Apple’s iPhone is four-times more likely to be stolen than an Android phone

Apple’s iPhone 17 Pro in Deep Blue
Even smartphone thieves don’t want Android phones. An iPhone is four-times more likely to be stolen than an Android phone, but Apple could well have the solution, one already inside your iPhone.
Zak Doffman for Forbes:
‎

If you own an iPhone, it’s four-times more likely to be stolen than an Android. The police say “up to three quarters of stolen phones are moved abroad, with 28% ending up in China or Hong Kong.” Put simply, if it’s taken then you’re not getting it back.
But Apple could well have the solution, one already hidden on your iPhone… A kill switch. When devices are looted from Apple stores, this feature turns up on social and local media. Phones lock up and sound an alarm, displaying a message on screen: “This device has been disabled and is being tracked. Local authorities will be alerted.”
If ever there was a solution to phone theft, this is it. A toggle on a user’s Apple Watch or a quick log in to iCloud could enable this to be triggered. There could even be an option that can recognize when a phone is snatched. Given how locked down Apple accounts are now, it would be easy to disable the kill switch using an online identity process.
Thus far, this kill switch only works on devices stolen from Apple’s own stores…
The current plague of phone thefts cannot continue without more drastic measures. It seems that this is the next logical move, and it falls to Apple to take the initiative.

‎
MacDailyNews Take: Many would consider it a strong selling point if every iPhone user had the ability to disable and track their stolen iPhone – as Apple does to iPhones (and other devices) stolen from Apple Retail Stores in smash and grabs, BUT:
Apple already empowers iPhone users with robust tools like Find My, Activation Lock, and Stolen Device Protection to remotely track, lock, erase data, and render a device unusable without the owner’s Apple ID credentials—effectively bricking it for thieves in most cases.
For retail store smash-and-grabs, Apple deploys an even more aggressive, immediate “kill switch” via proximity-based software on demo units, triggering alarms, disabling functionality, and alerting authorities the instant devices leave the store’s Wi-Fi network. Extending this instant, foolproof remote disable to every consumer iPhone sounds empowering, but Apple likely holds back for several pragmatic drawbacks that could outweigh the benefits:
• Abuse and False Claims: Verifying theft would be a nightmare — requiring police reports, proof of purchase, or eyewitness accounts for millions of reports annually. Malicious users could falsely flag devices to spite ex-partners, settle grudges, or sabotage secondhand sales, overwhelming Apple’s support and leading to wrongful bricks.
• Retail cases are straightforward: Apple owns the inventory and has direct telemetry.
Impact on Innocent Buyers and the Used Market: Stolen iPhones often resurface cheaply on secondary markets like Craigslist or eBay. A permanent disable could punish good-faith purchasers who bought unknowingly, stranding them with e-waste and eroding trust in Apple’s ecosystem — especially since sellers vanish with cash. Activation Lock already mitigates this by tying devices to Apple IDs (removable with proof), but a “retail-style” brick might be irreversible without Apple’s manual intervention, complicating legitimate transfers.
• E-Waste and Environmental Backlash: Bricking devices en masse would accelerate electronic waste, as thieves might dismantle for parts anyway, but victims couldn’t recover or repurpose hardware. This clashes with Apple’s sustainability pledges and could invite regulatory scrutiny or consumer boycotts over planned obsolescence perceptions.
• Privacy and Security Risks: A universal kill switch demands constant connectivity and deeper device monitoring, raising red flags for surveillance fears or vulnerabilities to hacks (e.g., nation-states coercing Apple to disable dissidents’ phones). It could also conflict with laws like right-to-repair mandates, locking users out of repairs or third-party services.
• Legal and Liability Hurdles: Broadening this feature might expose Apple to lawsuits from affected parties (e.g., disabled devices in rentals or family-shared plans) or demands from governments for backdoor access. Carriers already blacklist IMEIs for theft, so Apple avoids redundant, litigious territory.
In essence, while retail disables are a controlled, low-risk demonstration of the power of Apple’s infrastructure, scaling it consumer-wide invites chaos Apple has wisely sidestepped by prioritizing user-empowered (but reversible) tools over an iron-fisted kill swtich. If theft spikes, though, expect iterative tweaks like enhanced Stolen Device Protection rather than a full switch.

‎
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
The post Apple’s iPhone is four-times more likely to be stolen than an Android phone appeared first on MacDailyNews.