we already have a set of rent-a-cops in the area, but we've still had 3 home invasions in the past 2 months, maybe 6 major ones over the past 2 years, plus a lot of petty crime in back yards and open garages in the past two years... it came to a head a couple weeks ago when we had 2 major ones 4 days apart. people are just tired of having to worry about so much and are willing to go that extra step and do what it takes to reduce crime around here.
Neighborhood-wide monitoring
- Thread starter DeLicious
- Start date
beelzerob
Senior Member
Ya, but then what if the DVR keeper is in on it??!
Your story sounds very familiar. We lived in a pretty small neighborhood (maybe 50 homes), pretty new really, but on the edge of town. Someone suggested getting a neighborhood watch going, since Tucson is a property crime capitol. We got it going, got the signs, got a policeman to come out and give us a pep-talk....and then we started finding out just how bad the problem was. The advantage of a neighborhood watch is that everyone reports what is happening so that you're informed. The disadvantage is that you're now informed just how pervasive the problem is. You begin to look at EVERY vehicle with complete suspicion. Any sense of innocent security was gone.
I lived on a cul-de-sac with my cousin's family, my parents, and my grandma (each in our own house). Every one of those houses had people home during the daytime, when all the breakins were being attempted. We sat down one day and decided we could either militarize our homes...or simply move.
Crime was by no means the worst problem there, but it was certainly the final straw. Now, 1 1/2 years later and 2400 miles away, we're all together again and could not be ANY happier. Sure there are plenty of guns here, but as long as you don't have antlers, they won't bother you.
I know that's not an option for many people, but all I can say is that all of the technology in the world wouldn't have given me peace-of-mind in Tucson. It didn't matter to me if home invasions were lowered down to just 1 house a year...if it was my house.
AutomatedOutlet
Senior Member
Doesn't surprise me one bit. I've gone to several meetings with the Dallas Chief of Police and have seen their stance on things. They seem to be very negative on anything that may increase the calls to 911.....
Dallas has also adopted "verified response", meaning that they won't even come out for a buglar alarm unless there is some other verification.
Also, in the state of Texas, you have to be careful because monitored video cameras fall under the same state regulations as bugular alarms as far as licensing. Although you should be OK if the HOA does it, you still should check it out.
If home invasion is the real issue CCTV will be way more expensive and less effective then other technologies.
The DVR keeper doesn't always get an administrative password and all system events are relayed offsite. The cameras I would use in a design like that have internal backup storage so the DVR would need to stay down for a while then again rather then a streamer per house I would push for a mini DVR so the main DVR is mearly a consildated interface for the entire project. It can also be a redundent recorder but thats not a requirement.
In this sence you would would not be able to easily predict which recorder was recording which camera and the main console doesn't expose stop recording, stop schedule, stop networking or delete. So you would have to pull the plug on something and when you did it would be logged and look pretty obvious and you would only stop the redundent recordind while the remote DVR and the public area cameras and neighbor cameras stayed functional. So protecting the effectiveness of video evidence can be dealt with and really for not too much more depending on the setup it may even be less.
Damn sure check the licensing issues in TX all of the public cameras fall into their territory. IIRC Texas is one of few states that fine both the merchant and the customer for unlicensed work.
Generally you are allowed to DIY whatever you want on the property that you own and reside in. So putting the cameras on individual houses would be done by the homeowners the public areas however would need a licensed company to install them.
The DVR keeper doesn't always get an administrative password and all system events are relayed offsite. The cameras I would use in a design like that have internal backup storage so the DVR would need to stay down for a while then again rather then a streamer per house I would push for a mini DVR so the main DVR is mearly a consildated interface for the entire project. It can also be a redundent recorder but thats not a requirement.
In this sence you would would not be able to easily predict which recorder was recording which camera and the main console doesn't expose stop recording, stop schedule, stop networking or delete. So you would have to pull the plug on something and when you did it would be logged and look pretty obvious and you would only stop the redundent recordind while the remote DVR and the public area cameras and neighbor cameras stayed functional. So protecting the effectiveness of video evidence can be dealt with and really for not too much more depending on the setup it may even be less.
Damn sure check the licensing issues in TX all of the public cameras fall into their territory. IIRC Texas is one of few states that fine both the merchant and the customer for unlicensed work.
Generally you are allowed to DIY whatever you want on the property that you own and reside in. So putting the cameras on individual houses would be done by the homeowners the public areas however would need a licensed company to install them.
damn, this is all 1000 times more complicated than i wanted to get into... what about cameras on private properties that are pointing at public spaces, like streets or alleys? there is no expectation of privacy in those places, and if fellow homeowners want to share those streams with their neighbor, there's no licensing that should be involved in that.
Correct the homeowner can mount whatever they like on the house they own and currently reside in. No stipulations on the direction the device points.
However you will find some locations would not be so friendly to this method and would be easier to just pay someone to mount and focus the cameras.
beelzerob
Senior Member
Well what about that then...instead of a neighborhood-wide, global GPS-tracking redundant system....just select some very key houses, at neighborhood entry points or intersections, and enlist them in the campaign. You'll have a form of redundancy if you cover enough houses. And it will be on private property, and the systems can be much smaller and simpler (1 camera, 1 DVR). Now, who actually OWNS the systems...that's a good question, and of course it'd take some major buyin by some households.
beelzerob
Senior Member
Well, the question I think is...do you want monitoring that you can be watching as it happens? Or do you want monitoring that you can go back and reference after something has happened? If the later, then you don't need to be uploading everything, just store it locally.
Just make sure the DVR's can be accessed via web just for maintenance checks or to make sure they're online.
Just make sure the DVR's can be accessed via web just for maintenance checks or to make sure they're online.
I know this thread's been quiet for a while, but I wanted to see if you've done anything further with the project, and try to answer your last question. I think the way to do this is as you said, get 8-10 key houses that already have broadband to install cameras. But, get each house to buy something like this:
http://www.staples.com/office/supplies/Sta...p;ci_sku=708618
(not an endorsement, just the first one I found off Google, but there are lots of 2-4 camera web enabled DVR systems, cameras included, in the $250 - 350 range). Tech savvy is not an issue, as the units are administered through the web. Set up the roputer at each house to allow you to access the unit (maybe a VPN router is appropriate), then once installed you can administer remotely, the homeowner doesn't need to understand anything technical. Systems like this would also get rid of the bandwidth concern, becuase you're not uploading all video to a central source, it's being stored locally on a rolling basis on the DVR. Only if there is an incident, or if you want to check the camera for a couple of seconds a few times a day, would you log in over the Internet and view the video, so the upload bandwidth requirements would be minimal.
Assuming you guys can handle the install yourselves, a 10 location, 20-40 camera system would run about $2,500 - $3,500, which is maybe within an HOA budget.
