Caught an Intruder

[forgeblast]

There are also the products which are like a window tint (can get it in clear or dark or reflective) that will help prevent a window from being smashed in.
I watched a show on the history channel where they shot at it (i think it was 12mil thick) and the window held. I see it come up on ebay every now and then.

 

[dave1949]

I will have to vote for dog improvement. Some breeds and individuals within a breed are high energy and confident, some are not. Two dogs are better than one, they give each other support and pack confidence. A trained dog will actively protect you or your wife in a physical intrusion or assault situation, no camera or motion sensor will do that. That protection is portable if need be.

Dogs may not be the total answer, but I wouldn't discount their advantages--if well trained and cared for.

 

[simoutdoors]

I see lots of $$ in the camera systems. I have worked at very large commercial facility and a college campus that are wired with many cameras. It always seems that even if security can get an image of something going down, often it isn't enough to ID the person. I think trying to have a camera in the right place to watch a property line wouldn't be a great security investment. It might be on my list, but I think self defense training, safe room & weapon would be my first investments.

 

[dmccarty]

...It may not be likely, but certainly possible and as mentioned we can choose to ignore it and hope for the best or take reasonable precautions in the event our hopes are not realized.

Of all the victims of crime, other than domestic violence, there were few who didn't say something to the effect of "I never thought something like this could happen to me." If some think I am paranoid, it's certainly not the worst I've been called.

I think the vast majority of people in this country are in ignorant bliss of the evil that walks among us. The evil that lives a next door. People just do not know. Taking precautions is a good idea.

This morning there was a story of a very elderly couple attacked with a shovel in their retirement home. Course, a few years ago we had a woman beaten to death in her retirement home. Then there was a women and child who where just shot by three men for some reason. They shot an eight year old boy five times.

One can make plans to defend against this sort of evil or you can roll the dice and hope. I would rather plan and prepare rather than hope.

The OP's house seems to be like ours. If I saw a person looking at our house from the woods, THERE IS NO GOOD reason for that person to be there. NONE. If the person wanted help they would approach the house and knock on the door. Given our geography, there really is no good reason for someone to be standing in the woods. Someone with car problems would not walk to FIND our house to get help. They would go to the nearest house on the road. A person in the woods at our place is almost certainly up to no good. The people I have found in the woods WHERE up to no good.

The problem with the cameras is that they really are good for either keeping the bad guys away, if they see the cameras, or catching the bad guys after the fact. For the cameras to be useful, you really need something that can see at night. The best I could come up with was to have IR flood lights to illuminate around the house while having a camera(s) that could use that light to see what was happening outside. The IR light is not visible to human's but the camera(s) can use the IR. We have a boat load of outside lights, flick on the lights, which can be done from multiple positions in the house, and everything can be seen. Of course that would warn the bad buys which could be good or bad. The IR light would allow one to monitor without being observed.

A vulnerability one has in a rural setting is that there are often outbuildings a decent distance from the house. A bad guy that gets between you and the house is a concern. If you don't have a weapon with you then there needs to be one handy in the outbuilding. A cheap single or double shotgun locked up and hidden in the "barn" is a solution.

Later,
Dan

 

[greasemonkeyok]

A casual observation of the above posts. Those with experience in the criminal justice system recommend taking the situation seriously. Sure, the odds are that you won't become a victim. But given the severity of the consequences if you do become a victim, it is not paranoia to take reasonable precautions.

Criminals don't think like regular folks. If a regular-folk neighbor hears gunfire on your property, he thinks "I better not go over there unannounced." The criminal thinks "Hey man, he's got firearms that we can steal and sell on the street for our next hit."

 

[Obed]

I sort of question, not criticize, all of the security camera planning. ... Even with a record you have little chance of any satisfaction form a trespassing charge and if it is a record of theft or assault you have already lost the battle.

If someone steals from my property, I would love to know who did it, even if the knowledge would not result in getting my stuff back. In addition, local thieves will come back again and again as long as they think you don't know who is doing the stealing. Even if our lax judicial system fails to adequately deal with the perp, I can make thief very aware that he probably doesn't want to enter my property again. There's not much worse than having someone who lives nearby who repeatedly keeps stealing from you. That situation can drive you and your wife up a wall.

I had a friend who was building a house in a rural area who kept getting stuff stolen from his property. He suspected a teenager who lived nearby. One day my friend gave the teen a visit and said, "I own a backhoe. If I ever find out who is stealing from me, I will bury him in the woods where nobody will ever find him." The delinquent shortly afterward was busted on meth lab charges and got sent away to a juvenile detention center. The thefts at my friends property mysteriously stopped.

