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

Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

tucsonsentinel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 118 posts

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#11

Post by helterskelter »

efnx wrote: post #5

They need to get sued _hard_ and lose millions, as well as have cops put in jail before real change happens. I feel sorry for this kid but he's doing the right thing.

Taxpayers will just foot the bill. These cops need their personal funds taken, and before they blow it all on legal bills defending themselves from criminal charges.

Come to think of it, this is America dammit. Cops should be licensed, bonded and insured, and if their training or records aren't up to standards they don't get covered. We have higher standards for plumbers and pest control than we do police.

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#13

Post by argee »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #3

Time to start a new company, Swatly.ai, which listens in on 911 calls and warns police if they may be responding to a SWATting attempt. Working on integrating into their firearms so they won't fire unless the AI thinks it's load-bearing.

More sensibly, their insurance could just toss a clause in and charge higher premiums to cover for this, while adding some conditions to help prevent it.

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#14

Post by efnx »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #3

Time to start a new company, Swatly.ai, which listens in on 911 calls and warns police if they may be responding to a SWATting attempt. Working on integrating into their firearms so they won't fire unless the AI thinks it's load-bearing.

And then on the side they sell "metadata" to insurance companies and anyone else willing to pay...

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#15

Post by jrflowers »

getstowly wrote: post #2

I don't understand why more police agencies aren't being super careful with this stuff, especially if they're being sent to a house / location where no other crimes have been reported. It would be one thing if you have a call to a house that's had domestic violence calls, other shootings, etc. Instead, they're just getting a call and thinking, "Oh no! Danger!" and running in, guns blazing. I love the protection from…

A lot of police departments in the US pay to send their officers to seminars where speakers tell them that they’re Literally Warriors. Cops with Punisher tattoos aren’t being ironic, they think about finishing a shift of playing Temple Run on their phones like catching the last helicopter out of Saigon.

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#17

Post by infinite_spin »

helterskelter wrote: post #10
cyanregiment wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In San Francisco the cop cars don't say "To serve and protect" they say "Safety with respect" lmfao cuts to 6 cops beating a guy with clubs

IIRC "To serve and protect" was originally from a movie. Cops don't have a duty to protect you, and there in fact many cases of a cop not intervening during a violent crime due to concerns for their own safety, even when the asailant only had a knife.

> "To Serve and Protect," is a phrase made famous by the Los Angeles Police De­partment and adopted, in various forms, by law enforcement agencies across the United States.

https://www.policemag.com/articles/to-serve-and-protect-v2

> In February 1955, the Los Angeles Police Department, through the pages of the internally produced BEAT magazine, conducted a contest for a motto for the police academy. The conditions of the contest stated that: “The motto should be one that in a few words would express some or all the ideals to which the Los Angeles police service is dedicated. It is possible that the winning motto might someday be adopted as the official motto of the Department.”

> The winning entry was the motto, “To Protect and to Serve” submitted by Officer Joseph S. Dorobek.

> On November 4, 1963, the Los Angeles City Council passed the necessary ordinance and the credo has now been placed alongside the City Seal on the Department’s patrol cars.

https://www.lapdonline.org/lapd-motto/

I don't know what film you're referring to, but it's been a motto since the 50's, and made official since the 60's.

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#18

Post by reactordev »

helterskelter wrote: post #11
efnx wrote: post #5

They need to get sued _hard_ and lose millions, as well as have cops put in jail before real change happens. I feel sorry for this kid but he's doing the right thing.

Taxpayers will just foot the bill. These cops need their personal funds taken, and before they blow it all on legal bills defending themselves from criminal charges. Come to think of it, this is America dammit. Cops should be licensed, bonded and insured, and if their training or records aren't up to standards they don't get covered. We have higher standards for plumbers and pest control than we do police.

This. If truck drivers have to maintain safety records, if firefighters require certification and training, cops do too. To hell with this implied immunity bullshit, either they are correct in enforcing the law or they aren’t.

If it's one cops fault, charge the cop. If it's multiple cops fault, charge them AND the department. This makes it fiscally prudent to make sure cops in the department are well trained and educated on enforcing the laws and respecting rights.

Re: Man seeks millions after being shot by police in game-related swatting incident

#19

Post by atmavatar »

cyanregiment wrote: post #7
hamper653 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some protection!

In San Francisco the cop cars don't say "To serve and protect" they say "Safety with respect" lmfao cuts to 6 cops beating a guy with clubs

That's because the Supreme Court has ruled that police have no constitutional duty to protect citizens.

Special note: that includes cases where protective orders like restraining orders are concerned. The Castle Rock v. Gonzales ruling specifically states that police have no obligation to enforce them.

Post reply on HN