[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]

Re: Deadbolt security

Subject: Re: Deadbolt security
From: "Doug" <not@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 16:50:01 -0800
Newsgroups: alt.security.alarms
References: <23293cc8-9c63-451c-aae6-4fdccc67cde1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <ec69588f-f345-4e34-a2cf-3638e35f73c5@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5fe0c803-30af-44b2-8999-59530bbeb19b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <a692ff01-443a-4a2e-be56-12d84a3c0298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <luyYk.15051$zQ3.4642@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <ee05ee66-f9a2-43a5-9ece-c0654b2a4513@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

"tourman" <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ee05ee66-f9a2-43a5-9ece-c0654b2a4513@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>RHC: No, the Mul-T-Lock is considered a high security lock along with
>a variety of others such as Assa, Abloy and Medeco. These locks are
>pretty much impervious to any form of picking (including this silly
>amateur "bumping" technique).

"Bumping" may be amateurish, the same could be said about cutting phone
lines, but unfortunately it appears to work in many cases.

In the past a certain degree of skill was required to pick a lock,
apparently
that isn't so anymore.

Doug

Prev by Message: Re: Wet Underground Conduit
Next by Message: Re: wired and wireless unit recommedations
Next by thread: OT ... audio
Index(es):
- Message
- Thread

alt.security.alarms Main Index | alt.security.alarms Thread Index | alt.security.alarms Home | Archives Home