Re: The Bling gang

[tourman <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Apr 10, 10:32=A0am, "Bill" <billnomailnosp...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Can anyone cast light on this glaring omission in the show. I presume
> > these mansions are well protected even against "professional" thieves,
> > so how could a group of spoiled teenyboppers get past this kind of
> > security. I have to assume it was people simply not arming their
> > systems or other glaring "user error" stupidity like that. After being
> > robbed once however, you'd think they'd do something even as simple as
> > arming their system properly....
>
> A "mansion" does not necessarily have a more sophisticated security syste=
m
> than any other home. And actually these people would tend to be business
> types or the home would be managed by business types. And they would only
> install the minimum system required by the insurance company.
>
> Whereas a person owning a regular home might be more careless with their
> money. They might have additional security features installed which would
> not give them any additional break on their insurance rates.
>
> And that is how the rich get richer, by watching their pennies.
>
> TV is fantasy. The fancy laser beams and so forth they show in these
> "mansions" is a crock of hooey!
>
> The reality is that the most sophisticated alarms are going to be in
> something like a beer distribution warehouse! (Other than government secr=
et
> stuff.) Why? Because these get broken into the most! And insurance compan=
ies
> know this - thus they require an iron clad security system!
>
> It all has to do with statistics, losses, and what the insurance company
> requires.
>
> Back to the mansions... Even a basic system would be quite difficult for =
a
> "teenybopper" to get past.
>
> I think you are barking up the wrong tree. Might want to look at employee
> theft... (Some of these "mansions" can have up to 60 employees working
> there!)

RHC: Bill, I don't know what you mean by "barking up the wrong tree".
I'm not passing judgment here; just asking for comment hoping that
someone who may deal with people like this could chime in and give us
some idea about the actual type of security normally installed in a
$5million mansion owned by someone with more money than they know what
to do with. I'm in the business and there is no fantasy this end. I
know what we install in homes like that up here, and our crime rate
and risk is tiny compared to LA.

These young thugs were caught by security cameras in one of the homes.
Presumably, video security would normally follow electronic security
as an add on, and not likely be the only level of security in a home
of this size and expense. Nor would anyone who had a home like this
depend upon a stupid, largely ineffective basic "2 doors and a motion"
free system by one of the large nationals. Homes like this often have
someone who is responsible for care of the home on a contractual  or
even a "live in" basis, and I doubt very much if the owner would skimp
on a basic security system to save a few bucks, given what he or she
has to lose.  On the contrary, I would expect it to be quite
extensive, likely a full perimeter system, with video security as an
add on..It is possible that as the investigation is underway,
something like an "inside job" may be uncovered....

But the question still remains....how did these amateurs bypass any
security system(s) present in these homes. Notwithstanding the
stupidity of Paris Hilton leaving a key under the front mat (which
likely meant she didn't arm any system in place either) surely at
least one of these homes burglarized had a working system in place,
and surely at least one of these systems was armed.

It's an interesting question.