A new guide explaining all you need to know about fire alarms and sprinkler systems is now available at lulu.com
-
26Dec
-
22Dec
“Parking Aligns With Protection”
Security Management (12/06) Vol. 50, No. 12, P. 68 ; Jones, SteveSecurity is often not included in the initial design of many parking garages, which is unfortunate because parking garages with poor lighting and design are crime magnets. Parking garage owners can mitigate this crime risk by incorporating security when renovating an existing garage or when building a new garage. The first step is to assess the garage property and nearby areas for the types of security measures that might be needed. From a security perspective, the garage’s design should emphasize lines of sight, the safety of pedestrians, and traffic flow, with particular attention paid to points of ingress and egress, lighting, stairwells, and elevators. Features to be avoided for security or safety purposes include interior walls or wall columns, split-scissor ramps, dark corners, enclosed elevator lobbies, and stairways with undersides where criminals can hide. Digital CCTV cameras that display color should be mounted in the garage and monitored, especially near access points, elevator vestibules, and stairwells. The garage should be well-staffed with attendants and roaming security guards who patrol the parking areas, stairwells, elevators, and pedestrian walkways. Visibility can be improved by using glass or other transparent materials in walls and doors, by using whitewashed or brightly painted walls to maximize interior lighting, and by using metal-halide or white-light sources.
-
20Dec
Humorous and interesting stories about the inner workings of an alarm monitoring central station.
Read our new book. Available at lulu.com
http://www.lulu.com/content/588112
Â
-
12Dec
Ken Kirschenbaum, Esq.
SecurityInfoWatch.comÂDear Ken,Â
There was an interesting story recently about a San Francisco man who was robbed at his ATM and asked his bank to show him the surveillance video of the incident. He was told that the videos are private property and are only released to police upon subpoena. No surprise there, really. (See full story)Â
Nonetheless, this is a question that could arise for monitoring companies, businesses using surveillance, and even installing dealers. To help us understand the issues, could you comment on the ownership of surveillance video, and about any liability that might arise from turning over surveillance video? Other questions that come to mind are:Â
1) Should companies willingly turn video over to police without a subpoena (simply as professional courtesy)? 2) What are the possible implications and liability issues if they showed surveillance video footage to crime victims? 3) Does it matter if the crime occurred off their property vs. on their property?Â
My answer:Â
Video recording is not regulated like audio recording. There are federal statutes, plus statutes in most states that deal with audio recordings, but it’s not so with video. Interestingly enough, there may be statutes or regulations regarding video of ATM sites in certain jurisdictions.Â
However, absent statutes dealing with the specific issue, the video recording is the property of the bank or the surveillance company providing the service if independent of the bank. The bank would have no obligation to provide the recording to anyone voluntarily, though as possible evidence of a crime, it would need to be available to law enforcement agencies, if so requested.Â
As to the question of whether to turn surveillance over without a subpoena, there is no real reason why the bank should insist on a formal subpoena or court order before providing the video footage to the appropriate law enforcement agency. Withholding or tampering with evidence of a crime is a crime in and of itself; the bank should turn it over.Â
I doubt that the bank has any exposure civilly turning over the video recording to law enforcement. First of all, video recording is likely not prohibited. As long as the bank isn’t using the video for commercial purposes, such as commercial advertising, it does not violate privacy rights. Furthermore, there is no expectation of privacy when someone uses an ATM where video surveillance is known or expected to exist.Â
I can understand a bank not turning over the recording to its customer or someone other than law enforcement. What would be the justification or purpose? The bank would not be wrong in denying such assistance to a robbed customer who intended to engage in his own vigilante campaign.Â
Certainly there have been actions against banks for improper security at ATM sites, and in those cases, video surveillance would then be discoverable in those civil cases. A bank would be hard pressed to claim the tapes were confidential and the bank would probably turn the tapes over pursuant to subpoena rather than insist on a court order, which would not be hard to get in the course of the civil litigation.Â
I don’t think my analysis makes any difference if the tape shows images on the ATM site or off the site on public or adjoining property. Again, it comes down to expectation of privacy and the use of the tapes. Civil rights laws prohibit anyone from using the name or image of others, as long as they are alive, for commercial purposes without permission. But that is not coming into play in this situation. Therefore, I think the tapes can be released certainly to law enforcement and probably to a crime victim, though release to the latter would be entirely voluntary and unnecessary.Â
In the standard contracts I?ve created, it does provide for the issue of who owns the video and the audio recordings. As I have it phrased, the contracts provide that it is the central station which owns the recordings since it is the central station that receives the data and stores it on its equipment. By contract this, of course, could be changed.Â
About the author: Ken Kirschenbaum, Esq., is a New York-licensed lawyer practicing with Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum PC, a Long Island legal firm with a rich history of assisting clients in security and alarm related matters. Ken can be contacted via email at ken@kirschenbaumesq.com. His website, www.kirschenbaumesq.com, features a great supply of legal information and court rulings relevant to the security industry. You can also sign up for Ken’s discussion list from his homepage.Â
-
10Dec
-
10Dec
-
07Dec
Irvine Unified pulls the program after parents of University High teens feel an Orwellian chill.
