Officers to ignore burglar alarms, save about $600,000 a year

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 1/21/5 | Henry K. Lee

[SmithL]

They'll respond only if evidence shows a crime occurred

- Burdened by thousands of false alarms, police in Fremont will become the first in California to stop responding to burglar alarms unless there is a confirmed break-in or security breach, officials said Thursday.

The new policy, effective Feb. 18, will allow police in the Bay Area's fourth-largest city to handle more urgent calls and save the city about $600, 000 a year in staff time and equipment costs, Fremont Police Chief Craig Steckler said.

"I'm going to get out of the alarm business," Steckler said. "I was never asked permission to get into it."

Under the policy, police won't respond to burglar alarms unless a resident, property owner or alarm company employee can show evidence that a crime occurred, such as glass breakage or seeing a suspicious person. Officers, however, will still respond to panic, duress and robbery alarms.

[SmithL]

Can you hear me now?

[shellshocked]

About time. Frankly, a false alarm is nothing but making a false report if a person demands the cops show. The person should be ticketed for the costs.

[atomicpossum]

So, can we arm ourselves NOW, then?

[Glenn]

Frankly, a false alarm is nothing but making a false report if a person demands the cops show.

Then they should be arrested.

Is there a full moon?

[2banana]

Alternate Headline: Buglers know know which city to hit!

Can't wait until they ban handguns - Rapists need their time too!

[PeterFinn]

Good. Will they also not respond to reports of shots fired when I off some perp for busting into my place?

[Wolfie]

Will they also not respond to reports of shots fired when I off some perp for busting into my place?

Nope. They'll still boogie on over for that.

[Disambiguator]

Michael Salk, vice president of the East Bay Alarm Association, disagreed. "The reason it works is because of the threat of police response," he said. "All a guard can do is make a citizen's arrest. Who's going to stay still for a citizen's arrest?"

If the "citizen" is armed, then the perp will usually stay still. Unfortunately, we are talking about California here. Holding a robber at gunpoint can be construed as violating his or her civil rights.

(I wish I could include a sarcasm tag here!)

[Gefreiter]

Maybe this is an entrepreneurial possibility for an ambitious FReeper.

A private security, first-response team that WILL respond to every alarm in its network. For a fee, of course. Annual membership? Monthly?

[Strategerist]

I saw this Brinks commercial last night where they dramatized the Fire Department showing up at this couple's house because their Brinks smoke alarm had AUTOMATICALLY called the Fire Department.

I simply couldn't believe that this would actually be attempted. The FD shows up every time a smoke alarm goes off? Ridiculous.

[MPJackal]

"About time. Frankly, a false alarm is nothing but making a false report if a person demands the cops show. The person should be ticketed for the costs."

That depends. Do the owners of the alarms pay a few to the police to monitor their alarm? Also, police do not prevent crimes, they respond to them. The possibility that the police may show up acts as a deterrent to crime. That deterrent is now gone in the case of B and E. I am willing to bet money that in the long run this will cost more money than it saves. But hey, the Dunkin Donut's will be much safer.

[MPJackal]

few = fee. oops.

[Strategerist]

As the article points out, most cities fine people beginning with the second false alarm and don't respond to locations that have had a set number of false alarms in a given period.

98% of burglary alarms are false alarms.

[sittnick]

Will they also not respond to reports of shots fired when I off some perp for busting into my place?

Nope. They'll still boogie on over for that.

I know! How about a burglar alarm that sounds like an AK-47? It will bring the police and maybe scare the perp?

[Incandesia]

Alarms are for the weak; Join your local Schutzhund association. >:)

[Niteranger68]

I think they should also stop responding to same-sex domestic disturbance calls unless both parties can offer a blood test.

[MPJackal]

I understand that, but again, the possibility that an alarm will trigger a police response prevents more crime than the police actually catch "in progress". Like I said, in the long run this will cost more money in insurance claims/rates, lost/damaged property and so on than it will save. Also expect to see the rate of B&E increase over the next few years as the criminal element learns the police will not respond to alarms. Not to mention the law suits for dereliction of duty when someone is injured, raped, or murdered because an alarm goes unheeded.

[Always Right]

As someone who has had about $30,000 stolen from their business in the last year, I would be pissed it the police did this. Responding to alarms easily deters many times more than $600,000 woth of crime in the city the size of San Fransissyco. This would be an invite for burgulars to break in.

[from occupied ga]

One of the local counties responded to a couple of hundred thousand burgular alarms last year (Dekalb?). All but one were false alarms.