If you’re not smuggling any yams, you’ll probably continue driving as usual. But if you’re driving with a delivery of Big C in your trunk, the best bet might also be to keep driving. The reason is that this kind of blatant advertisement should alert the real criminals to a checkpoint ahead, so they’ll pull off at the next stop where the real checkpoint will be. A higher level “player” in this game theoretic scenario might also pull off in anticipation of the police also anticipating that real drug smugglers are pulling off at the next exit before the checkpoint.
Perhaps I’ve taken one too many game theory courses, but is there something similar going on with the Cornell Police’s new policy of checking the IDs of students crossing the suspension bridge? Sure, even if they don’t ever get to talk to the real perpetrators of the forcible touching incidents, talking to random students could produce some valuable leads. But this article has clearly tipped off any forcible touchers that the suspension bridge is not the best place to go, so they will likely take another route across the gorge. Are the police perhaps stepping up their surveillance at other gorge crossings?
Very interesting to think about. I’ll be taking my yams elsewhere.
I completely see how this could be applicable to this situation – every person I’ve seen read that article has had the same reaction: “well duh, the forcible toucher isn’t going there now, what morons!” Obviously, that’s the point, he would take another route. But where would he flee to? The Stewart Ave or Thurston bridges? Now that’s just a ton more ‘randos’ to have to check…doesn’t seem efficient – everybody goes across those, all the time.
This could better clarify my point:
It’s not like there’s a fork in the road, where if you’re afraid of your yams getting pinched in option 1 then you take option 2…that would be a lot easier to deal with.
In even other words, there’s no point in trying to lamb if you’re gonna get cheesed anyway.
I’m not going to say what I’m thinking right now, but I think you all know what it is.
Well, I guess it comes down to the criminal’s personal philosophy. For example, what is the perpetrator’s desire? Is it the paper? Or is it the sexual assault?
Clearly the perpetrator got thirty other autos and others will just follow