ᐅ New Construction Security Options for Windows and Front Doors
Created on: 2 Feb 2022 14:07
P
Pacc666
Hello,
I have a question regarding our new build.
For the windows, we were offered a security fitting in two levels:
Level 1: €45 per sash – mushroom cams all around, 4-corner steel tube reinforcement, and drill protection.
Level 2: €110 per sash – everything upgraded for better security.
I think Level 1 would be enough; on the ground floor, we have 7 sashes. Or do you think standard windows provide sufficient protection? Windows: (Veka Softline 82)
Front door:
Standard 5-point locking.
Additional cost €200 for 3-point automatic locking (what are the benefits? Is this necessary?)
Is an anti-lift device needed for the front door? It’s a metal plate costing about €100 that prevents the door from being pried open.
Do burglars even break in through the front door of a newly built semi-detached house, or do they usually go through the windows?
Our front door faces the street in a large new development.
Is a security bar required for the front door?
I have a question regarding our new build.
For the windows, we were offered a security fitting in two levels:
Level 1: €45 per sash – mushroom cams all around, 4-corner steel tube reinforcement, and drill protection.
Level 2: €110 per sash – everything upgraded for better security.
I think Level 1 would be enough; on the ground floor, we have 7 sashes. Or do you think standard windows provide sufficient protection? Windows: (Veka Softline 82)
Front door:
Standard 5-point locking.
Additional cost €200 for 3-point automatic locking (what are the benefits? Is this necessary?)
Is an anti-lift device needed for the front door? It’s a metal plate costing about €100 that prevents the door from being pried open.
Do burglars even break in through the front door of a newly built semi-detached house, or do they usually go through the windows?
Our front door faces the street in a large new development.
Is a security bar required for the front door?
No, I’m really not someone everyone can handle, especially since I talk too much.
Cloning my poodle and giving one to everyone would be a different story. He’s a real benefit for both mental and physical health, a substitute for a hot water bottle, a playmate for the kids, super sweet, and basically a security alarm. The amount of food isn’t an issue for him, it’s more about the selection. He’s as picky as a... poodle.
P.S. He’s also quite fearless. Proof photo:
Weight difference factor 12–15
The bone belonged to the bear dog. Or so I thought...
Cloning my poodle and giving one to everyone would be a different story. He’s a real benefit for both mental and physical health, a substitute for a hot water bottle, a playmate for the kids, super sweet, and basically a security alarm. The amount of food isn’t an issue for him, it’s more about the selection. He’s as picky as a... poodle.
P.S. He’s also quite fearless. Proof photo:
Weight difference factor 12–15
The bone belonged to the bear dog. Or so I thought...
B
BlackLotus7 Feb 2022 18:19At first, the police also suspected that something had been scouted out beforehand. However, a closer examination of the crime scene suggests it was more likely a "standard" burglary. Initially, the perpetrators started rummaging through everything and even repurposed pillowcases found on-site as "loot bags," which they filled with small items (cigars, perfume, etc.). Once they found the built-in safe, their behavior seemed to change—they specifically searched the basement for tools to break the safe out of its wall cabinet and the wall itself. They had selected an angle grinder with matching discs from the basement as well. The brute force used caused significant property damage in the five-figure range. In the end, the safe, which had been broken out but was still locked, was likely taken out through the window to a waiting getaway vehicle. The "loot bags" were actually left behind, and only the safe—the "jackpot"—was taken.
About 95% of the stolen goods were jewelry accumulated over decades. This also included many unique pieces made as a hobby by a relative involved in jewelry making over the years. Their high value did not lie primarily in the materials (which the perpetrators were ultimately after, as everything is normally melted down) but rather in the extensive craftsmanship and consequently high replacement cost. While most of this was insured, the main issue remains the psychological damage caused. The police did not rule out that my mother might have disturbed the perpetrators during the crime. Fortunately, she did not come face to face with them but reacted quickly by leaving, locking the front door, ringing neighbors, and calling the police. She was only able to sleep well again after the whole house had been properly upgraded. There isn’t much left to steal from the house today, as nearly half of the insurance payout has gone into the security upgrades. Most of the replaced jewelry is now kept in bank safety deposit boxes.
Regarding the "suspicious individuals," I’m not overly worried. Unfortunately, this seems to be quite normal nowadays if you look at various social media groups in the area where people post their surveillance footage. The problem is that most people without video surveillance simply don’t notice what’s really happening around their homes. Nowadays, friends occasionally ask me to conduct security assessments of their houses. It’s quite interesting to compare my evaluation—which is based on personal experience, research, and various criminology studies, such as those from the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony—with the statements from police security advisors. Somehow, I get the impression that the police are somewhat stuck in the past and don’t have a forward-looking view. Fifteen years ago, the statement “they don’t come through the windows” mostly held true, but if you invest money in security today, in my opinion, it should also take into account changing criminal behavior in the future. Of course, using laminated security glass might seem over the top today, but if more people start installing secure window frames, criminals will naturally adapt over the next 10–15 years. Therefore, I expect attacks on window glass to increase significantly in the future.
