English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Our city has decided to begin charging everyone with a security system, a $20 permit fee. Of course, we already pay for the system to be put in by a local company, and then pay that local company money every month to have it be working. I cannot see how this will help keep crime down in our city. People have to apply for a permit, whether it is a business or a residence, get approved, and then, get to pay the local company each month as well. The city seems to be helping crime by doing this. What do you think about this?

2007-08-01 09:39:08 · 3 answers · asked by laurel g 6 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

Already, there are expensive charges for false alams........up to $400 for the alarm going off when no one is in the home (supposedly) to set it off! I would say that false alarms are really well covered. I've had my system for over ten years and this is just not reasonable to me.

2007-08-01 10:45:21 · update #1

3 answers

I think they are recovering the cost incurred by home owners that can 't operate their systems properly causing false alarms and increased emergency police response. I don't believe a $20/year fee will have any impact on the number of homes equipped with alarm systems so it will not have a negative impact on crime.

2007-08-01 09:47:18 · answer #1 · answered by davidmi711 7 · 0 0

The only way a city in the US can enact such a law is through a vote by the people. If it was enacted as an initiative, it is unconstitutional (Supreme Court case decided this back in the 1960s), and a court challenge will throw the law off the books. All of these laws are usually written with a clause in them to say that if they are challenged in court and found to be unconstitutional, then it will be thrown out. So they KNOW already that a court challenge will negate the law immediately. But - as time goes on, people who serve on the bench change, and their interpretation of the law changes. So although it is unconstitutional, they may only mark PART of the law as unconstitutional, and the rest of the law may survive. So, if you dont like it, sue them.

Otherwise, its a mechanism for the city to recover costs for false alarms. You may want to check with the local police department to see if they charge the $425 per false alarm anymore - they may not do so as a result of this permit.

What other cities have done is they charge a initial fee for the permit, if you have no false alarms for the year they charge you ZERO to renew, and if you do have false alarms they charge you the fee times the number of false alarms you had to renew it. This way, everyone ponies up to the bar at the start, and only those that actually generate the false alarms have to pay for it.

2007-08-01 11:33:18 · answer #2 · answered by MrKnowItAll 6 · 0 1

Don't want your home broken into? Then pay the $20 fee for protection.

Isn't that what criminals say to people who live on their territory when they try to intimidate those people?

2007-08-01 09:47:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers