrator and later learns he murdered a 14-year-old girl who was trying to her hoodie from her dad's truck, which looks just like the tough guy's truck, and was parked a few houses down. Way to go, tough guy. Yeah, this is why it's not legal.

I'm not sure what kind of panzy you are, but until you start fighting back, be prepared to be a victim.

 

[Klutch]

Doesn't matter what you think. These morons are almost always armed and they are dangerous. We don't have the types of problems in my county/state that wussified counties/states which fail to hold individuals accountable do. Our sheriff publicly says get armed and take action. I can guarantee you that if I catch someone committing a felony on my property and I fear they will do me or my family bodily harm, I am going to shoot them dead. You can count on it.

Florida Statute Section 776.012(2):

• A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

You make multiple, invalid assumptions about people. Good luck with that attitude. You're going to need it.

Sponsored