Surveillance camera for outdoors

That's right. According to the unanimous opinion of all police officers, security advisors, etc., such things can only be prevented through vigilance, but that is difficult to implement for a house hidden directly at the forest.

Cameras are still perfect for watching. Or to see where the package from the delivery person has disappeared to again.

Where there’s a will ...

Sure, whoever wants to get in will get in but then you can also use a ladder or like in supermarkets go through the roof, throw a manhole cover through the display, tear the grating out of the wall with a truck and much more, their imagination is almost limitless. The art is to live beautifully and freely and yet generate a good level of security. That’s why the police have been talking less about "security" and more about "feeling of security" for many years :cool:, although such a feeling ultimately doesn’t have to have anything to do with reality. The intention should be to make it resistant to burglary hemmend. As you said, otherwise there is always a way where there is an unconditional will. If someone wants to get in, they wait until you come home or want to go to work and knock the homeowner out with a club and get in. There are always ways....

... and enough time ...

Exactly, the more time it takes, the more likely it is that the guy will give up, because most of them tend to be lazy sometimes. But there are probably pedants among them who don’t want to give up..... :D

That’s how it is. According to the unanimous opinion of all police officers, security consultants, etc., you can only prevent something like that through vigilance, but that is difficult to implement with a house hidden directly by the forest.

The problem with that is, if you constantly have to be vigilant because of it, freedom is lost or fear takes over. A difficult topic........who wants to constantly have to look back or check behind the hedge....... then it becomes a life lived in fear.

to live beautifully and freely and yet generate a good measure of security.

Hello

and the legislator in Germany is rather on the side of "offender protection." Because this has been greatly tightened for years.
I look enviously at the Austrians, who have to be granted permission to acquire a weapon with the justification: "to have a weapon ready for self-defense." If the person also has a certain training with the weapon, the "measure of security" is certainly brought immensely to the forefront.
And the home burglaries, as you can clearly see in Austria, are decreasing. Burglars shy away from the risk.

Steven

the legislator in Germany is rather on the side of "perpetrator protection"

Well, I would rather say that victim protection needs to be drastically and effectively improved, but that the legislator actively protects perpetrators is rather less likely to be true.

I look enviously at the Austrians, who must be granted permission to acquire a weapon with the justification: "keeping a weapon ready for self-defense."

I cannot understand any envy towards gun owners and users. That is also too simplistic for me, if one believes that "good" wars could bring peace. A look at the USA and other nations shows that the opposite is the case.

And if the person also shows a certain training with the weapon, the "level of security" certainly moves immensely to the forefront.

And what does the "trained" gun owner do when something rustles in the bushes? What does he do when two perpetrators come? Does he then shoot with both hands? The number of often uninvolved dead is extremely high and every single one is one too many. What do you do when the children are home alone? Do they also have weapons? Are they trained in this as well? From what age? Or does protection for the children only apply if dad is home and has not drunk anything? Is mom allowed, too?

And burglaries are decreasing, as can be very well seen in Austria.

Well, I would like to be able to examine that more closely; of course there are also the appropriate statistics for previously made decisions. In a country where the intoxicated vice chancellor wanted to sell democracy to some blonde woman testosterone-loaded, such a decision does not surprise me either. Strache’s companion constantly jumped through the camera image like a little monkey with a funny weapon pantomime.

Burglars fear the risk.

That is true to a certain extent, nevertheless looking back shows that there are not fewer criminals, they only adjust their actions. So the lever should be different than to put a gun in every man’s belt, even if that would lead some men to new feelings of happiness. Just imagine, everyone in your neighborhood has a gun and you don’t decide who that is. So also your opponent, the unrecognized drunkard, the choleric, the inhibited one, the one with poor vision, the nervous one and the jealous one......... better not.

Imagine if everyone in your settlement had a gun

Hello pagoni Don’t get me wrong: no one should be forced to acquire a weapon. But those who want to protect their wife, their children, and also themselves in a self-defense case should be given the opportunity. Of course, there are men (and also women) who would rather watch their partner being abused and, as the police advise, not provoke the criminal but hum a little tune. OK, to each their own. I want to be able to defend myself in an emergency. And now don’t say the police are responsible for that. No, in a self-defense case everyone is responsible for themselves. I’ve told this before: when I was attacked at home by 3 men, it took 20 minutes for the police to arrive. And the fact that you mention the USA shows that you have no idea about the real "American conditions." Besides, I was talking about Austria. Steven