IF the people in charge are asking for it, find and suggest a solution that can do it safely.
I'm with you so far.
If they are not willing to pay for your solution, find another, albeit less safe solution and present it with a list of assumed risks. Rinse and repeat until you have a solution they are willing to pay for with risks they are accepting, then do that.
In my experience, any "solution" that you present will be understood to do everything that they wanted.
Even if you say that they cannot have X at $Y. They will give you $Y and then demand X.
When you cannot do so, a contractor will be brought in to set up a flawed implementation that will reduce your security BUT will provide X at a price point that you said could not be done.
Which is why we see this story pop up over and over and over again.
Idjuts who try to respond with non-lethal force often find that the other side isnt always that considerate.
I deploy pepper spray with my off hand, strong hand on my handgun.
Not true, Indiana allows deadly force in defense of property, and there is no duty to retreat. And it includes your vehicle when away from home.
I think you're talking about Indiana's Castle Doctrine law, which gives you the right to assume that you're threatened with death if someone breaks into your house or car (some states also include place of business). But the authorization is for self-defense, not defense of property. The Castle Doctrine just means that the law automatically assumes that you were at risk of death or serious injury in those locations, and you don't have to justify it.
If a guy is stealing your car, would you just watch him and let him do it? Or, you could threaten him with the gun, but both you and him know that you can't legally pull the trigger? So he continues to steal your car, and you can't do anything at all to defend your property??
I can use non-lethal force. There are lots of options available.
But, no, I will not kill a man to stop him from taking my stuff. I have insurance. The situation changes dramatically if my kid is in the back seat, of course.
Most states allow deadly force for forcible felonies, and include burglary. The rationale there is that the house may not be empty, and so there may be human lives at risk. It's a reasonable choice.
So, in Missouri, not only can you shoot someone for simply breaking into your house while you're home, after January 1, 2017, you can also shoot them in the back as they run away.
This is even more wrong.
01 May 2015 (Bernie Sanders running for president)
Bernie Sanders is running for president.
He's going to have my vote.
In fact if you go right to stallman.org it's current front and center at the top.
It's long been possible to run entirely free software on a PC, but the world of game consoles has been a proprietary hellscape for many years.
In recent years there's been an attempt to open it up in some very modest ways, mainly through the proliferation of Android "microconsoles" and other Android-based set top boxes.
Do you find these new developments to be a step in the right direction and are you worried as I am that they're not catching on very well?