They call it swatting,” says grieving Wichita mother after son killed by police

[Perknose]

You think the military is held to that standard? Better look up the number of civilian deaths. The collateral damage specs.

I believe yllus is referring to the directive for Canadian soldiers, not American drones.

 

[woolfe9998]

Probably depends somewhat on where you are and what race you are. Also, I think you should consider the context in which FIVR gave the advice, before addressing it in a completely literal fashion.

But it _is_ an interesting question. How often do people die because the police hesitate and don't shoot when they should, compared to how often people die due to police shooting when they shouldn't have?

What context? He didn't give any.

Let's look at some numbers. Last year the police killed about 1000 people in the US. The vast majority of those people were armed.

In the US, we have about 3 million law enforcement personnel. How many encounters do you suppose there are every year between police and citizens? It's got to be at least in the 10's of millions, possibly hundreds of millions.

His advice to only call the police in the event of a mass shooting is pure foolishness. It's reckless. And it's born of rank paranoia, nothing more. Reading anecdotal news accounts of unarmed people being shot by police is not a reason to refrain from calling the police when you're in trouble. This is the way a child thinks.

 

[Vic]

Because it NEVER happened before Trump....fucking idiot....

No one said that this kind of thing never happened before Trump, but when Trump's predecessor dared to speak out against these kind of unnecessary police shootings, the "law and order" crowd that voted for Trump claimed falsely that Obama had instigated a "war on cops." And Trump intentionally capitalized on that sentiment, so yeah, this is kinda representative of "Trump's America." Trumpers voted for police to have the power to be able to shoot citizens for little to no reason at all, and here is an example of it.
This incident also represents the Gamergate crowd, who believe that the anonymity of the internet gives them the right to be unaccountable and even to engage in illegal activities, and we all know who they voted for too.

 

[Vic]

Not obeying commands is the thing that seems to lead to the use of deadly force.

"Comply or die" is the antithesis of liberty. Mere disobedience to the state is not a capital crime in a free country.

 

[woolfe9998]

Arrest made:
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/la-man-ar...ed-police-072205194--abc-news-topstories.html

Per your article, the same guy called in a fake bomb threat in 2015 and was convicted and given a 2 year sentence from that, of which it seems he likely didn't serve in its entirety. This man reminds me of a pathological arsonist. He needs to be behind bars for a very long time. He'll do it over and over again given the chance.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

They need to start teaching proper procedure in schools for dealing with the police. Yes It's that bad now. Put your hands high in the sky and don't even so much as blink or you might get your face blown off.

Also guy (swatting caller) should get a murder charge as far as I'm concerned. If you commit a felony and someone dies in the act its a murder charge. Even if you rob a store and the clerk shoots and kills your accomplice you would be charged with murder.

 

[Darwin333]

The law is rather clear his action was a felony, so I don't see why on earth you think he would get a misdemeanor charge.


http://www.thestate.com/news/nation-world/national/article192147144.html

The main question would be if he could be looking at a felony murder charge or some other additional charge under the circumstances given his actions were criminal in the first place.

I was simply going by what I read in one of the articles about his arrest. I just looked up the Kansas felony murder law, was there a child in the house? If so they "might" be able to charge him with felony murder since he endangered a child but otherwise I unfortunately don't see how they could charge him with it

 

[Aegeon]

I was simply going by what I read in one of the articles about his arrest. I just looked up the Kansas felony murder law, was there a child in the house? If so they "might" be able to charge him with felony murder since he endangered a child but otherwise I unfortunately don't see how they could charge him with it

Unless other reports are wrong, merely the fact he used an electronic device to conceal his identity makes it a felony, and "It's a more severe felony if the call falsely claims to be about violent crime or an immediate danger to a person."
http://www.kake.com/story/37160973/kansas-law-makes-some-false-police-calls-felony

You may be looking at the wrong law section for this scenario.

 

[Darwin333]

They need to start teaching proper procedure in schools for dealing with the police. Yes It's that bad now. Put your hands high in the sky and don't even so much as blink or you might get your face blown off.

Also guy (swatting caller) should get a murder charge as far as I'm concerned. If you commit a felony and someone dies in the act its a murder charge. Even if you rob a store and the clerk shoots and kills your accomplice you would be charged with murder.

Yes but most felony murder laws list rather specific crimes that you have to be committing in order to be charged with it. Otherwise you could have overzealous DAs charging all kinds of people with it that really shouldn't be. Although in this case this asshole should definitely be charged with the poor guys murder, from my limited research I just don't know that it's within their power.

 

[Darwin333]

Unless other reports are wrong, merely the fact he used an electronic device to conceal his identity makes it a felony, and "It's a more severe felony if the call falsely claims to be about violent crime or an immediate danger to a person."
http://www.kake.com/story/37160973/kansas-law-makes-some-false-police-calls-felony

You may be looking at the wrong law section for this scenario.

I was talking specifically about them being able to charge him with felony murder, not a felony in general.

