How To End Bike Theft: The Honeybike Project

Bike thieves suck, so I decided to get even. Why not track and, if you'd like, shock these most egregious of folk?

With a $40 pay-as-you-go cell phone, stun gun, and some basic electronic components, you can teach bike thieves a lesson and, hopefully, foster a small social change through individual action:)

Shameless self-promotion: I've got this and my other stuff for sale here

Updated: here's me demoing this at Dorkbot Austin last month. And yes, I shock myself:)


Here's the original video of me explaining details on building this:

Step 1 Ingredients

Part of what will make this secure is variance in the approaches we take. Feel free to start with a system similar to mine, but be sure to vary it up!

For a basic system that shocks and tracks, here's what you'll need:
-stun gun; I used the basic, ~50,000 volt one I found at a local sporting goods store. ~$20. You could also mod an instant camera or build one from scratch...
-Phone capable of talking to some tracking system. I went with mologogo, but feel free to play around with others. For the boost mobile motorola i425t, I paid ~$40. Unlimited internet service is like 35 cents a day. I haven't tried, but I've heard reports of being able to use mologogo without buying the net service...
-a diode to connect in paralel with the stun gun, because we're obviously concerned about safety...
-assorted thin-gauge interconnecting wires and non conductive electrical tapes
-circuit protobyping board
-a basic npn transistor, with datasheet. i used the 2n5088.
-a resistor sized based on your transistor. i used a 1.5-ohm one
To choose the right transistor and resistor, read this guide and look at these circuits. If you're using this same design as I did, the load you're trying to control is the 9v battery connection to the stun gun at 9volts 2.8 amps. If you go off the vibrating motor, you're controlling this via something like ~5volts .5 amps...

Useful tools were:
-screwdriver for the weird screws in the back of the cell phone. it was like ultra-tiny torx or something; your best bet is to get the phone, try your existing collection of weird screwdrivers, and get a specific new one if you need to
-utility blade
-multimeter (with ammeter)
-wire stripper
-soldering iron, solder
-'helping hands' alligator clip + magnifying glass thing

Comments

[yasirjan]

Is the plant life user-generated? I've seen a number of bizarre and alien plants. How does the plant life work and what's the relationship between the creatures and plants. MBA essay editing

[Grey_Wolfe]

Not sure if this was your plan, but you'd be best suited by having contact points in both handles of the handlebar. Also, you'd wants both positive and negative on EACH handle. You want it to charge across the contacts like normal. If you've got positive on one handle and negative on the other (assuming enough charge) you run the risk of causing serious injury or death due to charge being forced through the heart. This would definitely get you sued, or worse. Just thought I'd throw that out there. By having both contacts on each handlebar, you illiminate the chance of missing because someone's riding w/ one hand. Though you'll get less uses per charge of the stun gun batteries.

[tronic]

It is STILL a bad idea if you put both electrodes on each handle. The problem arises when the current path to the skin is broken, the internal resistance of your body is very low. There WILL be a current loop between the handle bars from one side's positive going to the others' negative and the current only goes up if the resistance skin resistance is higher on one lead than another which is almost defiantly a given. again, DO NOT use any more than 2 electrodes spaced closely together if you attempt this. If you want to do both handle bars, you would need two guns so they don't go across your heart, and then you have to have some optical or physical electrical isolation so they don't act act as a series circuit of two capacitors..... On a last point, I strongly recommend not hacking a taser to your bicycle or anything else for that matter. They are dangerous and if your doing a cell phone you don't have FULL control over, you are asking for problems, such as when the prepaid cell company sends advertisements to your phone every couple of weeks and it vibrates to indicate a text message from your provider about their latest pre-paid deals, you will get a random shock yourself and be a very unhappy hacker.

[OliveGreenCarbine]

@tronic - note the off switch in the concept.
@most everyone else - note the why would I care if someone got injured after stealing something of mine? If just one person did actually die from stealing a bike, word would spread quickly on the street and in the media, and there would be an instant reduction in bike thefts. I fail to see any problems with this. There are or were places where caught theives would lose fingers or a whole hand as punishment. If this was the case in these USA now, we would have next to no theft.
@liseman - Good idea on self-protection!

[The Green Gentleman]

People who steal bikes or other large items are generally either desperate (i.e. very poor or suffering from drug or alcohol addictions) or have mental or emotional problems or deficits. These people do not weigh the consequences of their actions well. If your prediction were correct, you would find that murder rates in states with capital punishment would be near zero, and would be sharply reduced compared to those states that did not have such legislation. In fact, that is generally the not the case. Criminals generally feel justified in their actions (i.e. "so and so deserves to be robbed or die," or "I deserve to benefit by robbing or killing") therefore harsh consequences are not terribly effective in deterring crime, and may actually have the opposite consequences (i.e. "the State kills people who are bad, therefore it is okay for me to kill people who are bad" - sound familliar?). This is called "The Brutalization Effect."

