Jon Radder said:
While I sympathize with your desire to add protection I can relates some of my experience. At my PT job I manage video surveillance systems that cover three restaurants and a housing complex. Over the years there have been many incidents caught on video; everything from theft of materials, armed robbery, assaults, property damage and more. In not one single case where the perpetrator was not already a known person did having video help in making an arrest. In the case of the armed robbery the perp was caught on 4 different cameras but only a few frames on each as the entire robbery took less than 20 seconds. Caps and hoodies protect faces and most surveillance cameras are of such low resolution that vehicle license plates can not be read. Don't believe the enhancement technology you see on CSI. If there is nothing there to start with you can't enhance it.What I’m trying to say is don’t spend a bunch of cash on a video system expecting to be able to apprehend those who do crimes against you. They work well against employee theft or damages done to properties by tenants, but these are all cases of known persons where the perp can be recognized by staff. Unless you have e neighbor attacking you the best you can hope for is that obvious cameras deter the criminals.
I think the Redneck Security System (a joke going around) has just as good or perhaps better chance of deterring crime than video systems.
I would agree with with Jon… I too work in the audio/visual business as a DoD contractor on a military base. Resolution is one of the largest problems and the need to have someone monitor the surveillance systems. With budget cuts being what they are, it’s getting harder to ‘justify’ the costs versus the need. For home use, we have motion detector flood lights located around the exterior. Good Luck.
Jerry