Fremont Ca. Residents threaten to arm themselves

[Jim Diver]

Fremont police are rolling out a new policy that states they will not respond to burglar alarms unless there is a witness or something caught on video. The reason given is that they can no longer afford to respond to them as they are 98% of the time false alarms.

This has local residents up in arms thinking this is a call to crooks everywhere to come and rob them with impunity and now some are threatening to arm themselves.

Fremont police welcomed people who wished to apply for CCW, but state that the new policy will not stand as "good cause" which is required to get a Ca. CCW.

On a related note, days after announcing this policy, a gun store was burglarized in Fremont. The owner blames the new policy for the break in.


Makes me wonder what good the police are in Fremont now that they will not come when someone breaks into your house or business.

 

[R.H. Lee]

Here's the city's stats and it doesn't look like there's all that much crime in Fremont http://www.city-data.com/city/Fremont-California.html

All the residents have to do is travel on down to city hall for the next city council meeting, preferably with torches and pitchforks.

 

[Pilgrim]

I suggest that if the residents of Fremont are that pissed off, they monopolize every city council meeting with demands that the police chief be fired and replaced with someone who is responsive to their needs.

Pilgrim

 

[geekWithA.45]

Citizens of Fremont:

This has local residents up in arms thinking this is a call to crooks everywhere to come and rob them with impunity and now some are threatening to arm themselves

Don't threaten to arm yourself if the police don't print out a policy that says they'll come running everytime your alarm goes off.

Just arm yourself.

WAAAAY too much can happen in the 3 minutes best case scenario.

I'm not even gonna talk about worst case.

 

[Art Eatman]

Seems to me that if 98% of the alarm calls are false, folks have been suckered by some fly-by-night salesmen.

Seems to me the solution is to buy decent systems. And then read the directions.

Art

 

[Standing Wolf]

Aren't police chiefs supposed to be smart enough to know better than to announce they're no longer enforcing the law—or at least smart enough to check with their city public relations hacks?

 

[Gray Peterson]

You can carry in homes and businesses anyway without a CCW.

 

[Jeff White]

Ok, before all the usual suspects check in and rant that this is another example of how the police don't want to do anything to serve the public or hw it's all a big conspiracy to get the people of Freemont to arm themselves so that we can use Project Exile to put them all in club fed for 10-15, let's look at things rationally.

Nuisance alarms are a big problem just about everywhere. A lot of manhours are devoted to answering them. Different places have different methods of dealing with them. Some places have outlawed certain dialer type alarms and won't respond to them. Other places charge for a response to a false alarm.

There are a lot of fly by night security companies out there and let's not forget the do it yourself kits that are available at Radio Shack and home improvement stores. The quality of the equipment and the installation varies greatly.

Responing to false alarms all the time is expensive and dangerous. It also leads to complacency on the part of the officers.

This could very well be the chief's way of getting the city council's attention if he's asked for local laws regulating alarm systems or the ability to charge for responding to nuisance alarms and been ignored. In a town that size it wouldn't take a lot of cheap alarm systems and homeowners who didn't know how to use them to overwhem a shift.

Before I went condemning the chief, I'd want to see how many officers and cars he had per shift and how many alarm calls they answered.

You have to look at both sides of the issue....Any issue....Jeff

 

[marklbucla]

An old buddy in the LAPD said that they made it a point to go answer all the calls, even if they were probably false alarms. After the 1st or 2nd false alarm or something like that, they charged several hundred dollars per call that they responded to.

Couldn't they just have some sort of policy like that? That way, it wouldn't be reflexive to call the police or it would motivate them to understand how their alarms work.

 

[c_yeager]

Before I went condemning the chief, I'd want to see how many officers and cars he had per shift and how many alarm calls they answered.

I have no idea how many calls they answered. But I CAN tell you about one that they DIDNT answer. It concerned one gunshop in Fremont that was equiped with an alarm. It was broken into and a quantity of weapons were stolen while the police did nothing. Maybe the people of Fremont feel that the combination of an influx of newly armed criminals COMBINED with this new nonresponse policy is enough to make them a tad nervous.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2005/02/03/BAGMTB4OTM1.DTL

 

[thorn726]

I have no idea how many calls they answered. But I CAN tell you about one that they DIDNT answer. It concerned one gunshop in Fremont that was equiped with an alarm. It was broken into and a quantity of weapons were stolen while the police did nothing.

there's that, and there's what art said, there's a real problem with 98% false alarms, and another kick to the pro gunner=

the store was NOT incopmpliance with security laws. the door was glass. no bars.
not setting a good example for people who want to open a gun store.

anyway, i think it's funny how upset people are the police won't respond to alarms, but none of these people are complaining their alarms are faulty.
and that of all places not to respond to , the police chose a gun store. stupid.

 

[Langenator]

Fremont may not have much crime, but it's right close to Oakland, which has more than its share. And gang bangers do have cars.

And like Lonnie said, you don't need a permit to carry on your own property, even in the PRK.

 

[jpIII]

After the 1st or 2nd false alarm or something like that, they charged several hundred dollars per call that they responded to.

Interesting idea,....

In a more libertarian free market type of setting with a private rather than public police force, I could see a portion of the fee for a false alarm going to the officer(s) that responded....

Talk about motivation to be the first one there.
Say $300 for a false alarm (after the 2nd false alarm), with about half going to the first two responding officers.

Pretty big incentive to arrive in a timely manner in my opinion, and also a pretty big incentive to citizens to have properly working alarm systems.

 

[Art Eatman]

I've observed that erroneous soundings of personal alarms are so commonplace that people hardly glance around at the sound of a car's horn or siren in a parking lot. They just grump at a house siren's shriek, but make no investigative effort.

