HAVE YOU SEEN THIS MAN?

Museums should lock up the paintings in glass boxes with locks on them, maybe. Hanging them on the walls seems like a bad idea for a variety of reasons. What about climate control for example? Don't paintings need specific conditions to keep them from fading over the centuries? I saw the how the Shroud of Turin is displayed, on TV once. It's behind so many layers of bullet-proof glass and whatnot that one day when the building it was in caught on fire and it needed to be removed, it took a small army of people with sledgehammers quite a long time to get it out. How it's displayed, you can still see the thing, through the glass and whatnot, but it's safe, and a 6-year-old can't walk up and walk away with it.

Quote:

---

I'm far more surprised they got away with it. Then again... that IS Norway. Those guards were probably pacifists armed with water-pistols, or something. Using OMG VIOLENCE to stop a crime is wrong, after all.

---

Yeah, you are right, any decent non-Euro Trash country would get the security guards loaded on steroids equipped with super multi-fire authomatic dude-it-goes-like-ka-boom super kick ass gargatuan bazookas and AK-14 double auto-reloading-neerer-neerer with lightorch and taser loaded with silver bullets in case the targets are werewolves. And a nitrogen bomb in case it's needed. Oh, yes, and bubble gum, and sunglasses.

Quote:

---

Yeah, you are right, any decent non-Euro Trash country would get the security guards loaded on steroids equipped with super multi-fire authomatic dude-it-goes-like-ka-boom super kick ass gargatuan bazookas and AK-14 double auto-reloading-neerer-neerer with lightorch and taser loaded with silver bullets in case the targets are werewolves. And a nitrogen bomb in case it's needed. Oh, yes, and bubble gum, and sunglasses.

---

No, not really. :D Just a handgun, a clear shot to the leg (to avoid any deadly injuries, and also not to damage the painting), and immediate retrieval of the stolen item, when the criminal is incapable of going anywhere (having his leg/s punctured an' all), awaiting arrest.

But, maybe they were just poor men, trying to feed their families for the next 400 years, by selling this one-of-a-kind artistic masterpiece, and I'm being so cruel. :(

I think those paintings, aren't important by themselves. You can make a perfect copy of them, and so, the artistic feel and value of these masterpieces will be preserved. However, the reason these works of art should be kept under guard, is their monetary value. Just like money exists in the form of real estate, gold, or diamonds, it also exists in the form of art. A man that steals, and successfully sells, say, the Mona Lisa, is set for a life of extreme wealth, and none of his children, or their children, will ever have to work for a living. To avoid evil people making money unjustly, by stealing art objects, those objects should be kept under close guard. That means, that during the night (when most stuff are stolen, except in places where using violence to stop a crime ist verbotten), those paintings, statues, etc should be kept in armoured containers, movement-detecting lasers, and have ARMED guards on the lookout - for the protection of famous, highly-valued works of art.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Using OMG VIOLENCE to stop a crime is wrong, after all. :rolleyes2

---

I agree. For the most part at least.

Also, i don't think there should be guards armed with lethal weapons. If they missed, or a bullet goes straight through the target, it could end up as a worse situation than if the peice were actually stolen.

Dinosaurs roaming the halls. That'll learn 'em.

Well, first of all, it did have some security. Two vaiers are attached to the painting. And there are a few guards in the museum.

Wanna know the reason why they've only got two vaiers attached to it? It's because IF someone were to rob them, the painting wouldn't get broken while trying to steal it. The painting is simply too valuable to take the risk of it being broken. Beats me why they didn't have more guards though.

That's what I heard anyway.. and I'm Norwegian :freak:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spaceman Spiff

Dinosaurs roaming the halls. That'll learn 'em.

---

Just make sure that dinosaurs can get past the velvet rope! Man that stuff is damn near impenetrable. It stops even the hardest of criminals. *Praises for the velvet rope!

Quote:

---

No, not really. Just a handgun, a clear shot to the leg (to avoid any deadly injuries, and also not to damage the painting), and immediate retrieval of the stolen item, when the criminal is incapable of going anywhere (having his leg/s punctured an' all), awaiting arrest.

