Home security is a curious beast. People invest in expensive home security systems and monthly monitoring with the expectation that doing so will keep them safer. Chances are they will be. But why? Because of the deterrence factor.
I have decided to write about home security systems and deterrence after reading an interesting post published on the Slate website. The post in question implies that paying for an expensive security system along with monthly monitoring is a waste of money because “it’s not protecting you, anyway.”
Police Agencies Don’t Respond
The main thrust of the article is that paying for monitored security is a waste of money because police agencies do not respond to alarm calls. The post goes on to cite data suggesting that 98% of all home security alarms are false alarms. Police departments around the country have deprioritized burglar alarm calls for that very reason.
As the post points out, it could take anywhere from 40-60 minutes for police to respond in a low crime community. In a high crime community, the police might not respond at all unless an alarm call is verified first. All of this is taken to imply that a failure to respond equals little to no value from monitored home security. I would disagree. Why? It goes back to deterrence.
Criminals Admit to Being Deterred
There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of security system alarms are false alarms. But the article did not discuss the deterrence effect. Numerous studies done over the years indicate that burglars avoid homes they know are protected by modern home security. Criminals themselves admit as much.
Assuming the deterrence factor is legitimate, it would be normal to expect that most alarms are false alarms. Burglars not breaking into homes leaves only one other possibility for alarms going off.
Not only that, but police agencies continue to warn people to lock their car doors even though burglars are not necessary we stopped by doing so. We are told to lock our doors because it is a way to slow burglars down or cause them to look for softer targets. The exact same principle applies to home security.
Consumers Do Have Options
Fortunately, the Slate article did not dismiss home security altogether. While it mentioned big name companies with monitored security systems, like Vivint Smart Home, the author did mention DIY home security and self-monitoring. The two combined make for a cheaper alternative that can be just as effective.
Buying a DIY system means installing it yourself. If you are handy enough to know how to use a Wi-Fi network – meaning you know how to connect a phone or computer to your home network – setting up a wireless home security system should not be too difficult.
As for monitoring, you will be managing that yourself as well. You will have to set up the system to send alerts to your phone or email as needed. That also means constantly monitoring whatever channel you have chosen for receiving notifications.
Deterrence Is Still the Key
Even with a self-monitored DIY system, deterrence is still the key to your success. Bear in mind that you will not be able to respond any more quickly than the police in most cases. Instead, you are relying on burglars passing by your home because they don’t want to take the chance of being discovered and recorded on video.
Perhaps professionally installed and monitored home security is more expensive than it needs to be. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t helping keep your home safe. Both professionally installed and DIY systems deter. That is the point.