Anybody Know Of Any Jurisdictions With Laws Against Tampering With a Security System?

Looking for something for some clients that will allow them to criminally prosecute someone who tampers with their security system but may not necessarily damage/steal it. If for instance, an employee who is lawfully on premise simply disconnects a camera so the he can take a nap but he forgets to reconnect the camera before going home. Or he disables a door contact because he is tired of hearing the chime. The employee committed no crime but he certainly did leave the premise with less protection than the owners assume they have. Sure, the company can discipline the employee, but some of these systems are not just watching candy bars in a c-store. Maybe it just happens that same night someone breaks in and now there is no footage.

I know that we can setup all sorts of things like video loss alerts and such, and we do. But some local businesses have the backing of the city council to pass an ordinance for just this scenario. Anybody have any thoughts on this?

Login to read this IPVM discussion.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

***** ** ******** **** *** *** ***** ****. ***** * little ***** ** ****** ******* *** ****. **** ** ******* actual ****: * *** ******** ****** ** ******* * ****** in * **** **** *** ********* ** *** **** ********* (accessible ***********/****** *** ** ******). * ***** *** *** **** in *** **** *** ***** *** ** *****. *** ****** discovered **** ******* *** ************ **. *** ******* ** ******** so **** ***** **** ***** ** ***** ******* ********. *** suspect *** ********** ** *** **** ******** ***** *** ***** was ** ****** *** ** ***** ** *********** ***** ***** was ** ******** ** *** ***** *****. ***** ****** ** a ****** *** ****.

* ***** **** ****** **** * ***** **** **** ****** to ******** *********. ** *** ****** **** *** ******** **** is * ******* ************ ******, **** * **** ***** ** made ***** **** *******. *** ****** ***** ** *** **** of ****, ***** *** ***** **** *** **** *** *** recorded.

** ** ****.*** *** **** ** **** *****'* ******** ***** law. * ***** ***** **** ***** ** *** ******* ***** you'll **** ******** **** *****.

***** *** ***** ** ** ** "*********** **** * ******** investigation" ** "******** ****** ********"?

*** ***** ***** ** *** **** ** *** ****** ********* to *** ****** ********** *** *** **** ** ** * privately ***** ******.

******** **** ** ***** **** ***** * "********** ** ****** ******** *****>", ** *** ***** *** *** ******** **** place.

********** ******** *** ** **** ******.

*** *********** ** ******** **** ***** ***** **** ********* *** i **** ***** ** ***** ***** ** ***** ******. * thought * *** *** * ********** ** **** ***** ** here ******. * ** ****** ** **** **** *****.

*** **** ***** *** * *** ***** ** **** ***** fit **** ************ ***** ** '********* ********', ********* ** ** a *********** *****, *** ***** *** ****** ********* ******** ***** if *** ****** ******* ******* * ******** ****** ******. ** California *** ***** **** ******* ** *****.

* ****** **** **********... * ** ******** * ******* ************ and **** **** ***** **** ** *** ****** *********** *** prosecutors. ** *** ***** **** ***** ** ********* ** *** that **** *** *** **** ** *** **** **** ********. I **** *****, * ******* ** *** ****, ** **** local ********** **** ******* ************ ** ******** *******. ** **** laws ********** ** ******* ******** ***** ******* *****, *****, *** phone. **** ********* ** ****** *** ***** **** ********* ** a "********* **** ******** ******" ********* ** ***** **** *****.

**** ****?

****** **! ***** ******* **** * ** ******* ***.