Re: Commercial Alarm - help

["Russell Brill" <russwbrill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jack,

I'm curious, what would all of these cops be doing if they weren't
responding to Burg alarms??? Remember, lots of tax payers own alarms........
Russ

"Jackcsg" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:j7-dnQG0W-PsdvDenZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:913c0494b0187f736b0f30d795eaaaeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Jackcsg said:
>>
>> >Here's how simple the calculation is: The Police are notified to respond
> to
>> >a burglar alarm going off at xyz residence. Police arrive, find no sign
> of a
>> >break-in at the premise. This is logged as a "False Alarm". This
> information
>> >is collected all Year long. At the end of the year, they compare the
> actual
>> >calls for response, with ACTUAL crimes. Response vs. Crime.
>> >
>> >100% Response
>> >99% False Alarm
>> >1% Valid Crime
>> >
>> >If I'm wrong, show me a report from a responding authority having
>> >jurisdiction that states otherwise. "SHOW ME"
>>
>> Yes, that's exactly my point.  The police are using an unfair statistic,
>> and they don't understand why it's unfair.
>
> Unfair statistics? Your point? Your point is dilusional.
>
>> Judging alarm companies by the total number of false alarms they create:
>> that's fair.
>
> So what a false alarm index? Where do you suppose this data would come
> from?
> Alarm companies? You just said that would be unfair.
>
>> Judging alarm companies by the average number of false alarms each system
>> causes:  that's even more fair.
>
> That's what you would think. Unfortunately alarm companies don't follow
> through with the result.
> Instead AHJ's do.
>
>>
>> Judging alarm companies by the ratio of false alarms to actual
>> burglaries:
>> that's complete bullshit.  Alarm companies have no control over how many
>> burglary attempts there are.  If all the burglars decided to take the
>> next
>> month off, the false alarm rate would be 100%.  If the burglars decide to
>> work extra hard and commit more crimes, the false alarm rate would
> actually
>> drop.   Would the lower percentage mean that alarms are working better?
> Of
>> course not.
>
> Look, again...put aside your personal feelings. No body is saying the
> industry is not effective, nor that alarms aren't either. You're side
> stepping the information, just like the industry. Some of us just want to
> see it more, or most effective. Stop focusing on what you think works, and
> realize there is a circular pattern here. Realize for every action, there
> is
> a reaction. For every reactive response, there may be a proactive
> initiative. Think Man!
>
>>
>> Alarm systems are electronic devices that have a certain failure rate,
> just
>> like any other piece of electronic equipment, and that failure rate is
>> not
>> affected by the number of burglaries that are attempted.  This is just
> like
>> fire alarms.  The number of false fire alarms has nothing to do with the
>> number of fires.  I'll bet you'd find the percentage of fire alarms that
>> are false is also in the high nineties, simply because there are more and
>> more fire alarm systems and no corresponding increase in the number of
>> fires.
>
> These numbers aren't based on comparisons. That's how the Politicians and
> idiots, use this information.
> It's a simple fact of economic's, man-hours vs. tax dollars. Alarm
> installers/dealers aren't paid by tax dollars, responding authorities are.
> Think.
>
>> Trying to cut that false alarm percentage is a game the alarm companies
> can
>> never win.
>
> I disagree. Finding the $9 answer for alarm companies will never happen.
> It's going to be tough because the industry is geared towards being
> competitive with one another.
> The industry is too focused on RMR. Lost was the value that alarm systems
> could have, or should have provided. It's not everywhere though. Some, the
> few, do make, or try to make a difference in the industry. Some of those
> guys are right here.
>
>