• @fidodo
    link
    English
    208 months ago

    Wouldn’t work. They get a different justice system.

    • @RagingRobot
      link
      188 months ago

      It has been happening to politicians already. Niki Haley had it happen to her family this past week. Now it’s in the news and is a big deal.

      My question is why do the police just randomly trust every call they get? I feel like there could be more safeguards in place on that side.

      • @ThatWeirdGuy1001
        link
        128 months ago

        Because it’s better to respond to a false positive than to ignore a false negative

          • @ThatWeirdGuy1001
            link
            28 months ago

            “Sorry your daughter and wife were raped and murdered right before your eyes. See we thought it was a prank call so we didn’t respond”

            You can replace that scenario with any other and it still fits.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              08 months ago

              Who said anything about not responding? There’s a wide gulf of scenarios between not investigating a lead and swatting a random address.

              • @ThatWeirdGuy1001
                link
                28 months ago

                I did when I said it’s better to respond to a false positive than ignore a false negative

        • @hperrin
          link
          -18 months ago

          Not if you’re the false positive that gets a grenade thrown in your baby’s crib.

          • @maness300
            link
            88 months ago

            And that’s worse than ignoring a real threat?

            “Sorry, we didn’t send help because we thought this was a prank.”

            Use your brains.

            • Echo Dot
              link
              fedilink
              18 months ago

              I think it’s possible that might just maybe a middle ground between going equipped for the third world war and ignoring the call.

              To suggest otherwise is just accepting that the police are heavily militarized and I don’t think that sensible.

              Swatting is nowhere near as big a deal in other countries so clearly it’s a solvable problem.

              • @maness300
                link
                7
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Swatting is nowhere near as big a deal in other countries so clearly it’s a solvable problem.

                Why isn’t as big a deal in other countries, though? Time to put on our critical thinking caps!

                Is it because they have more measures in place to identify false threats? Does this also coincide with LE ignoring real threats?

                Is it because their population doesn’t see the value in swatting as much as other nations’? (i.e. do they have fewer incels?)

                Is it something else?

                • Echo Dot
                  link
                  fedilink
                  08 months ago

                  It’s because the police don’t carry around assault rifles as a matter of course that’s why.

                  If there is a hostage taker you want to negotiator not an attack force. If a negotiator goes to the property and it’s a false flag no issue.

                  Sending in an armed force is literally the worst response in both real and false situations.

                  • @maness300
                    link
                    -38 months ago

                    If there is a hostage taker you want to negotiator not an attack force. If a negotiator goes to the property and it’s a false flag no issue.

                    You clearly don’t know the history behind why the SWAT teams were created. Educate yourself and then come back to us.