If the 98% figure is correct, I can see how the PD would want some change in the system.

Just a modern day example of the little boy who cried wolf, but the same old result as in days of yore...

Art

 

[sm]

I can look at this from all perspectives.

In a former life [tm] ...

I had a VERY expensive and well maintained Security System for a business(s). Even so with the technology of the times, if a heavy Thunderstorm or debris from high winds tossed debris onto roof of bldg , storefront - anyhwhere - the Alarm would go off. It happens [ed] .

I had LEO friends, they kept an eye on things, advised when "the Pros" were either suspected of being in town, various MO's, and whatnot.

Yes I felt very bad if Our Alarm went off and it was false. My gut would get all out of knots. Experience had taught me 1) MY alarm was being tested. 2) Response times were being tested ,3) Someone ( a Competitior for instance) had either been hit - or one of us was about to.

Now my Business and Residental neighbors were very good folks, I always had these no matter where I worked. WE resented the "El Cheapo" Alarms that were not reliable. These caused extra work and wasted resources of the LEO community.

Especially those systems that were manned from one's phone line and monitored out of state...
Honest, you really do get to a point with a T-storm ,or Tornados that a bunch of false alarms are gonna hit - you know these are real "mask" for a Pro to hit a business with a good alarm.

I know, I have BTDT. I know, I have helped a competitior or friend babysit a business after being hit and waiting for plywood, tarps and whatnot to keep what is left safe.

The LEOs kept driving by and calling to make sure we were fine. They even brought us breakfast and coffee. One even went to my place to bring me my Shotguns and ammo...so I could babysit. Many have on their time come and babysat with me...

I never got a fine. Perhaps it was because I ( and others like me) took prudent steps to get the BEST and most reliable system. Perhaps it was because I /we worked with LEO. Maybe it was because I had been hit and hit hard.

Easiest way to get in MY business without setting off Alarms - was to kidnap me and force me to open up. LEOs and I had a plan for that too...

In any business there are bad representatives. The Business I was in had them, the LEO admitted they had them too. Good LEO friend was upset when his Pard - went bad. It also jepordized many things for a lot folks besides him...

So I volunteered to babysit his personal residence when he had to be out of town for LEO business. Me and other trusted LEO did this. I mean - they had done this for me, my residence and business.

I still get a knot in my gut when I hear of a false alarm...I wonder who on the other side of town got hit.

 

[bill2]

I live in Fremont

and have lived here for several years. generally it's a peaceful town, but I was talking to an officer and he said that they have very few officers on a night shift ( I think he said 9 officers for the graveyard shift). The police chief said they have the fewest ratio of officers per thousands of residents for any city of its size in the country. he also said that they had 7000 alarms go off last year, and only about 75 were real, which is a really high percentage of false alarms. Fremont has a little over 200,000 residents, and geographically is fairly large. It's the 4th largest city in the bay area.

too bad the police chief isn't more pro 2nd amendment.

 

[TheEgg]

Once again -- the police are not there to protect you, no matter what your 1st grade teacher told you.

Not the fault of police -- it is simply not their function.

You must protect yourself.

 

[deej]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/02/11/BAG6CB978T1.DTL

With his city's police force poised to become the first in California to stop responding to most burglar alarms, Fremont insurance salesman Dennis Wolfe is urging his fellow citizens to arm themselves.

"I absolutely believe everybody should own a gun in Fremont now," Wolfe said Thursday. "If the police aren't going to protect us, we have to protect ourselves."

...

Police spokesman Detective Bill Veteran called Wolfe's suggestions "absolutely ridiculous."

...

The decision has not been popular with residents and business owners, but Fremont Chamber of Commerce President Cindy Bonior said Wolfe's call to arms goes too far.

"I would hate to see us become a gun-toting community," she said. "I think that would be a bigger threat to security than not responding to alarms."

...

Wolfe, who already owns a shotgun for skeet shooting, said he plans to seek a concealed weapons permit for his new handgun.

[Fremont Mayor and ex-police chief] Wasserman said Wolfe will have a tough time getting one from the police chief.

How I wish there was a shall-issue city in the Bay Area.

 

[Delmar]

98% of the alarms are false-might be a bit high but not by much. When I worked as a programmer for Brinks Home Security and Smith Security here in the DFW area, the average was about 95%.

The city of Dallas and several of the bedroom communities required you purchase a license to use a monitored alarm. Repeated false alarms will get the company account manager and the police into a huddle at the police station to see what might be the problem. There are fines involved. Some security companies have the option of a company security guard to respond to the alarm.

The do it yourself systems are NOT monitored unless a licenced security company agrees to make a connection. Otherwise they are noise makers.
Very, very few alarms actually report to the police station directly. Those exceptions are generally jewelry stores, banks, etc.

Alarms do have their place, but are not a cure all.

For me-if not already armed, I would do so as well as push for a better way to handle alarms than that particular chief has.

 

[SIGarmed]

the store was NOT incopmpliance with security laws. the door was glass. no bars.
not setting a good example for people who want to open a gun store.

No the cheif even lied about that. He stated how the store wasn't in compliance when his own department did the final inspection to determine if the store was a secured facility. The owner relied on internal security doors to meet compliance so yes it was in compliance. The owner posted his story at Calguns.net. How's that for a cheif doing everything he can not take any blame.

He needs to be fired as far as I'm concerned. LA city fines the businesses and that goes for false fire alarms too. This can work in other places too.

Burglary is the criminals fault. No ones deserves to be the victim of a crime.