4 ms·

> 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

> 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.