This is just plain nonsense and you know it! No perversion has been demonstrated.
"I will demand you to show where in the article it says that the police were targeting those who DO have past criminal records."
That is not in the article. I was responding to another piece of your nonsense - but you obviously forgot what you posted:
"Yes, and that seems to be what is going on here - trying to get people who don't have previous criminal records (at least none that the cops involved in the sting operation knows about) to commit a felony crime." " they were putting something out there to try to entrap anybody and everybody, in other words, trying to create criminals where none might have existed before."
LOL - that's actually funny. Someone without a criminal record takes the property and uses as a defense: "It's not my fault. The police created my criminality." Good luck with that!
" What the police did in this case is morally and ethically similar to searching random peoples' houses on the off chance that they might have something illegal."
Nonsense. First the police cannot do random searches of peoples homes and you know that! Second, passive surveillance in a public place is not a search. Sheesh!
" My objection is to the notion of the police trying to create criminals where they wouldn't otherwise exist by throwing a juicy plum out there for people to pluck."
Again, the police can't create a criminal if the criminal doesn't break the law.
" My argument is that the police ought to stick to investigating actual crimes which have already happened, instead of trying to engineer new ones."
Fine. Put a bait car in a public parking lot with valuable property in it. Wait until someone takes the property, and investigate a crime that just happened.
"The police ARE initiating the transaction because absent the initiatory action of the police in putting the unlocked cars full of doodads out there, there would be no possibility of a crime taking place."
Wrongo again. It is the same as the store owner putting property for display outside the store. If it weren't on display then no one would take it. If a bank didn't have so much money, no one would rob it. If people didn't have valuable property in their homes, no one would burglarize them. It is the criminal who initiates the criminal deed. You can't blame a crime on the police because someone willingly to violate the law. Your arguments are baseless.
Most of time when we do these bait stings, it is part of an investigation that leads us to target specific people that will be exposed to the bait, or targeting a problem area. To utilize the man power and the costs of man hours, it is usually part an an investigation that can justify it. But different areas have different budgets and regular operations, so I say that strictly from my experience.
A passing citizen securing the vehicle isnt unusual in these situations. Honest people ignore an unlocked vehicle with a camera (or something of value in the front seat), or they report it to the property manager of the parking lot, or they lock the car. Thieves steal it.
Also, you was making some good points in you your discussion with Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus about "entrapment". To take the discussion another step, entrapment takes effort to get someone to do something they normally would not do. If an undercover was making an effort to get someone to steal the items, and that otherwise honest person showed reluctance, but the UC persisted with pressure to get them to steal it, then they would have an entrapment argument. This is not an off the cuff opinion, this is something we deal with in court and we go over all the time. Texas Law Defines Entrapment:
Texas Penal Code § 8.06. ENTRAPMENT.
(a) It is a defense to prosecution that the actor engaged in the conduct charged because he was induced to do so by a law enforcement agent using persuasion or other means likely to cause persons to commit the offense. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.
(b) In this section "law enforcement agent" includes personnel of the state and local law enforcement agencies as well as of the United States and any person acting in accordance with instructions from such agents.
Again, I cant speak for your State.