BURGLARY ALARM AND CCTV

Burglary Alarm and CCTV



Burglary Alarm and CCTV

In our society, crime and the fear of predatory crime threatens the livability and viability of urban areas. Burglary is especially problematic because it carries tremendous costs, both economic and social, as a victim can suffer financial loss as well as the threat of violence in the event of a direct confrontation with the intruder.

The burglar alarm system comprises of 2 movement sensors and a sound sensor, the motion sensors are located in the main entrance, and the sound sensor is located in the main office. The alarm can be reset via use of a 9-digit keypad. When the correct code is pushed in the alarm will turn off or on.

In assessing the cost-effectiveness of burglar alarms to the community, one must look beyond the individual residence and view the effect of a person's alarm may or may not have on his neighbors. In one scenario, a burglar skips the protected house and goes to the unprotected. As a result, total burglary rate remains the same, as if there were no alarms; merely the victims have changed. Another possibility is that a burglar cannot tell which houses are protected, but knows what fraction of houses in the neighborhood is protected. In this case, burglar alarms serve two functions. One is to stop a burglary in progress (for alarm-protected houses), the second is to deter attempts, which works equally well for protected and unprotected houses. Also, houses with expensive items are likely to have a burglar alarm installed. This suggests that benefits from alarms are greater than estimated because the burglar alarmsare not merely deterring random burglaries but generally expensive ones. This applies to houses and commercial real estate with valuable property, as well as to homes and businesses with vulnerable inhabitants (Nasar, 1981; Rengert, 1988; Sesnowitz and Hexter, 1982). Shifting our attention to the drawbacks of alarm systems, one must take into consideration the rate of false activations. Residents without alarms would not resent valid activations because these might remove a burglar from the community and benefit everyone.

However, no one benefits from a false activation (Hakim and Buck, 1992). Not only are non-alarm homeowners hurt by these false alarm activations, but also the local police, who lose a sense of urgency and precaution. This is dangerous to the responding police officers, who might encounter an actual burglar while they are unprepared. False alarms incur cost but offer no benefit, so there is a justification for charging the activator the cost of response. This could have a negative impact, as people do not internalize the positive externalities to society and could be deterred by the fine and end up with fewer alarms than would be desirable.

They have two CCTV cameras installed on site, they have one keeping track of who enters and leaves the premises, these are connected up to a television in the back room, which records the film at 2 second ...