That seems easy: it’s been coined from the words “sonic” and “control.” It seems, therefore, that Sonitrol might employ a methodology of controlling people, in which sounds would play a part. To control by sounds, it might be necessary not only to listen, but also to generate sounds. I’ve noticed the Sonitrol logo in various places. One of those was a Big Lots store where the technique of trying to control people by sounds was evident.
For example, while in that store, I observed that announcements, which seemed intended to deter shoplifting, were sometimes made over the public address system.
It might be announced that security was wanted in a certain area of the store. The intent of that did not seem to be so much to tell security where IT was supposed to go—but, instead, to tell SHOPPERS that security was active in the store at that time. That comes under the heading of controlling people, i.e. shoppers, by sound.
That’s similar to some of what I’ve been ex-periencing in my apartment for many years--little audio acting vignettes seemingly designed to motivate me to act or think in one way or another.
I’m not a perfect person and never will be. But I don’t need constant guidance from an unknown big bother convinced of its own moral authority about how I should think or act.
Sonitrol is well-connected. Until 2004, Sonitrol headquarters was located in Alexandria, VA. That implies federal connections which might be considered quite improper for local policing purposes--and for civil rights.
After I pointed that out in a newsletter, Sonitrol moved to Pennsylvania. The move suggested that the company was paying attention to me—indeed, maybe too much attention. And, until I wrote about it in the same newsletter, Sonitrol was providing free office space for the downtown headquarters of IPD–which was clearly improper for a private security firm. So connections to both federal and local government, might well explain why IPD refused to even write up my complaint about Sonitrol.
A woman in the Indianapolis Sonitrol office asserted that they aren’t doing security for the particular building in which I’m actually living. “Why not,” one might ask, since they are doing security for the rental office. And there’s a TV camera in the entrance way of my building. For building security purposes that camera should be pointed at the front door, so as to view those coming in and out.
Continue
(Click for a larger image.)
Security firm of the CIA?
