Join the debate

[capz 0]

I'm having a debate with my boss about our system design.

Here's the question.

Would you rather have cameras out in the open for the deterrent factor or somewhat inconspicuous (or hidden if allowed by law), so maybe you have a better chance of catching a would-be workplace thief.

I say let them try and steal so you can weed out the bad apples. I think it could also do the neighborhood some good by getting a criminal off the street, instead of just warding him off your property, only to hit the next victim.

Opinions?

[scorpion 0]

It take a combination of all of the above. It is more a matter of the customers budget.

 

Cameras to be seen to deter. Why pay to have damaged items repaired such as cash registers that get thrown to the floor ect.

 

Then again they can damage the cameras so some hidden ones will back up the other cameras.

 

In some cases you can place "fake" cameras so that they take the hit, and the hidden cameras capture the event.

 

In day cares for instance you want the cameras to be seen in the parking lot, and the front desk.

 

It the kitchen, and food storage area you will want to use the covert motion detectors to catch employees who think they have a right to take food home for their family without permission.

 

Where security is of the essence then I agree with many combinations of cameras.

 

http://scorpiontheater.com/cvr.aspx

[VST_Man 1]

- GOOD covert cameras cost more. install & maintenance is also higher.

- deterance works. but really dumb or crazy perps will do it anyway.

- don't oversell yourself or your situation. commonsense applies.

- fake cameras are fake. be careful of presenting a secure enviornment and then getting sued because it was a fake camera.

- you can ALWAYS improve or add later based on results.

 

 

Just make sure you apply the proper camera for da job! ie. resturants usually need good area coverage and banks need facial details. completly different cameras.