Re: 34. Is monitoring required?

["Jim Rojas" <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

After 4 years of endless dribble, we can safely say that Paul's brain is
still not immune to RFI. It's time to take the headphones off Paul. Maybe
one of us "PROS" can send you a tin foil lined hat to block all the unwanted
RFI.

Yes Paul, there is a life beyond RFI...

Jim Rojas

<-pull@shoot> wrote in message
news:903bb1togrfpkhhcq6gqeljpagk2u0s3ki@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> NO monitoring is not required just like dyers do as good
> the installation job than "so called" pro's.
> Too many false alarms have lead police to a point that they lower the
> intervention priority of alarm calls.
> Where is the benefit to have monitoring?
>
> Initially the cause of police complains about false alarms was that
> the systems where installed by non pro's, not reliable they said..
> Did the pro's installations improve false alarms, i think so when it
> boils down to selecting the appropriate type of sensor (dog present,
> sunshine,..), but you can have recommendations/advises also, so why
> would a pro installation be better when it boils down to false alarm
> system reliability ?
>
> You can make a parallel between installation knowledge and monitoring,
> why should you need them?
>
> Let's see how i handle my alarms without monitoring ?
>
> First, i prefer a silent alarm approach :
> - i don't see who allows himself to involve external persons not
>  directly involved with a noisy sound/flashlight outside.
>  There is already enough unwanted noise around;
>  Its no longer an alarm system according to law when those
>  external devises are not present, Dyer's welcome.
> - i prefer several low volume buzzers, located at multiple
>  places inside my house, in order to inform the intruder that he
>  has been detected.
>  There are enough spare wires in the cables to the sensors to
>  provide the required alarm signal to small buzzers all around
>  the protected area's.
> - i let the system rings directly to my cell phone. If i like to
>  have my neighbor's involved, i give them a personal call and
>  explain them the ongoing problem.
>  At least i will know who is involved to observe the surrounding and
>  who look if the police are arriving. No direct intervention;
> - second, i let the system call back hiss own phone-line who will
>  be busy of course (see below for more details).
>
> Is a monitoring station required ?
> The usual arguments of monitoring stations are that they are
> available all the time and that you will not receive the alarm call
> all the time. Well yes and no..
>
> How do i attempt to solve that?
> When an alarm is detected it dial my cell phone and the place
> where the alarm is originated from, my home. Why ?
> Well when i'm not reachable for action (at the theater for instance
> or for any other reason) i redirect my alarm phone-line
> "conditionally" (when the line is busy) to an alternative person who
> agree to take action.
> When an alarm goes on, my alarm phone-line is busy, so it redirects.
>
> Why do i not change the phone number in the alarm control panel to
> redirect the call?
> Redirection by means of a phone is less error risky, it can be done :
> - with my home-phone in a semi-automatic manner, the
>  redirection/cancel data is included and stored in the phone number
>  to call;
> - from my cell phone at any time and place;
>
> So, is monitoring required?
> Do they do a better job whit theyre standard procedures?
> Is outside warning (yelling and flashing devices) mandatory?
> Are very noisy sirens inside required to disturb intruders?
>
> Well it depends on your choice and how good you will feel
> afterwards about the selected solution.
> How good will you feel when you select an all included out of your
> control handling or your personal intervention when there is an alarm
> going on. Think it over.
>
> Paul
>