When I lived in my previous house, I recognized in the front yard of a house a 1/4 mile down the road a gas can that had been stolen from my property. I pulled into the yard, retrieved the gas can, then knocked on the door. When the 40 year old drug head answered the door, I told him I found my gas can sitting in his yard. I told him very firmly that he and any of his associates were never to set foot on my property again. I made no statement as to what would happen if he did but let him read between the lines.

 

[MasseyWV]

I sort of question, not criticize, all of the security camera planning. It would seem the priority would be notification of an intruders presence rather than a record after the fact. Motion detection lighting and alarms certainly seem appropriate to either scare away or offer time to prepare for an intruder. It just seems like the expense, given a limited budget, of camera systems would do little in the way of notification. Even with a record you have little chance of any satisfaction form a trespassing charge and if it is a record of theft or assault you have already lost the battle. Again this isn't criticizing any of the planning I have just been thinking of where I personally would concentrate my expenditures to provide the most security to my family.

Security cameras will only be a secondary line of defense. Intruder detection is my highest priority, where I will employ several different methods of detection, with motion detectors being but one of those methods. As for the other methods I plan to use, I prefer not to say what they are, but if my intruder returns he'll wish he hadn't.

To accomplish my goal of intruder detection, I'd like to use multiple outdoor wireless motion detectors linked to a single indoor receiver with an audible alarm. This will allow me to create choke points using brush and debris along the woods at property line and direct potential intruders to specific points of my choosing. I also plan to install a driveway alarm to detect vehicles before they get near the house. These are my highest priorities.

 

[crowbar032]

I like the idea of a Ruger LCR (or the s&w body guard) series weapons.
They are small enough that I think you could carry them all the time and you wouldn't get annoyed by the inconvenience of lugging a weapon around.
They both have an optional laser site! I think they make perfect carry weapons!

I don't have a full carry license but if I did I would seriously consider one of these.

I have the S&W bodyguard .38 with the integrated laser. Like all 2 inch barrel guns it takes some practice to shoot accurately. Overall I really like it. The only downside I've found is the lack of holsters that take laser into account.

 

[MasseyWV]

One of the things I plan to do to enhance my perimeter security is install electrified barbed wire along the property line adjacent to the field where the intruder fled. The barbed wire (powered by an electric fence box) will be hidden within the tree line so it won't be unsightly and will serve two purposes.

1. It will deter deer from crossing the line and setting off the motion detectors.

2. It will define a clear boundary line and give an intruder a good shock if they try to cross it, with the added benefit of slowing them down if they do manage to cross the line and try to flee after they are detected.

I think the vast majority of people in this country are in ignorant bliss of the evil that walks among us. The evil that lives next door. People just do not know. Taking precautions is a good idea.

Living in such a secluded area tends to make one feel a little too secure. I must admit that I became overly complacent and was caught off guard, but it won't happen again.

If someone steals from my property, I would love to know who did it, even if the knowledge would not result in getting my stuff back. In addition, local thieves will come back again and again as long as they think you don't know who is doing the stealing. Even if our lax judicial system fails to adequately deal with the perp, I can make thief very aware that he probably doesn't want to enter my property again. There's not much worse than having someone who lives nearby who repeatedly keeps stealing from you. That situation can drive you and your wife up a wall.

Exactly. Knowing the enemy gives one a very distinct advantage over them. In my case, I'm 99.99% certain it was a local, and I may even know exactly who it was. At least I've narrowed the list down to two potential suspects.

Granted, it could have been a random stranger, but it was too specific. Only someone intimately familiar with this property and it's surroundings could have known how and where to enter the area where the intruder was seen. And I strongly believe it was not the first time they've been there, they just got caught this time.

 

[Car Doc]

A few of these maybe?

 

[MasseyWV]

This afternoon, I began clearing the undergrowth along the tree line which made a huge difference. I'd like to see someone try to hide there now.

A few of these maybe?

Signs are part of my plan, but these are more my style. :laughing:

 

[dstig1]

I've been reading along with this thread but hav not commented yet. Cameras is a topic that can fill pages. I have been researching this myself for some time. Here's some things that I haven't necessarily seen addressed:

IP Vs analog cameras. There are differences, but the #1 difference is resolution. IP cameras have the ability to have much higher pixel count than analog cameras do. That is not always necessary. If you are covering a small choke point, an analog camera may have plenty of resolution to show faces clearly. Analog cameras tend to be better in low light and often (though not always) at night. Analogs are generally much smaller too, so can be concealed in tight spaces. But you pay for resolution, bigtime. IP cameras are always more expensive, and often several times more, due to the resolution and other features.

