Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
justice.gov
Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
1–10 of 112 posts
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#2Several 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 blocked number, anyway, but you shouldn't be able to hide.
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#3Several 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…
> should be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder
How do you prove the intent was to murder rather than to harass?
You think you’re being clever by charging with something more serious, then the charge fails because really you just wanted what they really did to have a steeper punishment.
> I dont answer a blocked number, anyway
They don’t call you - it doesn’t matter what you’d do - they call the police, who have to answer the phone.
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#4Several 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…
> should be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder How do you prove the intent was to murder rather than to harass? You think you’re being clever by charging with something more serious, then the charge fails because really you just wanted what they really did to have a steeper punishment. > I dont answer a blocked number, anyway They don’t call you - it doesn’t matter what you’d do - t…
Because then they wouldn't be SWATting people then, they would, idk, order 10 pizzas to the place. Does this really need to be asked?
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#5Several 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'm a little surprised you didn't mention anything about police being held accountable when responding with unreasonable force to anonymous tips. If we are going to start talking about fixing this issue, I'm not sure getting rid of blocked numbers is going to materially impact these outcomes.
Likewise, what is your recommendation on eliminating the threat of burner phones?
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#6Several 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…
Surely the robust solution is for police/swat teams to treat unverified threats differently?
Any real world system needs to be able to handle faulty inputs. If this particular system wasn't so terrible at that, bad actors would have no reason to make the false reports in the first place.
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#7Several 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'm a little surprised you didn't mention anything about police being held accountable when responding with unreasonable force to anonymous tips. If we are going to start talking about fixing this issue, I'm not sure getting rid of blocked numbers is going to materially impact these outcomes. Likewise, what is your recommendation on eliminating the threat of burner phones?
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
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#8Several 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…
> should be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder How do you prove the intent was to murder rather than to harass? You think you’re being clever by charging with something more serious, then the charge fails because really you just wanted what they really did to have a steeper punishment. > I dont answer a blocked number, anyway They don’t call you - it doesn’t matter what you’d do - t…
> How do you the intent was to murder rather than to harass?
Are you serious? If I want to harass someone I'll ring the doorbell and run, order 40 pizzas, throw toilet paper all over their house, etc. Police armed to the teeth is pretty obvious this isn't about harassment. If it is, you need help.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/29/16830626/call-of-duty-sw...
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#9Several 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…
Surely the robust solution is for police/swat teams to treat unverified threats differently? Any real world system needs to be able to handle faulty inputs. If this particular system wasn't so terrible at that, bad actors would have no reason to make the false reports in the first place.
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?
Re: Three Men Charged in ‘Swatting’ Schemes
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a little surprised you didn't mention anything about police being held accountable when responding with unreasonable force to anonymous tips. If we are going to start talking about fixing this issue, I'm not sure getting rid of blocked numbers is going to materially impact these outcomes. Likewise, what is your recommendation on eliminating the threat of burner phones?
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 of force used in the encounter.