7 ms·

Imagine a 911 operator gets a phone call that goes like this: - 911, what is your emergency? - Help me oh god! ... My husband he's going crazy he got a s

Imagine a 911 operator gets a phone call that goes like this: - 911, what is your emergency? - Help me oh god! ... My husband he's going crazy he got a shotgun and is threatening to shoot my kids he... - [garble garble] - [Distant voice of a man] "get the fuck off that phone" - [Loud bang] - [Line clicks and goes silent] The 911 operator can try to call back to get confirmation, but a lack of response just underscores the seriousness of the situation. If the police didn't rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, they'd be the ones l̶i̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ berated in the media for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously. Though I doubt fake swatting calls are so well produced. edit: In this situation, whether real or not, obviously the police shouldn't murder people. If this was real, they should first exhaust their non-lethal options for keeping the crazy husband from murdering children. If it's a fake swatting call or the wrong address, they should discover that and especially not murder people. But in response to the parent's point about the police being eager to rush over from a single phone call, this seems like a 20 second phone call where they have no ethical choice but to rush over. How they behave when they arrive is a different topic from what I'm responding to.

pessimizer 3y ago
They don't have to murder people with no physical corroboration of the phone call at all. That's on them. What if it were a legitimate anonymous phone call with a transposition of the numbers of an address, or if the cops just accidentally went down the wrong street? Should people die then, or should we think that's a problem?
- blacksmith_tb 3y ago
  The have only called 911 twice, once when a neighbor was waving a pistol around yelling at his wife (cops came, de-escalated things a little, then left - better than shooting someone clearly, if not exactly perfect). The other time I saw smoke pouring out from under the eaves of the house across the street - in that case, the firefighters roared up, jumped out, and busted in my front door (in spite of the fact there wasn't any smoke or flames) so I clearly see why people are worried about first responders charging in without understanding the situation.
  - Arrath 3y ago
    I'm sorry but the mental image looking out your front door as a firefighter kicks it down, an ignored building happily in flames over their shoulder, is way too funny.
    - Obscurity4340 3y ago
      Reminds me of Captain Hindsight from South Park, where he flies over to the burning building and clarifies all the (in hindsight super obvious) structural flaws in the building leading to the fire and everyone being trapped in a burning building. Then flies away amidst they cheers of onlookers and trapped victims alike.
  - Broken_Hippo 3y ago
    I called 911 when I found my ex after a suicide attempt. One of the cops that responded tried to blame me.
    - Loughla 3y ago
      Not sure why you're being downvoted. Your experience isn't unique, sadly. The closest I've ever been to being arrested was when I had to call the cops because I got robbed while at work. They had footage of another person entering the store and then sprinting out, but the 17 year old nerdy kid was a much easier target. Never again.
- thakoppno 3y ago
  From a simple technical perspective, it seems like something like a more targeted amber alert would be feasible. Is this one of those fabled edge compute use cases?
- cornstalks 3y ago
  Police don't just go in guns blazing with their eyes closed. It's a very high-pressure situation because police are running in fully expecting to get shot at. They don't know if they're going to end up in a situation like [1] or if this is just a prank. In the end it's a really crappy situation for everyone. Police have to be super alert and are likely jumpy because they expect to be shot dead if they aren't the first to pull the trigger. Personally I don't really blame the police. Rather I blame the phone industry for giving these callers way too much anonymity. It should be trivial to trace a 911 call to a real paying phone customer. That would make swatting a lot less attractive (assuming it carried a very heavy punishment too). [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ODn6wuuVsU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ODn6wuuVsU
  - TechBro8615 3y ago
    > Police don't just go in guns blazing with their eyes closed In the Breonna Taylor incident [0], their eyes weren't closed, but they may as well have been: > Police then fired 32 rounds into the apartment... Cosgrove fired 16 shots from the doorway area... Hankison fired 10 times from outside through a sliding glass door and bedroom window, both of which were covered by blinds or curtains... The officers' shots hit objects in the living room, dining room, kitchen, hallway, bathroom, and both bedrooms. Now, granted that situation was out of the norm because an occupant of the apartment fired a shot first, since he thought they were being burgled and the police neglected to announce their presence. But that's exactly the kind of situation that could happen in a SWAT raid. Most victims of SWATTing don't expect police to show up to their door, so if they're someone who owns a firearm and they hear a loud bang at the door, they may quite rightfully fire a shot at it in self defense, just like happened in the Taylor residence. The main lesson there is that it's up to police to properly announce themselves (no-knock raids should never be used in response to an emergency distress call such as the kind that triggers a SWATTing). But even if they announce themselves and receive fire in return, I'd argue they should at least make sure they've sighted a target before they pull the trigger, rather than indiscriminately shooting a volley of bullets through a window like they're some kind of gangster doing a drive by. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor#Shooting_and_aftermath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor#Shoo...
