Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#31

Post by narrator »

hermitdev wrote: post #2

Several things need to be done. These idiots should be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder. The phone system needs to be updated to prevent apoofing of numbers. I know it jas its reasons for corporate exchanges and whatnot, but safety outweighs that. A Telco should be able to uniquely identify precisely who made a call. Along the way: no blocked numbers on caller ID. I dont answer a…

I think the threat of getting 25 years in prison, as one of the guys got, ought to be enough of a deterrent to prevent this kind of stuff.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#32

Post by usefulcat »

omeid2 wrote: post #22
hermitdev wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most police calls that are not from a victim amount to an anonymous call. They cannot be ignored. I hate to say, but it's a slippery slope. Right now, you can't distinguish between a legit line and a spoof, or a burner. But a burner still has a traceable number. Perhaps burners could be placed in a "low trust" zone when dialling emergency services. Such a classification could give 1st responders the caution they need…

> I hate to say, but it's a slippery slope The underlying problem is that police should not jump to lethal force and have proper training to contain dangerous situation, not kill people who are crawling on the floor under their orders. The problem is not distinguishing between a legit line and a spoof, it is having a police force that is not trigger happy who cowardly justify every killing with "I was scared for my l…

> Police who are so easy to be "scared for life" should not be in the force, in the same way someone with pyrophobia should not be a firefighter.

I take your point, but at the same time, that's a very easy thing to say when it's not your life that is on the line. Unless you have first hand experience doing that kind of job, I would strongly advise a bit of restraint in being quite so judgemental.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#33

Post by esoterica »

ksdale wrote: post #19
oh_sigh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when an unverified threat isn't considered quick enough, and the hostages are killed while the police are standing around outside taking a wait and see approach?

I feel like occasions where the police react too slowly and hostages get killed would make it into the news. Instead we have stories about swatting. Any policy needs to weigh the harm to actual hostages against the harm to victims of swatting and right now it seems like swatting victims are bearing the brunt of police action. It is just my hunch that Hollywood has made us believe that crazy dangerous hostage situatio…

That's a very silly thing to believe. Real hostage situations happen all the time, you just never noticed because "angry drunk waves gun around while wife and kids cower in the corner" is not exactly national news.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#34

Post by oh_sigh »

ksdale wrote: post #19
oh_sigh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens when an unverified threat isn't considered quick enough, and the hostages are killed while the police are standing around outside taking a wait and see approach?

I feel like occasions where the police react too slowly and hostages get killed would make it into the news. Instead we have stories about swatting. Any policy needs to weigh the harm to actual hostages against the harm to victims of swatting and right now it seems like swatting victims are bearing the brunt of police action. It is just my hunch that Hollywood has made us believe that crazy dangerous hostage situatio…

Swatting is a much more sensational story, even more so than a real SWAT-necessary situation. Odds are you have no ability to judge the relative frequency of pranks vs real swat calls, because only the pranks and extremely high profile real ones are reported on national news.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#35

Post by socceroos »

onetimemanytime wrote: post #26
omeid2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate to say, but it's a slippery slope The underlying problem is that police should not jump to lethal force and have proper training to contain dangerous situation, not kill people who are crawling on the floor under their orders. The problem is not distinguishing between a legit line and a spoof, it is having a police force that is not trigger happy who cowardly justify every killing with "I was scared for my l…

Again, that's a different issue and separate from calling the Swat teams. The cops are told that murder has happened and a person that had "killed" his family member has zero to lose, so yeah, cops are afraid. The person that sees 20 armed cops or has a grenade thrown through his window will freak out and not act rationally. Recipe for disaster, all because someone made that call. 19 years old going to jail for 20-25…

The call is the catalyst. The cops are the gullible, hyper-agressive actors that turn what should be a simple matter of communication into the 'justified' killing of an innocent.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#36

Post by oh_sigh »

aharrison wrote: post #10
oh_sigh wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternate side of officers using unreasonable force from a scam anonymous call is getting officers or members of the public killed from a real anonymous call. Police are going to be on high alert regardless, even if they think the call was a hoax

You will note that I did not say "scam" anonymous call. I said "anonymous call" which includes both real and anonymous calls. Police officers should respond with force dictated by the circumstances of their situation, trained in such analysis, and held accountable to their decisions - both as individual officers and as departments. The source of the initial investigation should have little if any impact on the level…

I agree completely - my point was that police can't treat anonymous calls differently than real ones, because it is literally their lives(and the lives of the potential hostages) on the line. Unreasonable force is unreasonable force, regardless of how the officer was called into the situation.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#38

Post by ddtaylor »

nostromo wrote: post #37

Shouldn’t local law enforcement do a little more triage before sending in paramilitaristic swat teams? How many hostage situations actually happen in middle class boring suburbs such that a single unverified call turns into a full blown swat response?

This conversation has been had on HN many times. Someone will come and say that they have to assume all reports are good faith and then someone else will counter that they're the ones using deadly force and should apply it as needed.

Endless loop debate.

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#39

Post by [deleted] »

Buge wrote: post #27

Twitter names @internetlord @defeat @tragic and @spared Those seem like some pretty high value names. Although internetlord and tragic don't look like what I'd expect a swatter's account to look like. They don't appear very popular or active so saying they're "known by" those names seems a little strange. Also strange how much more valuable those look compared to the mastermind's twitter names swautistic and goredtut…

[deleted]

Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes

#40

Post by anonytrary »

Abusing the protection system like this should be life in prison. This is one of those things you don't fuck with. When you're 6 years old and call 911 because you don't know any better, that's one thing. These kids are 23 and 19, etc. and they understand the potential consequences of their actions, but they continued to act anyway.
Post reply on HN