• @maness300
    link
    811 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
      111 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
        11 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
          011 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
            -311 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.