danenania 3y ago
They should definitely still rush over in SWAT gear, but before going in guns blazing, they should verify what the situation is. They should assume the call may be fake until it’s proven real. More recon would probably reveal that something doesn’t add up in most of these situations.
- dmbche 3y ago
  Since they recorded 1000 swatting events in a year, I assume that most times swat is called their response is warranted - it gets tough to try to vet calls sent to a very fast response group
  - jncfhnb 3y ago
    [dead]
  - yieldcrv 3y ago
    Funny because I would assume most times they are not warranted so do we have enough information to determine? or do we need to push for that first.
    - TechBro8615 3y ago
      Yes, I would be very interested in the denominator of "legit" SWAT raids, specifically limited to only those for which prank calls are a false positive, i.e. real, time-sensitive emergency distress calls, and not prearranged raids where the police have a warrant.
  - patmcc 3y ago
    That depends entirely on how many "my husband is going crazy with a shotgun" calls they get, doesn't it?
    - biofunsf 3y ago
      I picked the above scenario because police calls for domestic disputes are incredibly common. This source[0] says they account for 15% to 50% of all police calls. Hundreds of women are murdered with guns by their intimate partners every year[1]. Also domestic violence calls are a big cause of police deaths though definitely not the #1 cause as Joe Biden erroneously claimed[2]. I was aiming to create a somewhat plausible 911 call, though having the wife shot while she was on the 911 call might have been a bit over the top. [0] https://www.domesticshelters.org/resources/statistics/law-enforcement-and-domestic-violence https://www.domesticshelters.org/resources/statistics/law-en... [1] https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-against-women-americas-uniquely-lethal-intimate-partner-violence-problem/ https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-again... [2] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/mar/15/joe-biden/joe-biden-says-domestic-violence-calls-prompt-most/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/mar/15/joe-biden/...
tedunangst 3y ago
Good news: police are not liable for doing nothing in response to a threat.
- MR4D 3y ago
  That thought isn't exactly comforting if you think about it.
  - hackerlight 3y ago
    Uvalde shooting comes to mind.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    We just saw this with the recent court case decision from the cop that did nothing at the Parkland shooting.
    - jstarfish 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - HarryHirsch 3y ago
      The cops at Parkland couldn't even establish a proper perimeter around the crime scene. After the killer was done running amok he wandered off, got himself a slurpee out of Subway and then had breakfast at McDonalds. They did not even try and identify who was responsible for the shooting. Oh, and even after the shooter had been taken into custody the sheriff still denied access to the scene to emergency medical personnel. There can't be an excuse for that degree of malicious incompetence but the courts gave them one anyway.
- skyyler 3y ago
  What, exactly, are police for?
  - Arrath 3y ago
    Feeding the municipal/county/state coffers with the proceeds of civil forfeiture?
BLKNSLVR 3y ago
How long had the technology to see the calling number been available? And can't law enforcement map that to a physical address within a light speed equivalent amount of time? Unless a swatter is "the phone call came from inside the house"-ing, it should have been easy to filter out for maybe, conservatively, the last two decades.
- wmf 3y ago
  The physical address is some VoIP gateway. What if you legitimately use VoIP and call 911 for a good reason? They can't just ignore your call. (Legally they can ignore your call, but then why have 911.)
  - biofunsf 3y ago
    Exactly! I almost added that to my reply above. To make the above situation even trickier, let's say the homeowners had a landline for years, but just recently switched to a VoIP gateway. Their VoIP gateway operator advertised a feature that their outgoing caller ID will make it look like they're calling from their old number. This is a real and desirable feature for lots of people. I'd rather not have police disregard all calls from VoIP gateways. But to GP's point, of course what we really need is a genuine verifiable caller ID. Or at least some sort of verification that's instantly available to 911 operators. In this case, the VoIP provider should be able to assert that the call really is coming from that address in a way no one else can spoof.
    - tbrownaw 3y ago
      ... So no more getting prepaid sim cards (for, say, 2fa for a shitposting or politics account) without registering your government id with the provider?
      - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
        In Australia you can't activate a SIM card without registering your government ID with the provider. Similar with prepaid credit cards if memory serves. Flipside would be: don't use a burner phone/SIM to call 911 - or at least have an alternative method of verifying location / address.
moralestapia 3y ago
>ready to save the lives of children Lol, a wild meme appears.
themitigating 3y ago
Why do they need swat? Two police officers are not acceptable? Also the police aren't required to enforce the law
