Honestly, you nailed it—these new city rules feel like they’re aimed at the wrong people. Most of us just want a safe spot for our cars without jumping through hoops or paying crazy fees for “security” that doesn’t actually stop theft in the moment. My buddy’s Camaro got taken from a supposedly secure lot, cameras and all, and nobody even noticed until he showed up to drive it. The footage helped the cops, but by then, the car was long gone.
I get that some folks feel safer with more surveillance, but if no one’s watching live, it just adds costs for owners and maybe scares off the dumbest thieves... that’s about it. It’s tough when you’re on a budget and every new rule means another expense. Still, I guess having some video is better than nothing—insurance companies seem to care about that stuff now. Just wish the rules were more about actually preventing crime instead of creating headaches for people who just love their cars.
“if no one’s watching live, it just adds costs for owners and maybe scares off the dumbest thieves... that’s about it.”
That’s exactly what I keep thinking. I tried to follow all the new rules last year—paid extra for a “secure” spot, filled out the paperwork, even bought a steering lock. Still had my old Civic broken into. The cameras caught a blurry figure, but nobody was monitoring in real time, so it didn’t help much. If you’re on a tight budget, it feels like you’re just paying for a false sense of security. I’d rather see more patrols or better lighting than another fee for cameras that don’t actually stop anything.
I keep wondering if any of these “secure” spots are actually worth the extra money. Like, does anyone know if break-ins have actually gone down since all these new rules? I get why they want cameras, but if nobody’s watching them live, it just feels like a box-ticking exercise. Wouldn’t it make more sense to invest in brighter lights or even just have someone walk around every so often? My neighbor’s spot has a floodlight and he’s never had an issue... meanwhile, I’m over here with my car starring in blurry late-night crime footage.
I hear you on the cameras—half the time, I feel like they’re just there to make the insurance companies happy. My ‘72 Chevelle’s been parked in three different “secure” garages over the past couple years, and honestly, the only time I felt like my car was actually safe was when there was a cranky old guy on night patrol. He’d scare off anyone just by glaring at them through the window.
Cameras are great for catching what happened after your stuff’s gone, but they don’t stop someone from smashing a window in the first place. Brighter lights and a human presence seem way more effective. My buddy swears by motion-activated floodlights—says it’s like turning night into day, and thieves hate being in the spotlight.
Honestly, I’d pay extra for an actual person walking around or even a mean-looking dog over another “state-of-the-art” camera system. At this point, it feels like we’re just collecting grainy footage of people in hoodies...
I get where you’re coming from. Cameras are everywhere now, but I’ve never felt like they actually deter much—at least not in real time. I’ve got a couple of high-value cars, and after a break-in at a supposedly “secure” facility last year, I started looking into what really works. The footage was useless: just some blurry figures in hoodies, in and out before anyone could react. Insurance covered the damage, but that’s not the point. It’s the hassle and the feeling of violation.
I’m with you on human presence making a difference. There’s something about an actual person on-site—especially someone who looks like they take their job seriously—that makes would-be thieves think twice. I’ve even seen garages that use retired cops or security pros for night shifts, and honestly, I’d pay more for that peace of mind.
Motion lights help, sure, but I’ve noticed determined thieves don’t always care if they’re lit up for a few seconds. They know how fast they can work. Dogs are great in theory, but then you run into liability issues or city rules about animals on commercial property. It gets complicated fast.
The new city rules seem to focus so much on tech upgrades—more cameras, better resolution, remote monitoring—but it feels like they’re missing the bigger picture. All this gear is fine for insurance paperwork or police reports after the fact, but it doesn’t actually stop someone from breaking in if they’re motivated enough.
I’d rather see a mix: decent cameras for evidence, but also real people and practical deterrents like reinforced doors or even old-school patrols. Maybe it’s not as flashy as the latest “smart” system, but at least it feels like someone’s actually watching out for your investment—not just ticking boxes for compliance.
Funny thing is, my neighbor stores his classic Mustang at home and swears by his nosy next-door neighbor more than any alarm system he’s ever had... Sometimes low-tech is still the best defense.
