I best explain the title to this one…
I sold a door on Monday to a gentlemen that had come home to find his door broken down by the police. Apparently concern was raised by his neighbours because he had not been seen for a few days, so they called the police. He did say he had told them he was going away for a few days, but obviously that information was missed.
So, down came the police, got no response from inside the property and proceeded to break the door down – to find that no one was in the home. The customer then comes back to find wood and nails being his new front door.
What I don’t understand is that when the police know that cylinders can be snapped very easily from the outside, why they continue to batter doors down off their hinges beyond repair? All it takes is a few seconds to snap a cylinder from the outside with some very simple tools. It takes far long to get out the battering ram to try and brake the door down.
Surely it would be cheaper and far more efficient for all parties involved in these scenarios to at least and break the lock first, before starting to destroy the door.
This isn’t the first time where I’ve attended a police break-in where they didn’t have to go to the lengths of breaking the door down to get in. Last year I visited an elderly chap where they could quite have easily snapped the cylinder and got in that way. Again, it turns out they didn’t need to break the door down, so they ended up covering the costs for the new one.
What is strange to me is that given the information and knowledge they have about vulnerable cylinders, is why they aren’t using that to their advantage when it comes to trying to gain entry. There is far less stress and upheaval in replacing a lock and handles than there is a whole new door, and a lot cheaper too.
I wonder if any police forces out there will read this, consider their current policies in forced entry and make changes where they see fit. Because at the moment a lot of elderly people are going through stress and cost where they shouldn’t be.