'Grab and run' bandits target upscale Back Bay stores

Swrrly is using the $2,000 handbag, purebred dogs and iPhones as a metaphor for conspicuous consumption. The people who purchase them don't distinguish themselves by the ability too "keep people who work retail employed" -- as anyone who shops a Wal-Mart, Stop & Shop or 99 cent store accomplishes the same end -- but by the visible and obvious largesse with which they conduct their purchases.

The nation's rich backed away from this form of consumption two years ago when it became clear that the nation was heading into an economic downturn. Their logic was that, by flaunting their advantage during a period of upheaval, they were being insensitive at best, but making themselves targets for the kind of crime featured above at worst.

The purchasing of these items alone isn't what's drawing Swrrly's ire, but the free and open display of these items that was prevalent last decade and the calling card of "celebutantes" like Parris Hilton, Nicole Richie and members of certain Brahmin stock who could be seen keeping small dogs in Kate Spade bags while strolling Newbury. The aristocracy flouting its toys while the peasant classes struggle for scraps and unemployment benefit extensions is what spurred that comment, and the lack of taste and potential consequences associated with those actions have driven America's turn toward consumer frugality, austerity and modesty.

The nation isn't going to "get over" last decade's ill advised purchases and lavish displays of the tech, housing and hedge fund nouveau riche, but it's definitely learning from it. Perhaps if the retailers took on some of their customers' newfound modesty, they wouldn't be targeted in this fashion.

The people laid of by the companies whose execs purchase these bags, the people who spent money on these bags last decade and are still paying the debt today, the consumers who drive our economy and see conspicuous consumption of these bags and other luxury items not as "aspirational spending" but as impetus for the recent economic downturn and evidence of a consumer base that lost any and all sense of its priorities.

The general public reacts to these crimes the same way it reacts to the publisher of Bazaar when she insists that stemming the tide of knockoff handbags should be a law enforcement priority -- scoffing and general laughter. Swrrly's "laizzez faire" attitude toward this crime isn't a statement on the crime itself, but on the socioeconomic conditions that led to it. If you haven't made it past the Ideas section or the Bill Brett party photos in the Globe lately, it might surprise you to know that the city's murder rate has increased somewhat and that crime in neighborhoods along Blue Hill Avenue is of somewhat greater concern to residents there than a few handbags on Newbury Street.

Considering the quality of the photo, I have no doubt that the people involved in this theft will be apprehended and prosecuted. That resolution, however, will do little to change the lack of public sympathy toward a luxury sector that seems more concerned with inventory and potential overstock than the city blocks beyond its shopping districts.

I'm imagining some Smoove-y gang leader, "Baby, I will acquire for your use, 45 Louis Vuitton handbags of the finest fashion, to elevate your status among your girlfriends. And then, baby, I will freak you."