3 ms·

> police have no choice but to operate under the assumption that the 911 call is in good faith Why the hell not? Swatting is a well-known phenomenon, and even

> police have no choice but to operate under the assumption that the 911 call is in good faith Why the hell not? Swatting is a well-known phenomenon, and even if that weren't true, killing somebody without a single shred of direct evidence that the situation calls for that level of response is insane. We absolutely have to do better. Police cannot (responsibly) put themselves in completely unknown situations and then start shooting to kill at the slightest suggestion of danger. It seems that police departments have started to respond to the threat of swatting with streamer whitelists and such. That's good. It's just a shame that someone apparently had to die for them to sit up and take this obvious problem seriously.

gravy 8y ago
The issue is that it's not isolated to just streamers. Given an infinite number of possibilities of how a situation can occur (and given an infinite number of GIVEN POSSIBILITIES by the "swatter") how do you solve the issue of putting together a response team in as little time as possible to respond to a threat while at the same time not undermining the idea that it could very well be a real threat? What I mean is, it's very easy to say that they can't put themselves in these completely unknown situations. Unfortunately that simply is the job of the response teams and often of local law enforcement. How do you verify quickly and accurately that a call is not a trap? How do you do so consistently -- that is, how do I know the NEXT call is NOT a trap? A streamer whitelist does no good if swatting can be done to anyone. I don't mean to assume that there aren't already answers to these questions, but to say that they are being irresponsible when dispatching officers and teams is making light of the issues.
- caconym_ 8y ago
  > to say that they are being irresponsible when dispatching officers and teams is making light of the issues Are you implying that I said that? I said no such thing, anyway. I will say, again, that "police cannot (responsibly) put themselves in completely unknown situations and then start shooting to kill at the slightest suggestion of danger." Speaking of things I never said... I also didn't say streamer whitelists would completely fix this problem. It's a good start, and should help officers to go into these situations with more information. That makes everybody safer. Overall you've put a lot of words in my mouth and you seem to be implying this false dichotomy in which officers either "aren't taking the call seriously" or are justified in pulling the trigger on someone with zero direct evidence that they're actually in any danger. That dichotomy is bullshit.
  - gravy 8y ago
    No, what I'm saying is that a "completely unknown situation" may present itself with a reason to "start shooting to kill at the slightest suggestion of danger". You just don't know. I'm saying that it is difficult to be "responsible" (by what I'm assuming you mean taking in more information before dispatching) in balancing appropriate responses when it's much safer to err on the side of danger and reduce response time. I'll admit I didn't think too much about the whitelists (I assume it's just a list of streamers kept somewhere, not people sending their names in if they're a streamer to be placed on the list). It is a good idea because streamers are most often targeted by swatters (citation needed), though it obviously can't solve the problem since not all people swatted are streamers. I apologize.

gravy 8y ago

The issue is that it's not isolated to just streamers. Given an infinite number of possibilities of how a situation can occur (and given an infinite number of GIVEN POSSIBILITIES by the "swatter") how do you solve the issue of putting together a response team in as little time as possible to respond to a threat while at the same time not undermining the idea that it could very well be a real threat? What I mean is, it's very easy to say that they can't put themselves in these completely unknown situations. Unfortunately that simply is the job of the response teams and often of local law enforcement. How do you verify quickly and accurately that a call is not a trap? How do you do so consistently -- that is, how do I know the NEXT call is NOT a trap? A streamer whitelist does no good if swatting can be done to anyone. I don't mean to assume that there aren't already answers to these questions, but to say that they are being irresponsible when dispatching officers and teams is making light of the issues.

caconym_ 8y ago
> to say that they are being irresponsible when dispatching officers and teams is making light of the issues Are you implying that I said that? I said no such thing, anyway. I will say, again, that "police cannot (responsibly) put themselves in completely unknown situations and then start shooting to kill at the slightest suggestion of danger." Speaking of things I never said... I also didn't say streamer whitelists would completely fix this problem. It's a good start, and should help officers to go into these situations with more information. That makes everybody safer. Overall you've put a lot of words in my mouth and you seem to be implying this false dichotomy in which officers either "aren't taking the call seriously" or are justified in pulling the trigger on someone with zero direct evidence that they're actually in any danger. That dichotomy is bullshit.
- gravy 8y ago
  No, what I'm saying is that a "completely unknown situation" may present itself with a reason to "start shooting to kill at the slightest suggestion of danger". You just don't know. I'm saying that it is difficult to be "responsible" (by what I'm assuming you mean taking in more information before dispatching) in balancing appropriate responses when it's much safer to err on the side of danger and reduce response time. I'll admit I didn't think too much about the whitelists (I assume it's just a list of streamers kept somewhere, not people sending their names in if they're a streamer to be placed on the list). It is a good idea because streamers are most often targeted by swatters (citation needed), though it obviously can't solve the problem since not all people swatted are streamers. I apologize.