US2663864A - Electric burglar alarm system - Google Patents

Description

Dec. 22, 1953 o. c. CUNDIFF 2,663,864 ELECTRIC BURGLAR ALARM SYSTEM Filed June 29, 1951 I7- I7 l2 )2 l2 HE A 4 H /8 ,8 O /O ATTORNEY.

Patented Dec. 22, 1953 UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE ELECTRIC BURGLAR ALARM SYSTEM Olaf C. Cundifl, Detroit, Mich. Application June .29, 1951, Serial No. 234,170

This invention relates to electric signal systems and more particularly to an improved alarm system for use in stores and similar institutions in cases of holdups. v

Burglar alarm systems are well-known in the art and are extensivelyused. Such systems are intended to give audible and often visible alarm signal when burglars break into a locked store, opening a window or a door and thus actuating an electric switch. Numerous systems of such a nature have been installed, and they operate successfully for thepurposes intended. It was found, however, that such systems are totally inadequate when a holdup takes place during working hours. In such cases, the bandits usually enter thestore as customers and having slowly approachedthe cashier quickly surprise him or her, covering at the same time the customers that may be present in. the store. It is clear that under such circumstances, the burglar alarm system that may be installed in the store is not actuated by the burglars and no alarm is soundedautomatically. However, should one of the employees or customers findit possible to actuate or operate a switch of such a burglar alarm, the sound of the alarm resulting therefrom makes it clear to the bandits that the holdup is a failure, and that they must escape immediately or be caughtv or killed. Under such conditions any suspicious move by the cashier or by any of the customers may invite immediate shooting. One may read nearly every day newspaper accounts of such occurrences.

I have come to the realization that handling of holdups and the use of conventional burglar alarm systems therefore is totally erroneous, and

that it results in heavy toll of human life and limb every year. It should be distinctly-appreciated that killings occurring in the process of holdups, while being legally classifiable as murders, usually are not predetermined and are mainly the natural result of accidents, excitement, fear of being caught or shot, or misunderstanding by a bandit of some innocent move made by a person present at scene of a holdup. The above is particularly true in cases of inexperienced bandits such as teen-agers, who may attempt a holdup for the sake of thrill, not realizing fully what may be involved or develop. Having started a holdup, a youth holding a loaded gun in his shaking hands completely loses his head when he sees that he is about to be caught, and pulling of the trigger on his part may be involuntary or even convulsive.

An additional cause of numerous unnecessary killings that occur early in the process of holdups is found-also to be the result of the most unwise attempts on the part of victims to resist armed bandits, particularly when the bandit appears'to be a scared'youth. Many small store- 1 Claim. (Cl. 340274) keepers lost their lives in such attempts. It is my belief that publicitygivento rare successful attempts to disarma banditholding up a'store or a similarinstitution is very harmful, to public interest, since it encourages such resistance which is very dangerous. Besides endangering the 'life' of the resistingperson, such resistance invites a grave crime, which while not being intentional as a matter of fact, is considered intentional and classified as murderas a matter'of lawin order to protect the public. Ifkilling occurs, itto t ally ruins the life of ayouth'by subjecting him to heavy penalties of the law, for what as a matter of fact was the resultof excitement andunfortunate chain of circumstances. I Instances are known where newspaperfstories' of a girl cashier or a storekeeper disarming a teen-aged bandit, werefollowed several days later by accounts of a father of many children killed by a teen-ager bandit who later voluntarily surrendered to the police. 1; l i 1 One of the objects of the present invention is to provide an improved holdup alarm system whereby. the above difficulties and disadvantages are overcome and largelyeliminated, and unnecessary loss of human life, as well as ruining" livesof a greatnumber of r youngpersons by inviting or hastening crimes are eliminated. p

' Another object" of, the present inventionisto provide animproved holdup signal system where: by the signal isgiv'en in amanner not notice able to the bandit andth alarm is sounded or otherwise given without this fact becoming known to the bandit, thereby'enabling the police to arrive at the doors of the holdups'tore without the bandit appreciating that the alarm has been given and the holdup is discovered. l l A stillv further object of the invention is to provide. an improved'holdup signal or alarm syse term with the aid-of whichholdups can be liquidated speedily and safely,,with lessdanger. to the store-keepers, to the police and even to bandits, and without inviting unnecessary killings' that now constantly take placef A still further object. of the present invention is to provide an improvedholdup signal system which greatly decreases chances of a successful holdup,vandw hich bythe mere fact of its being known to be in existence or installed in some, places, has a strong deterring effect on would-be bandits, particularly er young age} It is an added object of the present inventionto provide an improvedsi'gnalsysternof the fore-" going'nature, which is simple'in construction: dependable in operation and iislrelati'vely ihexpens ive to manufactureandto maintain. 3

Further objects and tion will be apparent" from the following description and appended claim, reference being had ath @mmn advantages of' this invertdrawings forming a "part

Images