I worked at a bank branch for 7 years. They always catch the guy. Not sometimes. Always. Mostly because we didn't carry much cash in the first place and a bank robber never robs 1 bank and calls it quits. It's simply not sustainable in the long run.
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
449 points (97.5% liked)
Comic Strips
22062 readers
2833 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The risk reward on bank robbery is not good. They don't carry much money for you to be able to grab, the serial numbers will be recorded and traced back when they show up spent, and they put a lot of effort into catching robbers. Any thing that causes a bank to lose money is made into a serious crime they prosecute hard.
Idk what's a better way to get some money if you have to, but robbing a bank is not it. Unless you can do it well, some dudes in Sweden hijacked a helicopter and stole a 17 million dollar equivalent bank transfer on some skyscraper that had a helipad. They supposedly caught them, but never recovered the money as I'm aware.
It's almost like denying people basic human rights... leads to future suffering and desperation? Shocked I tell you!
Next step is taking houses by force and eating the rich.
Robbing banks is a hard job. And I'm not sure if it is very profitable...
Yeah it's not a good risk-to-reward ratio
There was some movie (rather old, from 40s-50s I believe) about how a gang tried to rob a big supermarket they worked for. And after they were caught at the end of the movie, the police inspector was explaining how stupid they are with arguments like this: Imagine you stole merchandise for a 10'000 (movie was old, so I suppose that still was a serious sum), you wouldn't be able to sell it more than for 2-3k. Then you need to rent a lorry for all night and better for a few days to move out the stolen goods, a few hundred minus. (Then some other expenses I don't remember...) And then look at yourself, divide all what's left among yourselves and you get a few hundred dollars each at best while risking a huge prison times.
I think that's why gangs are more likely to just rob a truck in transit instead of burgle a facility. Same with pirates and highwaymen pre industrial, go where the cops aren't and the goods are.
It's got around a 60% clearance rate which is far higher than most other crimes but there are surprisingly low injury and deaths associated with them. You'd probably have more luck stealing a rich person's phone to move money from their accounts to hidden accounts or crypto, destroy some of their property as a distraction to steal other property, blackmail them, etc.
smelting steel is a hard job, too, and it is not very profitable
The risk is lower, though.
Why not steal the house directly?
Palestinians hate this one weird trick
Jjeeesus fucking christ, dude
Too soon?
Dark humor is still humor, but goddamn that one hits like a truck
Fun fact: you can legally just steal a house if nobody is living in it for an extended period of time and you get away with living in it for an extended period of time (not legal advice btw)
Sugar Bear?!
What?
Squatter laws differ by State.
Yeah that's why you shouldn't take what I said as legal advice
CA has them I know.
Generally the squatting has to be open, and hostile. Idk why hostile that has always seemed odd to me. But you want to get bills in your name as soon as possible for instance. You want to make some improvements to the property if you can.
Around here you have to pay the property taxes for several years in a row, if the actual owners realize after a few years and start again, you're just out the money. Which... seems like a good way to only pay your property taxes once every few years, if you don't mind your property going to hell (lots of folks around here do not, based on the number of burnt out houses).
Civil forfeiture could actually be improved in some cases, like if you just give up and move along and your house is a nuisance attracting crime and squatters, your neighbors should be able to fix that by petitioning for ownership, instead of having to wait until the house is worthless and likely burned down for anything to be possible.
Idk why hostile that has always seemed odd to me.
Maybe to prevent the law from being abused for capital transfer tax fraud. But that's just a guess.
I think also, like a neighbor built their driveway over my property under the old owner (2 of them did actually, one he put a chain over it in a couple places, other one woman called the sheriff and made him back off and let her steal that little bit of what is now my land. But her use maybe is like hostile, at this point I couldn't get it back, although this is a little different than squatter laws it's kind of from a similar place in the law I think.
So her use was hostile, so I can't get it back. If it wasn't, if she just asked can I use it, and I would say sure, then I could reclaim that piece, because I was letting her use it. Still seems weird to me but I think that's how it works sometimes.
Neighbors are dicks out here, some of them, always trying to prevent people with property from accessing the private road network they have gates up on. Judge finally told them to fuck off and threatened to jail them, so we all got the code, but they can change it again at a moment's notice. I should get some thermite, if they lock me out and just melt through that bitch. But that's all another story.
Can’t you just be “hostile” and take back what’s yours? And yeah thermite that bitch.
I don't think I could get that piece of land back. I don't care though, we are both new owners, I have only seen the owner twice in 5 years, he's alright, came up to deer hunt this year, and his property has all of these blue spruces he'd have to cut through. If he did it to screw me I would be mad, if he asked I would let him.
The other guy was the one that mattered more, 100 or 200 yards by 10 or 20 yards his drive was on my property, and I think he cut down a bunch of trees too, it's all forest except for that part anyway. I haven't seen them at all in 5 years, but have 2 cables still up between trees so no one can drive back there.
I don't even need a house but high density housing is shifting towards being built as a luxury because its more profitable (and less work) to sell a couple to the people that DO pay than keep everything always occupied for affordable pricing.
Outside the post WWII bubble most new construction is always luxury focused. The old luxury becomes the entry and mid level places.
Millenials and Gen Z be like
cybercrime and cocaine trade are the new bank robberies
Seems like the AI didn't mention unions in the third panel.