 

[woolfe9998]

They need to start teaching proper procedure in schools for dealing with the police. Yes It's that bad now. Put your hands high in the sky and don't even so much as blink or you might get your face blown off.

Keeping your hands up when the police tell you to do so strikes me as common sense advice.

Also guy (swatting caller) should get a murder charge as far as I'm concerned. If you commit a felony and someone dies in the act its a murder charge. Even if you rob a store and the clerk shoots and kills your accomplice you would be charged with murder.

I understand your reasoning, but the felony murder rule in most states requires the underlying felony to be one of an enumerated list of "dangerous" felonies. I don't know which state's rule applies here, whether it's Kansas, where the killing took place, or California, where the swatter resides, but both states have a limited list of felonies under which the rule applies. In CA, it's arson, rape, sexual assault, carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem, kidnapping or train wrecking.

However, in CA we also have a second degree felony murder rule where you end up with a murder 2 conviction if anyone dies during commission of any felony which is "inherently dangerous to human life." I think this pretty clearly qualifies. Murder 2 I think generally carries a 20 year to life sentence.

 

[Darwin333]

Per your article, the same guy called in a fake bomb threat in 2015 and was convicted and given a 2 year sentence from that, of which it seems he likely didn't serve in its entirety. This man reminds me of a pathological arsonist. He needs to be behind bars for a very long time. He'll do it over and over again given the chance.

If you listen to the interview he gave to the youtube guy he implied that he has swatted a lot more than just the ones he was caught for. He actually admitted specifically to a 3rd one, calling in a bomb threat to disrupt the FCC vote on net neutrality. Not to mention that, according to him, someone else called him up to do this so he had to have a reputation for not only doing it but to be willing to do it to a person just for fun. I personally hope they bury him under the jail.

 

[woolfe9998]

If you listen to the interview he gave to the youtube guy he implied that he has swatted a lot more than just the ones he was caught for. He actually admitted specifically to a 3rd one, calling in a bomb threat to disrupt the FCC vote on net neutrality. Not to mention that, according to him, someone else called him up to do this so he had to have a reputation for not only doing it but to be willing to do it to a person just for fun. I personally hope they bury him under the jail.

I think so too. See my discussion of the felony murder rule above. If it's CA law he's going to be prosecuted under, I think he's possibly looking at second degree murder, which is a far more severe penalty than manslaughter.

 

[purbeast0]

If you listen to the interview he gave to the youtube guy he implied that he has swatted a lot more than just the ones he was caught for. He actually admitted specifically to a 3rd one, calling in a bomb threat to disrupt the FCC vote on net neutrality. Not to mention that, according to him, someone else called him up to do this so he had to have a reputation for not only doing it but to be willing to do it to a person just for fun. I personally hope they bury him under the jail.

I mean his twitter handle is @SWAuTistic so clearly he embraces it.

 

[pmv]

What context? He didn't give any.

Let's look at some numbers. Last year the police killed about 1000 people in the US. The vast majority of those people were armed.

In the US, we have about 3 million law enforcement personnel. How many encounters do you suppose there are every year between police and citizens? It's got to be at least in the 10's of millions, possibly hundreds of millions.

His advice to only call the police in the event of a mass shooting is pure foolishness. It's reckless. And it's born of rank paranoia, nothing more. Reading anecdotal news accounts of unarmed people being shot by police is not a reason to refrain from calling the police when you're in trouble. This is the way a child thinks.

Er, the context is, you know, the context. The context being this thread, about this story. That is the context in which the comment was made. This isn't complicated, does it really have to be explained?

Plus your numbers don't answer the question I was musing about.

 

[pmv]

Not obeying commands is the thing that seems to lead to the use of deadly force.

But that's only the last link in a very long chain of causation. No one element is what 'leads to' the outcome, hence such outcomes are more common in some societies than others.

Edit - oh, though in the context of the comment you were originally replying to I get your point.

I'm kind of surprised that 'swatting' is only employed by socially-dysfunctional geeks for petty-grievances, to be honest. Given the non-negligable chance of a bad outcome I'm surprised people aren't using it to settle scores all over, including disputes between criminals (who would presumably regard 'wasting police time and resources' and potentially tying them up in the legal aftermath as a bonus benefit).

Edit - a neighbor of mine had his door smashed in by the police in the early hours - they were on a drug-raid but had gotten the address completely garbled. No guns involved, so no such outcome, but said neighbour (an entirely harmless and significantly disabled guy) was really furious about who was going to replace his front door.

 

[ImpulsE69]

The difference between the cop and the swatter is I'm pretty sure the cop feels bad and regrets his actions. The swatter clearly doesn't. He needs to be locked up for life. The cop needs to be fired...I'm not sure anything less will be acceptable.

 

[woolfe9998]

Er, the context is, you know, the context. The context being this thread, about this story. That is the context in which the comment was made. This isn't complicated, does it really have to be explained?

Plus your numbers don't answer the question I was musing about.

