3 ms·

It does not matter you believe, accusations should not be enough to swat someone. Accusations != proof and proof is what matters.

surgical_fire 2y ago
The problem is that those are not typically accusations, those are reported emergencies. If you see your neighbor, for example, actively trying to kill his wife during a domestic incident, the last thing the police should do is sit on that report and carefully investigate whether that is true. They should act, because it might be a life or death scenario. What logically follows, is that false reports like this should come with very heavy punishment. I would say at least as grave as attempted murder.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- beaglesss 2y ago
  Make it simple, equal ground rules for police as citizens. If it's illegal for me to point a gun at someone because someone told me a scary, it ought be the same as police. The dichotomy exhibits the standing army effect the founders warned against .
  - snapplebobapple 2y ago
    Its more compli ated than that. What percentage of scaries told to you are credible vs what percentage for the police? i dont think this should happen but i also recognize its a complex issue
- smsm42 2y ago
  If it's not typical, it should be seen more skeptical, not less. If I say my neighbors are witches who worship the devil, and are going to summon legions of Hell to earth this evening, then the police shouldn't start with burning their house down, with them inside, just in case. They should first try some other means of verifying this highly unusual claim, before acting on it as if it were true. I am reasonably sure the prior of that email being true, based on all previous emails they've received in that police department, is less than 1%. And yet, after that, and after already finding out there's no murder happening on the scene and no emergency at all, they still behaved as if the victim is the criminal. And I am sure they didn't even get politely reprimanded by that - probably they were praised by their peers and their managament for quick and decisive action.
darby_nine 2y ago
Proof has never been used to justify arrests, just prosecutions. Or rather it's never been a necessary bar that must be demonstrated. Warrants at least have mildly higher bars
- AdrianB1 2y ago
  Reasonable articulable suspicion of committing a crime is a bar. Quite low, but "suspicion of committing a crime" is not met based just on an anonymous tip, as SCOTUS said quite clearly. It is enough to investigate, not to arrest and not even to detail someone.
  - darby_nine 2y ago
    Agreed. I don't think the police response is inherently unwarranted (well except literally, ha ha) but the protocol surrounding how to handle the situations appears completely busted.

surgical_fire 2y ago

The problem is that those are not typically accusations, those are reported emergencies. If you see your neighbor, for example, actively trying to kill his wife during a domestic incident, the last thing the police should do is sit on that report and carefully investigate whether that is true. They should act, because it might be a life or death scenario. What logically follows, is that false reports like this should come with very heavy punishment. I would say at least as grave as attempted murder.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
beaglesss 2y ago
Make it simple, equal ground rules for police as citizens. If it's illegal for me to point a gun at someone because someone told me a scary, it ought be the same as police. The dichotomy exhibits the standing army effect the founders warned against .
- snapplebobapple 2y ago
  Its more compli ated than that. What percentage of scaries told to you are credible vs what percentage for the police? i dont think this should happen but i also recognize its a complex issue
smsm42 2y ago
If it's not typical, it should be seen more skeptical, not less. If I say my neighbors are witches who worship the devil, and are going to summon legions of Hell to earth this evening, then the police shouldn't start with burning their house down, with them inside, just in case. They should first try some other means of verifying this highly unusual claim, before acting on it as if it were true. I am reasonably sure the prior of that email being true, based on all previous emails they've received in that police department, is less than 1%. And yet, after that, and after already finding out there's no murder happening on the scene and no emergency at all, they still behaved as if the victim is the criminal. And I am sure they didn't even get politely reprimanded by that - probably they were praised by their peers and their managament for quick and decisive action.

darby_nine 2y ago

Proof has never been used to justify arrests, just prosecutions. Or rather it's never been a necessary bar that must be demonstrated. Warrants at least have mildly higher bars

AdrianB1 2y ago
Reasonable articulable suspicion of committing a crime is a bar. Quite low, but "suspicion of committing a crime" is not met based just on an anonymous tip, as SCOTUS said quite clearly. It is enough to investigate, not to arrest and not even to detail someone.
- darby_nine 2y ago
  Agreed. I don't think the police response is inherently unwarranted (well except literally, ha ha) but the protocol surrounding how to handle the situations appears completely busted.