XPost: nyc.transit, nyc.politics, nyc.general 
 From: tls@panix.com 
  
 In article , 
 Alex Rodriguez   wrote: 
 >In article , dogglebe@yahoooo. 
 com 
 >says... 
 > 
 >>>My car alarm has prevented a break-in more than once. I agree that the 
 alarm 
 >>>makers and installers should be required to make these as false-alarm- 
 proof 
 >>>as possible, but they should not be banned. 
 >> 
 >>How did it prevent a break in?  Car alarms don't go off until after 
 >>the damage is done.  Maybe your alarm went off because it's too0 
 >>sensitive. 
 > 
 >A properly tuned alarm can go off when someone lifts your door handle but 
 >not when other vehicles pass by.  Newer alarm will also chirp a short 
 >warning to people before going to full wailing mode.  The problem is mostly 
 >from poorly installed alarms. 
  
 That's an interesting concept.  Why should I believe that it's true? 
  
 I note that the worst offenders often seem to be factory-installed 
 alarms; why would these be most likely to be "poorly tuned"? 
  
 Why should I believe that it's economical to make and install an alarm 
 that can tell the wind rocking a car from the car being pushed around? 
  
 -- 
  Thor Lancelot Simon                                       tls@rek.tjls.com 
    But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of common 
  objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp!  You towel! 
 You 
  plate!" and so on.              --Sigmund Freud 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)