- tcmart14 3y ago
  I think the issue isn't necessarily the existence of SWAT, but the over use of SWAT. SWAT makes sense if its LAPD going in to do a raid on a big cartel event. In a real scenario when you are also going to be confronting a large group armed to the teeth. Outside of that, eh, why is SWAT being used so much for things that really just need 1 or 2 officers with stock equipment?
calvinmorrison 3y ago
Well 911 calls have locations in a few seconds. If I am a zoomer prankster calling from San Jose swatting a guy in NJ.... hum thats a long knife
- dylan604 3y ago
  If only spoofing your caller ID were possible...
  - wmf 3y ago
    This is kind of a nitpick but caller ID, ANI, E911, and now STIR/SHAKEN are different protocols AFAIK and spoofing them takes different amounts of effort. Unfortunately capitalism turned SS7 into swiss cheese so the effort probably varies from trivial to easy.
- jauer 3y ago
  Most low-cost VoIP providers will let you set your e911 address to whatever you want without any verification.
UncleMeat 3y ago
And yet, cops fight in the courts to so it is a-okay to do absolutely nothing when a man who has a restraining order against him kidnaps his kids and then eventually murders them.
quickthrowman 3y ago
> If the police didn't rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, they'd be the ones liable for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously. Q: Are the police required to protect you as a specific individual in the United States? A: No, the police are not required to protect you as an individual in the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gelman_stabbing_spree#Lozito_v._New_York_City https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gelman_stabbing_spree... And just yesterday the coward that hid outside Parkland High while a mass murder occurred was acquitted: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/6/29/us-officer-found-not-guilty-of-neglect-in-parkland-shooting https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/6/29/us-officer-foun... re: Your edit changing ‘liability’ to ‘being berated in the media’ George Floyd was murdered by cops in my city 3 years ago and the entire world heard his name.
- jorf 3y ago
  This is a lame post. It was clear what the OP meant: in hot trouble for not doing the job. And technically liable vs. otherwise wasn't even the main point of the post. Assume best intentions and avoid nitpicking. Also the Q&A format comes off as a little condescending.
  - quickthrowman 3y ago
    It was not clear what the OP meant, ‘liable’ has a distinct meaning with regards to legal liability. A little condescending is OK when someone is posting authoritatively and they’re totally incorrect.
ddejohn 3y ago
> they'd be the ones liable for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously Cops aren't liable for shit. We have real evidence of cops doing fuck all to "save the lives of children" or take "a clear imminent threat to life seriously" just last year in response to a much more credible threat in Uvalde.
- TheCleric 3y ago
  And the supreme court has ruled they CAN'T be held liable just because they don't protect you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza...
katbyte 3y ago
Should the 911 operate not be able to verify the number and it’s location? If not there is your problem. Fix the telecom network and prevent all spoofing of numbers. Would solve lots of other things too
8note 3y ago
When you consider the police response to actually dangerous situations like a school shooting, what's the point of having the swat gear? They're going to wait until the shooter has shot all of the children at least once and run out of bullets before going in. It's pretty well known that the police have no responsibility to help in a dangerous situation, only to arrest people once the situation has ended
onion2k 3y ago
If the police didn't rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, they'd be the ones l̶i̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ berated in the media for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously. Here in the UK the police would rush there without guns. There would be an armed response team to back them up, but only once the threat was confirmed. Maybe the UK just has braver police.
- rm_-rf_slash 3y ago
  >Maybe the UK just has braver police Bit of a smug take coming from a place with fewer guns than people.
  - onion2k 3y ago
    I don't see what that's relevant. If the UK police respond to reports of a person with a gun without being armed themselves that's clearly braver that American police who respond to literally any report with enough military hardware as if they fear for their lives.
    - mschuster91 3y ago
      Because the likelihood of a police officer getting shot by a criminal is far higher. Not just in domestic violence situations, but also in everyday policing. An example: here in Germany even if you push hundreds of kg of cocaine you'll get six to eight years behind bars. Not worth shooting a police officer at a traffic stop over it. In the US? Decades behind bars at least, life if you're in a "three strikes" jurisdiction - that's a massive incentive to shoot the cop and attempt to escape when you got nothing to lose anyway.
      - CaptainZapp 3y ago
        Actually, being a cop is not even in the top 15 most dangerous jobs in the US[0]. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/deadliest-jobs-in-america-bls-2022-12?op=1&r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/deadliest-jobs-in-america-bl...
xorcist 3y ago
> rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, Ready to endanger the life of children. There's really no nice way to put this. This phenomenon does not exist in any other country in the world which is not a completely failed state.