---

Man, you have seen too many movies. If you shoot someone in the leg, you just don't happily wound them: Either you are very good and can shoot to the exact point and you only wound them because the bullet dosen't hit fully (And thats not something a normal guard can do), either you cause irreparable nerve or bone damage to the leg that will leave them crippled for life or, most probably, hit a critical point such as an artery and kill the person with a rather slow and painful death. It's not only that, add up too the fact you could miss the shot and destroy The Scream, you could accidentally hit another painting or, worse of all, you may hit someone innocent.

Wouldn't like...guards in the doors checking people to see they have no weapons be more helpful? "Open your backpack...OK, you don't have anythoing, la la la, welcome to the museum". It's how it works at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York and it seems to work preety fine (I mean, no big lines of people accumulating to enter, you just need to wait 5 minutes).

Also...how about tranquilizer darts? If it misses it dosen't hurt anyone and wouldn't do a painting excessive damage. If it hits, it's non lethal. Dosen't that make more sense?


However, anyway, those guys were armed, so showing another gun would result in a happy shootout where more than one person could have died.

Double post

Quote:

---

If you shoot someone in the leg, you just don't happily wound them

---

Yes, actually, you do. Even if the whole leg is taken off, the man has some 20-30 minutes of living, with no blood-stoppers applied - and we're talking about a handgun shot, not amputation. Also, it happens in the middle of a bustling city - he'll get medical attention within minutes.

And yes, I admit the idea of arming museum guards with lethal weapons might be a bad idea. After re-thinking it, due to your insight (:P), other means of incapacitating the offenders might be a better idea. Certainly, we wouldn't a shoot-out in the museum - even if the guards' bullets are JHPs, that wouldn't penetrate anything, we can't promise the criminals' bullets are anything like that. Or how about, ACTUALLY NOT LETTING THEM LEAVE THE BUILDING?! That seems smart. You know, like, not letting them run away with the painting... 'cause they're, like, stealing it, an' all. And it's not even theirs!

:D

Maybe they decided to play it safe because of the hundreds of potential hostages lying on the floor. Besides, they could threat with breaking one of the paintings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Or how about, ACTUALLY NOT LETTING THEM LEAVE THE BUILDING?! That seems smart. You know, like, not letting them run away with the painting... 'cause they're, like, stealing it, an' all. And it's not even theirs!

:D

---

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, yet the problem is that they had weapons, and if they were trapped, God knows what they could have done. Suppose they like....take people hostage or worse, start shooting hysterically (Unlikely, but still possible). I mean, I would really not like to be inside a museum with criminals with weapons.

The best idea would have been to stop them at the entrance of the museum. I mean, like...guards pressing a button to call the police or something. Dosen't the police have helicopters flying around? They have here, after hearing on radio two guys had stolen The Scream the helicopter could have simply followed the car from the sky while giving indication to cop cars. It makes sense, right? I just don't understand why they didn't do that.

They did have a silent alarm, and it went off. But you can't really expect the police to be there the instant the alarm goes off. Besides, we don't have many helicopters here in Norway. The police practically never use it.

That's a shame, I really hope they get those paintings back. If I was to decide how museums would work, I'd put tracing devices on the back of each painting, or maybe inside the frame. Of course, they can take out the frames like they did, but it would at least help to keep track of where the painting is going for a while. Then again, I don't know how expensive that is.

Quote:

---

Maybe they decided to play it safe because of the hundreds of potential hostages lying on the floor.

---

A few armed thieves with a precious painting in their hands, would not stop, nor are they professional enough, to take hostages. Besides, a hostage situation isn't as delicate as Hollywood movies make it out to be - you just send it the SWAT/Anti-terror teams, and there's a very slim chance of anyone, other than the terrorists (and if they take hostages, that's what they are), getting hurt. But that's beside the point...

Quote:

---

Besides, they could threat with breaking one of the paintings.

---

What would be the point of that? It'd be better to let it go, and try some other time. Damage to the painting would be the LAST thing they, or the people who sent them, would want.

Quote:

---

The best idea would have been to stop them at the entrance of the museum.

---

That's what I said - simply shutting the doors close.

Quote:

---

The best idea would have been to stop them at the entrance of the museum.

---

That's another very passive and docile solution, that could work. But, again, the possibility of using violence still exists, and that's not acceptable, is it now?