By JORGE BARRIENTOSÂ
The Orange County Register Dec. 6Â
IRVINE - Plans to start a student finger-scanning system at University High School to make lunch lines and record keeping more efficient have been stopped by the Irvine Unified School District after parents complained of its possible Big Brother effect. The high school was to use the new technology to make it faster and easier for students to buy meals, check out books, register their attendance and buy school event tickets.
It could have many different uses, said Chuck Keith, assistant principal at the high school.
Keith came up with the idea after watching a special about school technology on CNN. The project was put on hold after parents complained about the “new millennium technology,” he said.
“It ruffled some feathers,” Keith said.
Ted Faison, a parent of a University senior, had concerns about the legality and constitutionality of fingerprinting students.
He decided to try to stop the school from implementing the project after receiving a letter from the school Friday stating the school was to begin scanning the 2,300-plus students starting Monday. The laser fingertip ID system was to begin after winter break on Jan. 8, according to the letter.
He met with school administrators and Tom Dunphy, senior vice president of the scanning company, identiMetrics Inc., who was on campus at the time. Faison and a few other parents complained to the district about the project.
The school put a hold on the project.
“I did not want my daughter being fingerprinted,” Faison said. “I didn’t want any of the students being fingerprinted. Students are not criminals.”
The plan was not reviewed by the district and was the administrators’ choice, district spokesman Ian Hanigan said. The district discontinued plans Tuesday for at least the rest of the year pending review.
University High would have been the first Orange County public school to use finger-scanning technology in cafeterias.
Across the country, dozens of schools and colleges have used finger scanners as alternatives to cash transactions in lunchrooms since 2001. Three elementary schools in Santa Barbara could have the scanners in place early next year, making them the first in California.
Several other schools in Pennsylvania connected the scanners to the Web so parents can keep tabs on what their children eat for lunch.
University High and other district schools have a system in which students push in a code to deduct funds from their accounts.
Although the system would have made lunch more efficient, students and faculty care more and fear that Big Brother may be watching, said Tom Poulos, a senior on the associated student body.
“It seems too invasive,” Poulos said. “It seems a little too much.”
-
04Dec
“Prevention Is Cheapest Tool Against Shoplifting”
Statesman-Journal (OR) (11/28/06) ; Wilkins, JimmieIn general, retailers should spend most of their time and resources on preventing shoplifting, not prosecuting shoplifters who have been caught. Deterrence makes better use of resources, and it consists of three main areas: educating employees, incorporating deterrence in store layout, and utilizing security guards and security technology. Employees should be trained to spot the following warning signals: customers carrying “concealment” devices or wearing “concealment clothing”; merchandise hidden on the lower rack of shopping carts; price labels that have been switched; and merchandise like toolboxes or garbage cans in which shoplifters hide stolen items. Store layout should include sufficient lighting in all areas of the store, alarms on unlocked exits, and end-displays that are low in height. In addition, entrances and exits should be in a common area, general displays should be orderly and neat, and small high-priced items should be kept behind the counter or in locked display cases watched by store personnel. Stores should use security devices such as convex wall mirrors, two-way mirrors, and CCTV, while also employing uniformed security guards and undercover detectives.
Recent Comments