Finally, does a mountain climber stop climbing mountains because someone else has fallen to his or her death? No, the climber assumes that the person who died was either foolish, unprepared or unlucky. They might even feel additional an thrill while climbing mountains because someone else has died doing the same thing.

[OliveGreenCarbine]

No, I think if capital punishment was fast, people would be less likely to commit crimes deserving it... the problem is most go a long time before actually happening with appeals and all.. I'm not arguing for or against it, incidentally. There is an apparent thought of 'I want that and can get away with it' prevalent in society rather than generations being taught to 'respect others and their property'. And all the wrongs whether real or imagined do not justify doing wrong to another. I've been stolen from before and I don't think I should go steal from another just because I percieve they could afford it. If I could shock, stop, or injure every jack-leg that tried to steal something from me as they stole it, I would certainly attempt it. There is no wrong in self-protection, including protecting your personal property.

Finally, was the mountain public domain or did the climber get permission from the land-owner? If neither, then was the owner still at fault for the death of the climber? No. And if that climber is carrying my bike off up my mountain then I think I may cut off his rope and let him ride my bike down the cliff, or just shoot. once for a warning, twice for ignoring it.

[The Green Gentleman]

So, because spending ten years on death row while filing appeals is such a cakewalk you think people are saying "what the heck - I'll just kill that guy"?

The reason why we have an appeals process is because people get convicted of crimes they didn't commit. It's supposed to reassure those who were just in the wrong place at the wrong time that the justice system is indeed about justice - not meting out punishment to whomever is on hand.  Self-protection is legal - provided - the action is commensurate with the intended crime.  If you (to use the case at hand) electrocute someone for stealing your bike (or push them off a cliff, as you seem to be indicating in your post), you may very well find yourself staring a life sentence in the face. 

In other words, the newspaper headline "Crazy Dude Electrocutes Would-be Thief, Faces Murder Charge" will probably not serve as the deterrent to crime you feel it should, much as the Columbine massacre didn't reduce the bullying of skinny, mentally-unstable fans of Marilyn Manson.

[--= Excogitate =--]

So if it doesn't matter either way to the criminal than we should give them less repercussions? The benefactors of the government should also be considered When sentencing offenders. Just because some may be warped, we should not lessen the consequences. Far too often I've personally seen reoffenders of violent crimes go out and destroy everyday tax paying, law abiding citizens lives. If you or your loved ones have suffered from a violent crime I can't see it in your post. And it's individuals that suffer that these laws pertain to and should cater to more so imo.

[The Green Gentleman]

I understand your feelings. However, I don't believe that something is wrong if practiced by one person, but right if practiced by a group of people. If it's wrong for one person to kill, it's equally wrong for a group of people to do so. We can call that group of people the State or a lynch mob, thieves or loan officers - it doesn't change the quality of their actions. Wrong is wrong.

That said, we were talking about killing people for stealing a Huffy.

[--= Excogitate =--]

Eh, I got caught up in the cosmic perspective. Although this discussion stems from a petty crime, the idea of a kinder gentler judicial system is parallel to the idea of communism; good in theory, bad in practice. Keep it simple. Bad deeds=bad punishment. Look at the cold war. It was cold because nobody wanted to see the outcome. And I'm not for killing people, but if they are sentenced to life anyway just save us the taxes...

[The Green Gentleman]

Assuming that innocent people have never been convicted of murder, which they have, but assuming that never happened, you're still advocating capital punishment because it's less expensive and might equate to lower taxes? Yikes. Even if that were correct (and it isn't: the number of appeals filed by people who don't want to be killed for their crimes makes capital punishment vastly more expensive than incarceration), that's several large leaps right of libertarian. That actually is within the same moral realm as electrocuting someone for stealing a Huffy.

[allen]

Why would you care? Because you'd be both criminally, i.e. jail time, and civilly, i.e. lose everything you own, liable.

As for those "places" where caught thieves lose finger, the US isn't one of those places. So, if you live in one of those places then you're good. If you live in the US - criminally and civilly liable.

Also, if someone who isn't even remotely connected with the theft is injured by you zapping the thief, as in the thief goes down in traffic precipitating a car crash that kills/injures someone, they you're on the hook for that as well.

Cheers.

[OliveGreenCarbine]

you may be on point there, but it shouldn't be so- like the case of the stoned drunk who stumbled out into the street and got hit by the delivery service truck...that guy loses a job because an idiot was inebriated and unable to control herself
Tally ho

[Colonel88]

u are so r8ght and cnt the thif just figure it out?