You can mix camera types, though it seems to make sense to go IP for the system backbone. There are converters that make analog camera signals into network signals so you can feed those into your network, if you want or need them.

Recording. Systems in a box that include cameras and a DVR/NVR are almost always crap and should be avoided. Dedicated DVR/NVRs seem like a poor choice to me as many require proprietary hardware. I believe the better choice is NVR software on a dedicated PC. You basically need to create a separate network in your house for IP cameras, as they can consume huge amounts of bandwidth. You get a few cameras going, and it will bury a home network and you will lose frames, drop connections, etc. You very quickly get into the need for gigabit ethernet switches, which are not too crazy expensive anymore. There are some decent software packages out there, but Luxriot seems to be the best bang for the buck. A commercial grade system with reasonable costs. Get a decent PC (used or not) and XP Pro for an OS as your server. Win 7 uses too much memory and resources for this application. With software like Luxriot, you can log into the server remotely even from your smart phone and watch cameras. It can send alerts to you. Track motion. Scheduled recordings. Things like that.

This gets expensive very quickly. If you try to do it cheap, you will find that when/if you need those images, they will probably be useless as you will not have enough resolution or enough camera coverage to see what you need. It is like race cars - "speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" Only here you will find you have just wasted money on a cheaper system as it will deliver nothing useful when you need it. You need to get good cameras, and frankly a lot of them to really be useful. You are better off starting with 1 or 2 good cameras rather than a raft of crappy ones. Then add as you can.

My $0.02

 

[aczlan]

Get a decent PC (used or not) and XP Pro for an OS as your server. Win 7 uses too much memory and resources for this application. With software like Luxriot, you can log into the server remotely even from your smart phone and watch cameras. It can send alerts to you. Track motion. Scheduled recordings. Things like that.

Here, we will have to disagree. I have several computers (Intel Core Solo or AMD Sempron 3000+ and faster) which I have converted from XP to 7 (for schoolwork with licenses through school). All have had at least 1.5 GB of RAM and IMO, all have been as fast, or even a little faster under Windows 7.

This gets expensive very quickly. If you try to do it cheap, you will find that when/if you need those images, they will probably be useless as you will not have enough resolution or enough camera coverage to see what you need. It is like race cars - "speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" Only here you will find you have just wasted money on a cheaper system as it will deliver nothing useful when you need it. You need to get good cameras, and frankly a lot of them to really be useful. You are better off starting with 1 or 2 good cameras rather than a raft of crappy ones. Then add as you can.

I agree. As the saying goes: Good, Cheap, Fast. Choose any 2.

Aaron Z

 

[MarkV]

I agree. As the saying goes: Good, Cheap, Fast. Choose any 2.

Aaron Z

Used that a good bit as a builder before retiring.

MarkV

 

[dstig1]

Aaron, My point was not fully made, I guess. Post was long enough as it was...

You can get a pretty basic PC and run it with XP as it is a much lighter OS, and very stable. 7 takes a lot more horsepower to run. You can find a cheap PC that will run XP from lease returns on ebay and work perfectly for this. I wouldn't try putting 7 on those.

Plus a lot of industrial software like this seems to be an OS or two behind the curve, so things may not work as well with 7 as with XP, which is old enough to have been around the block a bunch. Heck you still find serial ports on some industrial equipment even though USB has been around for like 15 yrs...

 

[Lebneh]

I've been reading along with this thread but hav not commented yet. Cameras is a topic that can fill pages. I have been researching this myself for some time. Here's some things that I haven't necessarily seen addressed:

IP Vs analog cameras. There are differences, but the #1 difference is resolution. IP cameras have the ability to have much higher pixel count than analog cameras do. That is not always necessary. If you are covering a small choke point, an analog camera may have plenty of resolution to show faces clearly. Analog cameras tend to be better in low light and often (though not always) at night. Analogs are generally much smaller too, so can be concealed in tight spaces. But you pay for resolution, bigtime. IP cameras are always more expensive, and often several times more, due to the resolution and other features.

You can mix camera types, though it seems to make sense to go IP for the system backbone. There are converters that make analog camera signals into network signals so you can feed those into your network, if you want or need them.