Unfortunately, windows are almost always discussed only in terms of RC classes. While these classes are a good indicator of frame security, the glass associated with each class remains a major weak point if you only look at the RC rating. For illustration:
RC1N: No requirements for the glass
RC2N: No requirements for the glass (tests are conducted with P4A glass, but the manufacturer is still allowed to market the window as RC2N with ANY type of glass!)
RC2: P4A glass ("resistant to projectile penetration"), tested by dropping three steel balls measuring 10 cm in diameter and weighing 4.1 kg from a height of 9 meters
RC3: P5A glass ("resistant to projectile penetration"), tested by dropping nine steel balls measuring 10 cm in diameter and weighing 4.1 kg from a height of 9 meters
RC4: P6B glass ("resistant to break-in"), must withstand 30-50 axe blows from a 2 kg axe
With a hammer and screwdriver, you can very quickly create an opening in a standard RC2/RC3 window due to the small surface area on which the force is concentrated. The standard lockable handles can also be relatively easily forced open. For this reason, I generally recommend at least RC2, preferably RC3, with the glass always at least P6B, and handles rated for 200 Nm torque or better. Everything else, in my opinion, is mostly a waste of effort. The additional cost for P6B glass is not as high as one might initially expect. Whether the window manufacturer then inflates the price further is another question.
Of course, how much you want to invest is up to each individual. Just please keep in mind that a burglary is not only about material loss but also about your sense of security and the psychological impact, which can be significant after a break-in.
About 95% of the stolen goods were jewelry accumulated over decades. This also included many unique pieces made as a hobby by a relative involved in jewelry making over the years. Their high value did not lie primarily in the materials (which the perpetrators were ultimately after, as everything is normally melted down) but rather in the extensive craftsmanship and consequently high replacement cost. While most of this was insured, the main issue remains the psychological damage caused. The police did not rule out that my mother might have disturbed the perpetrators during the crime. Fortunately, she did not come face to face with them but reacted quickly by leaving, locking the front door, ringing neighbors, and calling the police. She was only able to sleep well again after the whole house had been properly upgraded. There isn’t much left to steal from the house today, as nearly half of the insurance payout has gone into the security upgrades. Most of the replaced jewelry is now kept in bank safety deposit boxes.
Regarding the "suspicious individuals," I’m not overly worried. Unfortunately, this seems to be quite normal nowadays if you look at various social media groups in the area where people post their surveillance footage. The problem is that most people without video surveillance simply don’t notice what’s really happening around their homes. Nowadays, friends occasionally ask me to conduct security assessments of their houses. It’s quite interesting to compare my evaluation—which is based on personal experience, research, and various criminology studies, such as those from the Criminological Research Institute of Lower Saxony—with the statements from police security advisors. Somehow, I get the impression that the police are somewhat stuck in the past and don’t have a forward-looking view. Fifteen years ago, the statement “they don’t come through the windows” mostly held true, but if you invest money in security today, in my opinion, it should also take into account changing criminal behavior in the future. Of course, using laminated security glass might seem over the top today, but if more people start installing secure window frames, criminals will naturally adapt over the next 10–15 years. Therefore, I expect attacks on window glass to increase significantly in the future.
Unfortunately, windows are almost always discussed only in terms of RC classes. While these classes are a good indicator of frame security, the glass associated with each class remains a major weak point if you only look at the RC rating. For illustration:
RC1N: No requirements for the glass
RC2N: No requirements for the glass (tests are conducted with P4A glass, but the manufacturer is still allowed to market the window as RC2N with ANY type of glass!)
RC2: P4A glass ("resistant to projectile penetration"), tested by dropping three steel balls measuring 10 cm in diameter and weighing 4.1 kg from a height of 9 meters
RC3: P5A glass ("resistant to projectile penetration"), tested by dropping nine steel balls measuring 10 cm in diameter and weighing 4.1 kg from a height of 9 meters
RC4: P6B glass ("resistant to break-in"), must withstand 30-50 axe blows from a 2 kg axe
With a hammer and screwdriver, you can very quickly create an opening in a standard RC2/RC3 window due to the small surface area on which the force is concentrated. The standard lockable handles can also be relatively easily forced open. For this reason, I generally recommend at least RC2, preferably RC3, with the glass always at least P6B, and handles rated for 200 Nm torque or better. Everything else, in my opinion, is mostly a waste of effort. The additional cost for P6B glass is not as high as one might initially expect. Whether the window manufacturer then inflates the price further is another question.
Of course, how much you want to invest is up to each individual. Just please keep in mind that a burglary is not only about material loss but also about your sense of security and the psychological impact, which can be significant after a break-in.
Similar topics