[Grey_Wolfe]

Maybe the thief's buddy. lol After the first guy fell on the ground twitching. Don't think many people are expecting an electric bicycle to bite them. But at the current design, it's not overly covert, so, your right, it would be fairly easy to spot, even if you weren't sure what it was.

[comander01]

wonder if it would be possible to insert the assembly inside, say the handle bars? Then you can just put the end covers back on and nobody would know. It shouldn't affect the cell reception too much, either.

[carlos.camposalcocer]

No one has funny videos?? like, this thing in real action???

[skidrum]

Wisconsin Statutes say

"939.49  Defense of property and protection against retail theft. (1) A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with the person's property. Only such degree of force or threat thereof may intentionally be used as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. It is not reasonable to intentionally use force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm for the sole purpose of defense of one's property."

So, assuming the thief touches your bike, gets shocked, then walks away, you're fine. But what if, in the process of riding your bike, said thief takes off his gloves, gets shocked, and falls into traffic. Do you want to be a killer?
And what about a curious child? What if your bike falls and some good-doer wants to put it back up? 

[Jrown]

The law changes as per district, but in areas to do allow defenses that can be considered traps (in an extreme example, the Mantrap home security systems) loss of life on behalf of a perpetrator is a liability on behalf of the criminal IF a warning of potential loss of life is posted.

In shorthand, if your bike does NOT have any warning about the existence of a potentially fatal security system, it might face the scrutiny of law.

However...

If one has been warned of a security system then chooses to disregard it, gets shocked and run over by a car, it's their own fault. It's the same scenario as if you were to touch an electric fence, get knocked back, and drown in a puddle: it is YOUR FAULT for touching the fence; the rest is a consequence of a really bad choice.

[anex]

this would not be an issue more than likely since he will be manually activating it. Im assuming he would confirm that it was being stolen by either first hand knowledge or by tracking his bike.

[frisbeechamp1983]

Good point Skidrum.

[bakermonitor]

for the next version i would suggest a model T ignition coil this will numb the mussels of the rider and it can be sustained rather than just a single shock

it works by flipping the polarity of the battery and built in ingintion coil will work wonderfully off of drill batteries or anney other source greater than 6 volts up to 16

[Freyberger]

I had my bike stolen and I so agree. Great instructable !!

[Brett_cgb]

It's not a good idea to pass electric current through the chest cavity - this can stop the heart with a very low current (voltage does not matter). The idea of placing both electrodes close together makes sense. This is how the stun gun originally works. Allowing the electrodes to arc will prevent electrical transients elsewhere is the system, though that is likely not a problem here. Consider placing thumbtacks in the seat (exposed disks), one for each butt cheek. This ensures a good contact, and would probably incapacitate a riders legs if/when the stun gun fires, further ensuring good contact.....

[LegendaryPrimate]

I have a question, then: How safe are actual tasers? My understanding of a taser is that two probes are fired from the taser, and for maximum effect you want one probe to enter the lower body and one to enter the torso. Then, a current is passed between the two probes, and consequently the body. Because electricity follows the path of least resistance, the current should essentially pass straight through a leg and the torso from one probe to the other, correct? Doesn't this pass a significant amount of electric current through the chest cavity?

[Jakooboo]

Voltage does not... but amps do.

[stupidloginthing]

thats what he said. current = amps.

[carpe_noctem]

perhaps if you had drop bars w/ road bike type brakes you could rig the stun to go through the lever and the hoods, granted you don't have hood covers. also the thief would have to be riding on the hoods for it to work....alot of factors required......

[russianmike]

Or moving them up several inches to that balls area.......

[rossta]

Yeah except the last time my bike was stolen, the thief didn't have a "balls area". She sure knew how to cry when I found my bike in front of her work and she had to explain her boss why some stranger was taking her bike home.

[xenobiologista]

Good idea. One contact in the front (beak part) of the seat, one contact near the rear. Definitely nonfatal, definitely painful as hell.

[askvictor]

Voltage does matter - it matters because without a high enough voltage you won't get any current flowing through the body/under the skin. 30V is about the minimum you'd need to get under the skin, and once you're through the skin, resistance is very low...

[bob.smitty]

While voltage matters, what shocks is the current. Your figure of 30V is incorrect, as is your assumption that the resistance is lower below the skin. The minimum voltage needed to produce noticeable shock is 9.7 V @300uA (a total of 2.91 W.) Skin resistance is typically 1MOhm/cm, and it's affected by a whole host of variables, like moisture of the skin (or lack of) being the most critical. Stun guns typically operate at 3mA, and voltages vary from 50KV to 160Kv (powers from 15W to 480W). The current is dependent on the conductivity of the skin, the higher the resistance, the lower the current. Note that there are physiological reactions below the voltage threshold, and while they can be measured, they are not noticeable to the subject.

