Re: Verified Response

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"RLB"  wrote in message ...

> "Bob Worthy" wrote:
> >
> > RLB  wrote in message
> >
> >> > How many Cities have tried Verified Response and then found
> >> > B&E's went up or have cancelled the Verified Response program?
> >>
> >> Probably few to none.
> >
> > That is correct. However, over the years of gathering statistics from
both
> > sides, public pressure and with new local government administrations,
there
> > are those that are reconsidering their decission about going to verified
> > response including Salt Lake City, which I believe was the first to go
to
> > VR.
>
> Agreed.  I suspect it's mostly public pressure.  They ignored or twisted
the
> statistics when they decided to go with VR.  They'll do the same thing
while
> abandoning the policy.

Yep

> >> Much less busy than usual.  The fact is police waste a lot of precious
> >> time responding to false alarms. The solution isn't to fight city hall
but
> >> to find
> >> ways to reduce false dispatches.
> >
> > There is no such thing as a false dispatch. Unnecessary dispatch maybe.
>
> I suspect you knew what I meant.

Yep

> >>Verified response is one way to reduce false
> >> dispatches.  The problem is it makes it almost impossible to catch
anyone
> >
> > Not to mention putting the runners in harms way
>
> Naah.

It only takes once

>By the time a runner arrives the thief has left and >the goods have
> already been pawned, not that the powers that >be actually care either
way.

World is going to hell in a hand basket