Then the "context" doesn't explain his advice. This incident doesn't make it rational to advise people to not ever call the cops except in cases of mass murder, which was the advice he gave.

I can't answer your precise question. While your question is interesting, it doesn't really inform our decision about when we should call the police. What is on point there is much simpler: what are the odds that the police will actually shoot you in any given case where you encounter them? The answer to that, roughly, is "one in many millions" which doesn't seem to justify his alarmism.

 

[woolfe9998]

I'm kind of surprised that 'swatting' is only employed by socially-dysfunctional geeks for petty-grievances, to be honest. Given the non-negligable chance of a bad outcome I'm surprised people aren't using it to settle scores all over, including disputes between criminals (who would presumably regard 'wasting police time and resources' and potentially tying them up in the legal aftermath as a bonus benefit).

I think the answer to this is rather obvious. Because it is very unlikely in a given case that the swatting will result in anything more than annoyance and inconvenience to the target, this unfortunate victim not withstanding. Which is why it tends to be the domain of pranksters.

If you're a serious criminal and you really want to settle a score with someone, you wouldn't do it that way.

 

[lxskllr]

What context? He didn't give any.

Let's look at some numbers. Last year the police killed about 1000 people in the US. The vast majority of those people were armed.

In the US, we have about 3 million law enforcement personnel. How many encounters do you suppose there are every year between police and citizens? It's got to be at least in the 10's of millions, possibly hundreds of millions.

His advice to only call the police in the event of a mass shooting is pure foolishness. It's reckless. And it's born of rank paranoia, nothing more. Reading anecdotal news accounts of unarmed people being shot by police is not a reason to refrain from calling the police when you're in trouble. This is the way a child thinks.

Police aren't your friend. I haven't been shot(yet), but I've had "issues". Cops are the bottom of the barrel. Most never outgrew the cops n robbers they played at 7 years of age. Thugs protected by radios and the state. Take away either of those, and their attitudes would change. Calling cops is last in my list for anything. I handle my own problems.

 

[woolfe9998]

Police aren't your friend. I haven't been shot(yet), but I've had "issues". Cops are the bottom of the barrel. Most never outgrew the cops n robbers they played at 7 years of age. Thugs protected by radios and the state. Take away either of those, and their attitudes would change. Calling cops is last in my list for anything. I handle my own problems.

Yeah, that would have been great advice when my then 5 year old nephew choked on a pretzel several years back, and we called the police, who showed up in less than 2 minutes and heimliched the boy causing him to cough it up. We might have been able to do it ourselves, though we weren't getting any success. I guess we should have taken that chance right, since according to you, your average cop has homicidal intent in a given case. I guess we just got lucky that he wasn't the typical cop who would have blown as all away instead of trying to help us. You know, like in the vast majority of traffic stops where the person stopped ends up with his brains splattered all over his upholstery.

If you want to not call the police, say, when there is an armed intruder entering your house, by all means. You'd be the proud winner of the Darwin awards. I sincerely hope your foolishness only affects your own safety and not that of anyone else.

 

[lxskllr]

Yeah, that would have been great advice when my then 5 year old nephew choked on a pretzel several years back, and we called the police, who showed up in less than 2 minutes and heimliched the boy causing him to cough it up. We might have been able to do it ourselves, though we weren't getting any success. I guess we should have taken that chance right, since according to you, your average cop has homicidal intent in a given case. I guess we just got lucky that he wasn't the typical cop who would have blown as all away instead of trying to help us. You know, like in the vast majority of traffic stops where the person stopped ends up with his brains splattered all over his upholstery.
If you want to not call the police, say, when there is an armed intruder entering your house, by all means. You'd be the proud winner of the Darwin awards. I sincerely hope your foolishness only affects your own safety and not that of anyone else.

Dude, go fuck yourself. Instead of calling cops, how about... oh, I don't know fuckin' ems since that's what they're trained to do. You're as stupid as the fuckin' cops. That's like wanting chesseburgers for dinner, and going to pizza hut.

As far as someone breaking in my house goes... Good fucking luck. They better be prepared, cause I am. If I die, well that's a good way to die. I'll go out a hero, instead of a bleating sheep.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

the swatter and the cops both suck. The swatter reported his home was 1 story but the average iq cops couldnt figure out they were looking at a 2 story house.

Mark it on your calendars, JSt0rm and I are in complete agreement on this one.

 

[FIVR]

I think woolfe9998 is probably a defense attorney for cops. That's why he likes to defend murderers when they have badges - It's his job.

 

[Darwin333]

I think so too. See my discussion of the felony murder rule above. If it's CA law he's going to be prosecuted under, I think he's possibly looking at second degree murder, which is a far more severe penalty than manslaughter.

Yeah, I looked up the felony murder rules in Kansas but not California. Is there a legal mandate of some sort on who gets jurisdiction? I'm sure Kansas would like to prosecute him themselves but if they can they might concede to California since they can give him a much more appropriate sentence.