pessimizer 3y ago

They don't have to murder people with no physical corroboration of the phone call at all. That's on them. What if it were a legitimate anonymous phone call with a transposition of the numbers of an address, or if the cops just accidentally went down the wrong street? Should people die then, or should we think that's a problem?

blacksmith_tb 3y ago
The have only called 911 twice, once when a neighbor was waving a pistol around yelling at his wife (cops came, de-escalated things a little, then left - better than shooting someone clearly, if not exactly perfect). The other time I saw smoke pouring out from under the eaves of the house across the street - in that case, the firefighters roared up, jumped out, and busted in my front door (in spite of the fact there wasn't any smoke or flames) so I clearly see why people are worried about first responders charging in without understanding the situation.
- Arrath 3y ago
  I'm sorry but the mental image looking out your front door as a firefighter kicks it down, an ignored building happily in flames over their shoulder, is way too funny.
  - Obscurity4340 3y ago
    Reminds me of Captain Hindsight from South Park, where he flies over to the burning building and clarifies all the (in hindsight super obvious) structural flaws in the building leading to the fire and everyone being trapped in a burning building. Then flies away amidst they cheers of onlookers and trapped victims alike.
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  I called 911 when I found my ex after a suicide attempt. One of the cops that responded tried to blame me.
  - Loughla 3y ago
    Not sure why you're being downvoted. Your experience isn't unique, sadly. The closest I've ever been to being arrested was when I had to call the cops because I got robbed while at work. They had footage of another person entering the store and then sprinting out, but the 17 year old nerdy kid was a much easier target. Never again.
thakoppno 3y ago
From a simple technical perspective, it seems like something like a more targeted amber alert would be feasible. Is this one of those fabled edge compute use cases?
cornstalks 3y ago
Police don't just go in guns blazing with their eyes closed. It's a very high-pressure situation because police are running in fully expecting to get shot at. They don't know if they're going to end up in a situation like [1] or if this is just a prank. In the end it's a really crappy situation for everyone. Police have to be super alert and are likely jumpy because they expect to be shot dead if they aren't the first to pull the trigger. Personally I don't really blame the police. Rather I blame the phone industry for giving these callers way too much anonymity. It should be trivial to trace a 911 call to a real paying phone customer. That would make swatting a lot less attractive (assuming it carried a very heavy punishment too). [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ODn6wuuVsU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ODn6wuuVsU
- TechBro8615 3y ago
  > Police don't just go in guns blazing with their eyes closed In the Breonna Taylor incident [0], their eyes weren't closed, but they may as well have been: > Police then fired 32 rounds into the apartment... Cosgrove fired 16 shots from the doorway area... Hankison fired 10 times from outside through a sliding glass door and bedroom window, both of which were covered by blinds or curtains... The officers' shots hit objects in the living room, dining room, kitchen, hallway, bathroom, and both bedrooms. Now, granted that situation was out of the norm because an occupant of the apartment fired a shot first, since he thought they were being burgled and the police neglected to announce their presence. But that's exactly the kind of situation that could happen in a SWAT raid. Most victims of SWATTing don't expect police to show up to their door, so if they're someone who owns a firearm and they hear a loud bang at the door, they may quite rightfully fire a shot at it in self defense, just like happened in the Taylor residence. The main lesson there is that it's up to police to properly announce themselves (no-knock raids should never be used in response to an emergency distress call such as the kind that triggers a SWATTing). But even if they announce themselves and receive fire in return, I'd argue they should at least make sure they've sighted a target before they pull the trigger, rather than indiscriminately shooting a volley of bullets through a window like they're some kind of gangster doing a drive by. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor#Shooting_and_aftermath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Breonna_Taylor#Shoo...

danenania 3y ago

They should definitely still rush over in SWAT gear, but before going in guns blazing, they should verify what the situation is. They should assume the call may be fake until it’s proven real. More recon would probably reveal that something doesn’t add up in most of these situations.

