Anecdotally my motion sensors go off all the time from non humans. Mostly deer. Sometimes a dust-twister that moves the heated dirt.
Cameras on the other hand are useful for capturing a burglars face, their license plate, things they said to each other if the camera has audio, make and model of their car and last known direction. I am in a one party consent state that allows capturing audio.
Even if you give the police a video, it’s probably a stolen car and they aren’t going to lift a finger to find your stuff. This is what insurance is for.
I’m not sure why people think just because they have cameras that the police will follow up on the video evidence and make arrests. They’ll tell you to file an insurance claim and move on.
I’m guessing you’ve never had a break-in before? I’ve been burglarized and knew who did it and the police didn’t do anything about it.
I have. In big cities I completely agree with you. They have little interest in wasting time on such things even if I gathered finger prints and know the persons name. They go for easier wins. Most city cops have mostly given up at this point. That said they did get the guy that broke into my truck and I got everything back. He was a prior felon driving a stolen car and was in possession of firearms. Driving a stolen car is going to become more difficult with time due to real time LPR's being mounted on more marked and unmarked cars.
In my current location a rural tight knit community they would most certainly try to track them down, adjust their attitude and get some of my stuff back. I listen to them tracking people down. It's both reassuring and scary at the same time because some of them sound like stereotypical good 'ol boys. There are also a surprising number of cameras going up in this area which is intriguing to me being so rural so I will just contribute to their mesh.
I don’t. Lived in New York for over a decade. Had two laptops pilfered.
Police showed up the next morning, took a report and called me for questioning a day later. The 13th precinct followed up twice with the super for the lobby camera’s footage. We saw our neighbour’s and realised the thief was her hookup from the bar. Neighbour didn’t have their name or contact information, but did have (or was able to find) their Instagram. An arrest warrant went out, but that was it (they were out of state).
Months later, the thief was caught jumping a turnstile. The investigator called and informed us of their arrest. (We got the property back, but that was more convoluted.)
NoMad/Flatiron was then a nice but not extravagant neighbourhood. We were in a middling no-doorman building. The investigator gave a shit because the voters in that district prioritise feedback to their electeds when cops ignored them. (I wrote a letter to the sergeant in commendation of her work.) Meanwhile, my parents couldn’t get the cops in Cupertino to give a shit about their catalytic converter being repeatedly jacked. They complained to me but ultimately shrugged it off.
There is a tragedy of commons in civic engagement. The rural/urban divide may be a proxy for that variable instead.
> In my current location a rural tight knit community they would most certainly try to track them down, adjust their attitude and get some of my stuff back. I listen to them tracking people down every day.
In your case I could definitely see police taking it seriously, or in wealthy communities where police don’t have much to do other than investigate property crime. My experience is in a big city where as you said, police have mostly given up on investigating property crime. Rural areas also have fewer neighbors to witness things so cameras seem like a reasonable option to deter thieves and burglars.
Sure, let's just write off two whole societal institutions because of your one poor experience. No point in trying to do something if it could fail, amirite? Of course then someone else can chime in with how they got stiffed by insurance and how you should just get a dog, then the next person says I had a dog but it was too friendly so just get a gun and stay home all the time, etc etc etc. Exit can be a strong check, but asserting it as a foregone conclusion is its own oppressive hell.
Anecdotally, I had a break in where the perp was stopped in the act and they even ended up getting prosecuted. The system can work, too.
I've also been kidnapped by the police, ransomed, and then harassed for a year by the "justice" system. So this is certainly not some "I love the police" comment.
I’m certainly not the first person to be cynical about the police investigating property crime, here’s a scene from the 1998 film, The Big Lebowski which echoes my position: https://youtu.be/GvT_VOJaXvs
I’m not saying the police are worthless or irrelevant, simply that using insurance is how you get made whole after a burglary or theft. It’s a crapshoot whether the perpetrator is found, which in some cases, they are.
I’m also not suggesting anything in particular to prevent burglaries, I don’t have home security, a gun, or a dog. My cat isn’t going to stop a burglar. My position is that sometimes theft and burglary happens, and insurance is the best tool to mitigate the risk because the police don’t have the time or the inclination to fully investigate every property crime.
> I’m not sure why people think just because they have cameras that the police
will follow up on the video evidence and make arrests
The plain answer to your question is that because some times they do. But the implication of your rhetoric is that they never will. That's the problem.
Being "made whole" is actually a separate concern from helping to catch the perp, and it doesn't help to brush off one concern in favor of another. Like for example if someone stole most of my computing gear, financial compensation by insurance could not possibly make me whole (months of bespoke setup and customization). But it would be nice to know that the perp got punished, regardless of whether they had already sold my stuff.
And personally, I'd double down on the cynicism and point to having video evidence as a good way of documenting the incident for insurance purposes, lest they attempt to screw you some how.
(Nothing in my comments should be construed as condoning having Internet connected cameras running proprietary crapware. Rather I'm just talking about the general motivation for cameras, and unfortunately many people are insensitive to the crapware)
Cameras on the other hand are useful for capturing a burglars face, their license plate, things they said to each other if the camera has audio, make and model of their car and last known direction. I am in a one party consent state that allows capturing audio.