Paranoid security question

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 12:23:12 -0500, Delenn <[email hidden]> wrote
in misc.fitness.weights:

Quoted message said:

I want to increase the security in my place of business, which is also
my home. I've gotten a couple of quotes from monitoring companies and I
like the idea of having smoke censors as well as motion detectors
alerting when there's a problem while we're away. This isn't primarily
to prevent personal loss or security while we're in-residence, it's to
protect my business assets when we're away from home.

Get complete perimeter protection with a motion detector as back up.
Never go with an alarm company that uses motion detection as primary
detection. Also, have it hardwired. You'll have a hard time finding
someone that can do that these days and be able to hide all the wiring
but it is far superior to wireless.

Quoted message said:

My husband says no. He says he doesn't want the police coming into our
house when we're not here.

So if a neighbor sees someone kick in your front door and calls the
police, does he think that they will not go inside? Also, if it is a
false alarm and no evidence of entry, the cops will not go inside.

Quoted message said:

I'm stuck on this one. I see his point, although I don't really share
his concern/paranoia about bad cops. We're not, to our knowledge,
engaged in any questionable activity and I really don't think the cops
alert the building inspector (we live in a decrepit below-code hovel).
But just because we're not guilty of anything doesn't mean I'm okay with
having people come in and poke around, even Good Guys.

They send in the dogs first. You can always blame the mess on the
K-9:-)

Quoted message said:

What do you think is an alternative?

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

Go with the alarm system or hire someone to stay at your house while
you're away. You have clients come into your house, it can't be that
bad.

Delenn said:

My husband says no. He says he doesn't want the police coming into our
house when we're not here.

They might find his stash.

"Delenn" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

Two words.

Satellite phone.

Lee Michaels said:

"Delenn" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

Two words.

Satellite phone.

That's an interesting point. The cost of the satellite phone might be
surmountable if it allowed to skip a monthly monitoring charge, i.e.,
alarm trips and the satellite phone rings.

The concept of carrying a phone on a cruise or while camping in the
northern woods is a bit sad, though.

D.

"Dally" pouted

Quoted message said:

Lee Michaels said:

"Delenn" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

Two words.

Satellite phone.

That's an interesting point. The cost of the satellite phone might be
surmountable if it allowed to skip a monthly monitoring charge, i.e.,
alarm trips and the satellite phone rings.

The concept of carrying a phone on a cruise or while camping in the
northern woods is a bit sad, though.

I am someone, who in his youth, received lots of survival training. The old
fashion kind, good old WOODCRAFT! How to chop dosn trees in a snow storm
and cozy up to a fire for a week or so. That sort of thing.

And I have read about hundreds of survival stories. I have always been
fascinated by them. And in almost all of those situations, the horrible
ordeal could have been prevented or greatly reduced by a satellite phone
call.

If I get far off the beaten path, you can bet I will have one of those space
phones along with a gps device. Afterall, if terrorists can afford and use
them in the middle east, what is your excuse?

Talk to folks who are safety conscious, they don't think that space phones
are "sad". Think of it as another form of insurance/risk management.

I find it interesting that you want to increase the security of your home
office, and apparently do not understand the need for a modern communication
device.

Lee Michaels said:

I find it interesting that you want to increase the security of your home
office, and apparently do not understand the need for a modern communication
device.

Oh, I'm not dismissing the notion. I think it makes a great deal of
sense, actually. I just dislike how cellphones make me reachable and
value time off the grid and am mourning the downside of better
communication. I honestly hadn't considered upgrading phones until you
mentioned it. I already hate my cellphone.

But I see the value in it.

D.

"Dally" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Lee Michaels said:

"Delenn" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

Two words.

Satellite phone.

That's an interesting point. The cost of the satellite phone might be
surmountable if it allowed to skip a monthly monitoring charge, i.e.,
alarm trips and the satellite phone rings.

The concept of carrying a phone on a cruise or while camping in the
northern woods is a bit sad, though.

They carry 'em to the top of Mount Everest now, so, welcome to the new
millenium.