dmbche 3y ago
Since they recorded 1000 swatting events in a year, I assume that most times swat is called their response is warranted - it gets tough to try to vet calls sent to a very fast response group
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  [dead]
- yieldcrv 3y ago
  Funny because I would assume most times they are not warranted so do we have enough information to determine? or do we need to push for that first.
  - TechBro8615 3y ago
    Yes, I would be very interested in the denominator of "legit" SWAT raids, specifically limited to only those for which prank calls are a false positive, i.e. real, time-sensitive emergency distress calls, and not prearranged raids where the police have a warrant.
- patmcc 3y ago
  That depends entirely on how many "my husband is going crazy with a shotgun" calls they get, doesn't it?
  - biofunsf 3y ago
    I picked the above scenario because police calls for domestic disputes are incredibly common. This source[0] says they account for 15% to 50% of all police calls. Hundreds of women are murdered with guns by their intimate partners every year[1]. Also domestic violence calls are a big cause of police deaths though definitely not the #1 cause as Joe Biden erroneously claimed[2]. I was aiming to create a somewhat plausible 911 call, though having the wife shot while she was on the 911 call might have been a bit over the top. [0] https://www.domesticshelters.org/resources/statistics/law-enforcement-and-domestic-violence https://www.domesticshelters.org/resources/statistics/law-en... [1] https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-against-women-americas-uniquely-lethal-intimate-partner-violence-problem/ https://everytownresearch.org/report/guns-and-violence-again... [2] https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/mar/15/joe-biden/joe-biden-says-domestic-violence-calls-prompt-most/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/mar/15/joe-biden/...

tedunangst 3y ago

Good news: police are not liable for doing nothing in response to a threat.

MR4D 3y ago
That thought isn't exactly comforting if you think about it.
- hackerlight 3y ago
  Uvalde shooting comes to mind.
- dylan604 3y ago
  We just saw this with the recent court case decision from the cop that did nothing at the Parkland shooting.
  - jstarfish 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - HarryHirsch 3y ago
    The cops at Parkland couldn't even establish a proper perimeter around the crime scene. After the killer was done running amok he wandered off, got himself a slurpee out of Subway and then had breakfast at McDonalds. They did not even try and identify who was responsible for the shooting. Oh, and even after the shooter had been taken into custody the sheriff still denied access to the scene to emergency medical personnel. There can't be an excuse for that degree of malicious incompetence but the courts gave them one anyway.
skyyler 3y ago
What, exactly, are police for?
- Arrath 3y ago
  Feeding the municipal/county/state coffers with the proceeds of civil forfeiture?

BLKNSLVR 3y ago

How long had the technology to see the calling number been available? And can't law enforcement map that to a physical address within a light speed equivalent amount of time? Unless a swatter is "the phone call came from inside the house"-ing, it should have been easy to filter out for maybe, conservatively, the last two decades.

wmf 3y ago
The physical address is some VoIP gateway. What if you legitimately use VoIP and call 911 for a good reason? They can't just ignore your call. (Legally they can ignore your call, but then why have 911.)
- biofunsf 3y ago
  Exactly! I almost added that to my reply above. To make the above situation even trickier, let's say the homeowners had a landline for years, but just recently switched to a VoIP gateway. Their VoIP gateway operator advertised a feature that their outgoing caller ID will make it look like they're calling from their old number. This is a real and desirable feature for lots of people. I'd rather not have police disregard all calls from VoIP gateways. But to GP's point, of course what we really need is a genuine verifiable caller ID. Or at least some sort of verification that's instantly available to 911 operators. In this case, the VoIP provider should be able to assert that the call really is coming from that address in a way no one else can spoof.
  - tbrownaw 3y ago
    ... So no more getting prepaid sim cards (for, say, 2fa for a shitposting or politics account) without registering your government id with the provider?
    - BLKNSLVR 3y ago
      In Australia you can't activate a SIM card without registering your government ID with the provider. Similar with prepaid credit cards if memory serves. Flipside would be: don't use a burner phone/SIM to call 911 - or at least have an alternative method of verifying location / address.

moralestapia 3y ago

>ready to save the lives of children Lol, a wild meme appears.

themitigating 3y ago

Why do they need swat? Two police officers are not acceptable? Also the police aren't required to enforce the law

tcmart14 3y ago
I think the issue isn't necessarily the existence of SWAT, but the over use of SWAT. SWAT makes sense if its LAPD going in to do a raid on a big cartel event. In a real scenario when you are also going to be confronting a large group armed to the teeth. Outside of that, eh, why is SWAT being used so much for things that really just need 1 or 2 officers with stock equipment?

