Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Outdoor security cameras

ladypanther

By ladypanther,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

ladypanther Grand Master

ladypanther

Posted
Posted

I live in the country and have started to have some problems with theft. So far they have gotten a lawn mower, tool box, even full gas cans...but not on the same day....all while I am at work.  My house and property are not visible from the road...part of its charm.  Now I wonder what these thieves are going to try next. I need to put up a couple of cameras...they need to be battery operated.

Anyone have any suggestions?  Used anything you like that is moderately priced?

 

Also...any ideas on how I could set them up to steal something that I could track?

 

Note...I have asked the sheriff's department to patrol the area and they are putting extra patrols for a week.  They were very nice about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronn Contributor

Bronn

Posted
Posted

Your easiest/cheapest solution would be game/trail cameras. I would invest in 3-4 if I were you. They are battery operated, and some have the option to hook to a larger battery/outlet.

I just saw our local Walmart had a cheaper 5MP one for $25.

You'll need SD cards for each one you get, but 5MP should be decent enough to identify your suspects. I would also recommend some Python cable locks to run through the cameras to prevent theft, especially if you are putting them within easy reach. You should be good about $50 total for a camera setup if you go for the cheap ones.

They do sell these cameras with a variety of options, and you can upgrade to better quality for more money. I currently have a Bushnell 12MP one that runs about $120.

Based on my experiences, you probably want to find some areas that you can use a ladder to put the cameras outside of easy reach with on your property. You can also conceal them somewhere in outbuildings so that they aren't really obvious.

If someone is determined enough to subvert/sabotage your cameras, they are going to be able to do so.

I'm not sure about GPS tracking chips. I would be more concerned with getting the perps on camera in clear view. That will get them arrested faster than any kind of tracker. The only reason you should track something is if it is irreplaceable. If it is irreplaceable, it shouldn't be accessible enough for a common thief to get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • jasonluckydog
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By jasonluckydog · Posted

      Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...