[Brett_cgb]

Granted, voltage does matter, but not as much as you think. 30mA (0.03A) through the heart WILL stop it (less current will still affect the hearts operation, possibly lethal). The voltage required to drive that current depends on the body’s resistance, which changes depending on what the body is doing. If the body is exercising (as it likely would be on a bike), the resistance will be low due to sweat (among other things), allowing higher currents.

30V is the maximum voltage that can be applied under worst case conditions (sweating, standing knee deep in salt water) and not reach 30mA. This is the standard for hospital grade electrical equipment (that's what that green dot on some plugs and electrical outputs signifies).

- - - -

The stun gun is likely not lethal in its original configuration (electrodes less than 1 inch (2.5cm) apart) so there's little chance of driving a significant current through more than a few inches of skin, but increase the spacing and all bets are off.

F.Y.I.

Amps = ampere = current
Volt = voltage
Ohm = resistance

Amp = Volt / Ohm

- - - -

It’s hot, but it's a dry heat.......

[sspence]

Brett, the green dot does indeed mean hospital grade, but has nothing to do with 30v/30,mA. Just means it went through a higher level of QA/QC.

[ultrauber]

So...what are watts?

[sspence]

amps * volts = watts

[Brett_cgb]

In terms of DC (direct current, which a stun gun does NOT produce)
Watts ( W, a unit of power) = V * A (Volt * Amp)

- - - -

AC terms (alternating current):

For resistive loads (incandescent lamp or heater), the same equation still works.

With reactive loads (motors), things are more complicated as the voltage and current are not in phase - they do not measure zero at the same time. Current usually lags behind the voltage (assumes voltage and current are both sine waves). Additional terms needed for this discussion include frequency, phase angle, true power, apparent power, reactive power, power factor, and complex impedance.

With harmonic loads (fluorescent lamps, most electronics, and lamp dimmers), current is either in phase with voltage, or is zero (current is not a sine wave, may be a pulse during each half cycle). Additional terms for this discussion include frequency, harmonic distortion, and crest factor.

More than you wanted to know?

- - - -

For purposes of the stun gun, we can assume a resistive load across the electrodes.

[bob.smitty]

Brett, Couple of minor points. When Current and Voltage are out of phase (as you correctly point out in your inductive motor example) they can (and sometimes it is desirable) be at zero at the same time, if the phase shift is 180 degrees. Harmonic loads do not affect power at all, and are not relevant to this discussion. The current neither lags nor precedes voltage when out of phase. It's just out of phase. It is simply a convention to assume the current is behind the voltage (15degrees behind... it's the same thing as 165degrees ahead.) Complex impedance is not related to this discussion. Impedance itself is implied when you refer to reactive loads. Fluorescent lamps are not harmonic loads. The ballasts that drive them are. Current may not be a sine wave, but it MUST be a wave, and can never be a pulse. If current is zero, there is no voltage. (did you think this through?) Harmonic distortion does absolutely not apply to any power discussion. Crest factor is only a factor when you are rectifying AC. Fairly good display of power and control knowledge. Shame it's not germane to the subject. There's tons more I'd like to know, but I seriously doubt you'd be the one to school me. Nice dick flopping though.

[Brett_cgb]

> When Current and Voltage are out of phase (as you correctly point out in > your inductive motor example) they can (and sometimes it is desirable) > be at zero at the same time, if the phase shift is 180 degrees. If the phase shift is 180 degrees (lead and lag are essentially the same thing) then you have a generator rather than a motor if work is being done (there is a loss of energy in the system), or a resonant circuit (no losses). > (15degrees behind... it's the same thing as 165degrees ahead.) That's 345 degrees ahead... Running the calculations with 345 degrees ahead will give the same results as 15 degrees behind, but it's slightly more convenient (and easier to grasp) to restrict the range of angles to within a +/-180 degree range. In the real world, current pulses occur all over the place though they are not perfect rectangular pulses. Those devices sitting in front of you (computer and monitor) both use switching power supplies that use pulses of current to perform power conversions. It is not necessary to have a voltage in order to have a current. It is necessary to have a voltage to AFFECT a current (increase, decrease, change its direction of motion). > If current is zero, there is no voltage. (did you think this through?) Apparently more than you did.... How do you explain charged capacitors? A resonant half wave antenna? Antennas are an excellent place to observe points with 0 voltage/peak current AND peak voltage/0 current in a single piece of wire at the same time. Ever hear of standing waves? > Crest factor is only a factor when you are rectifying AC. Ever read the specifications for multimeters? Most meters are calibrated to measure an average value, but display it as an RMS value. When the waveform is a sine wave (or something close) everything is assumed to be correct. But if the waveform deviates from a sine wave, then RMS and Averaging meters will show different results. A DC-AC inverter with a "modified sine-wave" output is a good signal source. Check it out. I think you know enough to be dangerous....