Recording. Systems in a box that include cameras and a DVR/NVR are almost always crap and should be avoided. Dedicated DVR/NVRs seem like a poor choice to me as many require proprietary hardware. I believe the better choice is NVR software on a dedicated PC. You basically need to create a separate network in your house for IP cameras, as they can consume huge amounts of bandwidth. You get a few cameras going, and it will bury a home network and you will lose frames, drop connections, etc. You very quickly get into the need for gigabit ethernet switches, which are not too crazy expensive anymore. There are some decent software packages out there, but Luxriot seems to be the best bang for the buck. A commercial grade system with reasonable costs. Get a decent PC (used or not) and XP Pro for an OS as your server. Win 7 uses too much memory and resources for this application. With software like Luxriot, you can log into the server remotely even from your smart phone and watch cameras. It can send alerts to you. Track motion. Scheduled recordings. Things like that.

This gets expensive very quickly. If you try to do it cheap, you will find that when/if you need those images, they will probably be useless as you will not have enough resolution or enough camera coverage to see what you need. It is like race cars - "speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" Only here you will find you have just wasted money on a cheaper system as it will deliver nothing useful when you need it. You need to get good cameras, and frankly a lot of them to really be useful. You are better off starting with 1 or 2 good cameras rather than a raft of crappy ones. Then add as you can.

My $0.02

Lots of good info here but I would like to expand on the network requirements a little. Unless, you're constantly recording video from all the cameras at the same time the network traffic is very minimal. Meaning if you have the cameras set to alert mode or aren't viewing them all at the same time there isn't much to worry about.
Most IP cameras have a web engine built into their firmware. The traffic is connection based not a blunt broadcast.

When you are recording it can jump up there a little but an N wireless network should be fine.

I run a bunch of cameras on mine without issue. I can even record/view them from the cloud via my small 500Kbps (upload) Internet line. I still have plenty of bandwidth to stream Netflix/ online games/ whatever. I even host a Vent server from the same network without issue.

So yes, higher res cams take more bandwidth but an N wireless network should handle it no problem.


IMO, if you buy a computer to do the viewing/recording just put whatever OEM, OS came with it. They will all do the job.

 

[joshuabardwell]

One of the things I plan to do to enhance my perimeter security is install electrified barbed wire along the property line adjacent to the field where the intruder fled. The barbed wire (powered by an electric fence box) will be hidden within the tree line so it won't be unsightly and will serve two purposes.

It is generally recommended never to electrify barbed wire. An animal that gets tangled in the fence can be killed by the continual shocking. At the very least, the animal will be tortured until it escapes, dies, or is rescued by someone. Getting tangled in barbed wire is bad enough all by itself without getting constantly shocked too. If you must combine electric and barbed wire, run parallel, alternating lines of non-electric barb and electric smooth-wire. Or electric smooth wire with a top line of barbed wire (non-electric) to discourage climbing over. Or, heck, if human animals are your main concern, forget electric and just go barbed. Electric is the end-all, be-all to animals, who have no idea what has happened to them when they get shocked. A human will get shocked and then will know not to touch the fence and will just figure out a way to defeat it. Barbed wire is a whole lot nastier and harder to defeat than electric. The electric fence can be totally disabled with an improvised ground rod placed against a wire, for example.

 

[Obed]

It is generally recommended never to electrify barbed wire. An animal that gets tangled in the fence can be killed by the continual shocking. At the very least, the animal will be tortured until it escapes, dies, or is rescued by someone. ...

The electric fence can be totally disabled with an improvised ground rod placed against a wire, for example.

Your common meth head may not be that smart. He's dumb enough to be doing drugs.

 

[texasjohn]

Joshua, gotta disagree with you re electric fence....I run two chargers and multiple miles of it....have for 20 years...so some experience.

modern electric high intensity fence chargers will not kill a person or animal nor start a fire.

You can electrify either smooth or barb wire. Personally, I run alternately smooth and barb. smooth is electric primarily because it is cheaper than barb and MUCH easier to handle and electrify. Barb is grounded. As a personnel deterrent, it will really set you on your can when you get hit...but immediately thereafter you are able to function again. True, you can get past it by rolling under it, using a stick to keep it away from you as you step over fence. Only if fence is multi strand, low to the ground AND too high to step over would it be a significant deterrent.

That said, such a fence is an excellent way to identify property boundaries, hang no trespassing signs on, contain/repel animals (enough wires and electricity will hold back elephants, hogs and coyotes...really) and as such would funnel intruders to gates or drive ways where they can be captured on camera or alerted by various sensors.

 

[birddog0304]

John you're correct. Might I add the enjoyment of watching a bull that has destroyed a conventional fence several times be introduced to an electric fence (lol).
Know you local and state laws regarding marking a perimeter fence that has been electrified. Wouldn't want to be putting any meth heads out of work because they got introduced to an electric fence. More important I would hate to see a filthy lawsuit against someone just taking care of or up keeping their property.