Re: Self Monitoring....

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ithoughtwe weretrying to ignoreourfriendpaulie



"Stanley Barthfarkle" <sbarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:WBtUe.1287$Xq6.570@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> You really should stick to Belgian newsgroups...can't understand a word of
> your English.
>
>
>
> <-pull@shoot> wrote in message
> news:cna3i1tv1fb1u77t301g0r5nbdunh8nksg@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> Monitoring by professionals is not required.
>>
>> The usual arguments of monitoring stations are that they are
>> available all the time, they apply standard procedures with your
>> authorization and some phone numbers you have to provide of persons
>> they can contact and more...
>>
>> How do i reject theyre "not reachable" argumentation?
>> When an alarm is detected i dial 2 numbers:
>> - my cell phone
>> - 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" (line busy) to an alternative person who has been
>> informed prior and agree to take action to warn police of an
>> ongoing alarm and monitor theyre presence acknowledge.
>>
>> I can redirect the alarm phone number (and check presence) of the
>> involved person:
>> - with my home-phone before i leave
>> - with my cell phone at any time and place;
>>
>> When I'm not reachable on my cell-phone, i will know exactly who is
>> involved for action.
>>
>> I repeat for the "deaf pro's", no direct personal intervention, police
>> will do it and theyre (re)action time will be monitored by a truly and
>> well defined person for true information.
>>
>> How good will you feel when you elect an all included out of your
>> control standard handling procedure by a monitoring station to protect
>> your belongings?
>> Think it over.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
>