David

In article <[email hidden]>,

Delenn said:

I want to increase the security in my place of business, which is also
my home. I've gotten a couple of quotes from monitoring companies and I
like the idea of having smoke censors as well as motion detectors
alerting when there's a problem while we're away. This isn't primarily
to prevent personal loss or security while we're in-residence, it's to
protect my business assets when we're away from home.

My husband says no. He says he doesn't want the police coming into our
house when we're not here.

Ah, so having some one kick the door in and robbing you blind with no
response from the police 'cause you have no alarm is the better option?
Smart hubbie you got there...

Quoted message said:

I'm stuck on this one. I see his point,

He has none honestly. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Quoted message said:

although I don't really share
his concern/paranoia about bad cops. We're not, to our knowledge,
engaged in any questionable activity and I really don't think the cops
alert the building inspector (we live in a decrepit below-code hovel).
But just because we're not guilty of anything doesn't mean I'm okay with
having people come in and poke around, even Good Guys.

The good guys only have cause to enter if they see signs of entry not
just 'cause an alarm went off. So you don't want the cops to come
quickly and attempt to arrest the criminals? An interesting way of
dealing with your security.

Quoted message said:

What do you think is an alternative?

New husband? Large dog? Handgun courses?

Quoted message said:

We typically travel to places without cellphone access.

You guys are full of good personal protection ideas aint ya?

Quoted message said:

D.

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

Delenn said:

to prevent personal loss or security while we're in-residence, it's to
protect my business assets when we're away from home ....
(we live in a decrepit below-code hovel).

Think of yourself as a thief that is casing your neighborhood. Why
would they want to gain access to your house specifically over any
other house? They not only want certain goods but easy simple access -
its not always necessary to alarm a residence IMHO. They want something
easily available, with quick access to come and go secretly without
notice. So if I were you I would look at the exterior of your house,
shrubbery to hide in, windows accessable? curtains down? lights on
variable timers? What kind of locks do you have on your doors now?
window locks? Even a simple dowel stick in a sliding window makes it
more complicated to get into your house. They dont want complicated
when easy pickings lives next door. Even an alarm company sticker on
your door/windows make the common thiefs think you have an alarm system
even when you dont. So basically house thieves (just like car thieves)
look for stupid people who leave their doors, garages, gates, bikes etc
unlocked with a 'steal me' sign on them. Look at simple changes that
you may not even be aware of that makes your house more vulnerable than
the next one.
You mentioned a smoke detector - well every house should have one of
those regardless plus a carbon monoxide detector - but a sprinkler
system is going a bit overboard I think. Keep your personal
files/backup discs etc in fire proof filing cabinets or offsite in a
storage facility. I would be buying higher residential/business
insurance before a costly alarm system which you may or may not even
need or use.

joanne

joanne said:

Think of yourself as a thief that is casing your neighborhood.

Oh I DO! Where do you live? Give me your address.

"joanne" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Delenn said:

to prevent personal loss or security while we're in-residence, it's to
protect my business assets when we're away from home ....
(we live in a decrepit below-code hovel).

Think of yourself as a thief that is casing your neighborhood. Why
would they want to gain access to your house specifically over any
other house? They not only want certain goods but easy simple access -
its not always necessary to alarm a residence IMHO. They want something
easily available, with quick access to come and go secretly without
notice. So if I were you I would look at the exterior of your house,
shrubbery to hide in, windows accessable? curtains down? lights on
variable timers? What kind of locks do you have on your doors now?
window locks? Even a simple dowel stick in a sliding window makes it
more complicated to get into your house. They dont want complicated
when easy pickings lives next door. Even an alarm company sticker on
your door/windows make the common thiefs think you have an alarm system
even when you dont. So basically house thieves (just like car thieves)
look for stupid people

you hit the nail on the head Joanne and hence the reason for her concern

Quoted message said:

who leave their doors, garages, gates, bikes etc
unlocked with a 'steal me' sign on them. Look at simple changes that
you may not even be aware of that makes your house more vulnerable than
the next one.
You mentioned a smoke detector - well every house should have one of
those regardless plus a carbon monoxide detector - but a sprinkler
system is going a bit overboard I think. Keep your personal
files/backup discs etc in fire proof filing cabinets or offsite in a
storage facility. I would be buying higher residential/business
insurance before a costly alarm system which you may or may not even
need or use.

joanne