calvinmorrison 3y ago

Well 911 calls have locations in a few seconds. If I am a zoomer prankster calling from San Jose swatting a guy in NJ.... hum thats a long knife

dylan604 3y ago
If only spoofing your caller ID were possible...
- wmf 3y ago
  This is kind of a nitpick but caller ID, ANI, E911, and now STIR/SHAKEN are different protocols AFAIK and spoofing them takes different amounts of effort. Unfortunately capitalism turned SS7 into swiss cheese so the effort probably varies from trivial to easy.
jauer 3y ago
Most low-cost VoIP providers will let you set your e911 address to whatever you want without any verification.

UncleMeat 3y ago

And yet, cops fight in the courts to so it is a-okay to do absolutely nothing when a man who has a restraining order against him kidnaps his kids and then eventually murders them.

quickthrowman 3y ago

> If the police didn't rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, they'd be the ones liable for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously. Q: Are the police required to protect you as a specific individual in the United States? A: No, the police are not required to protect you as an individual in the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columb... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gelman_stabbing_spree#Lozito_v._New_York_City https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gelman_stabbing_spree... And just yesterday the coward that hid outside Parkland High while a mass murder occurred was acquitted: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/6/29/us-officer-found-not-guilty-of-neglect-in-parkland-shooting https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/6/29/us-officer-foun... re: Your edit changing ‘liability’ to ‘being berated in the media’ George Floyd was murdered by cops in my city 3 years ago and the entire world heard his name.

jorf 3y ago
This is a lame post. It was clear what the OP meant: in hot trouble for not doing the job. And technically liable vs. otherwise wasn't even the main point of the post. Assume best intentions and avoid nitpicking. Also the Q&A format comes off as a little condescending.
- quickthrowman 3y ago
  It was not clear what the OP meant, ‘liable’ has a distinct meaning with regards to legal liability. A little condescending is OK when someone is posting authoritatively and they’re totally incorrect.

ddejohn 3y ago

> they'd be the ones liable for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously Cops aren't liable for shit. We have real evidence of cops doing fuck all to "save the lives of children" or take "a clear imminent threat to life seriously" just last year in response to a much more credible threat in Uvalde.

TheCleric 3y ago
And the supreme court has ruled they CAN'T be held liable just because they don't protect you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonzales https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_of_Castle_Rock_v._Gonza...

katbyte 3y ago

Should the 911 operate not be able to verify the number and it’s location? If not there is your problem. Fix the telecom network and prevent all spoofing of numbers. Would solve lots of other things too

8note 3y ago

When you consider the police response to actually dangerous situations like a school shooting, what's the point of having the swat gear? They're going to wait until the shooter has shot all of the children at least once and run out of bullets before going in. It's pretty well known that the police have no responsibility to help in a dangerous situation, only to arrest people once the situation has ended

onion2k 3y ago

If the police didn't rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, they'd be the ones l̶i̶a̶b̶l̶e̶ berated in the media for not taking a clear imminent threat to life seriously. Here in the UK the police would rush there without guns. There would be an armed response team to back them up, but only once the threat was confirmed. Maybe the UK just has braver police.

rm_-rf_slash 3y ago
>Maybe the UK just has braver police Bit of a smug take coming from a place with fewer guns than people.
- onion2k 3y ago
  I don't see what that's relevant. If the UK police respond to reports of a person with a gun without being armed themselves that's clearly braver that American police who respond to literally any report with enough military hardware as if they fear for their lives.
  - mschuster91 3y ago
    Because the likelihood of a police officer getting shot by a criminal is far higher. Not just in domestic violence situations, but also in everyday policing. An example: here in Germany even if you push hundreds of kg of cocaine you'll get six to eight years behind bars. Not worth shooting a police officer at a traffic stop over it. In the US? Decades behind bars at least, life if you're in a "three strikes" jurisdiction - that's a massive incentive to shoot the cop and attempt to escape when you got nothing to lose anyway.
    - CaptainZapp 3y ago
      Actually, being a cop is not even in the top 15 most dangerous jobs in the US[0]. [0] https://www.businessinsider.com/deadliest-jobs-in-america-bls-2022-12?op=1&r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/deadliest-jobs-in-america-bl...

xorcist 3y ago

> rush over in full SWAT gear, ready to save the lives of children, Ready to endanger the life of children. There's really no nice way to put this. This phenomenon does not exist in any other country in the world which is not a completely failed state.