brerrabbit
Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2005
- Messages
- 401
considering I have a constitutional guarentee of being secure in the privacy of my own home, It is up to the SWAT teams to figure the solution, not us.
Dangerous prank calls draw SWAT teams
- Thread starter erik the bold
- Start date
- Status
You guys still don't seem to get it. The system is designed so that a hacker or spoofer is allowed to do this. The fix is to spend the time so that these spoofing calls are not possible. Also, log all calls origin and destination, so that we know who has made any pranks like this. Problem solved. Clear as mud?
thexrayboy
Member
Sergeant Sabre writes....
Nice try but it don't fly. We have enormous legal precedent showing that LEO is not liable for failure to act or to protect the citizens from harm. There have been multiple attempts to sue LEO agencies for not responding in an adequate and timely fashion to calls for help. The few that have been successful are invariably overturned on appeal. The vast majority are dismissed outright. As for " I don't have pockets that deep" statement? I wish. LEO are rarely, and I do mean rarely held personally financially accountable for their actions. 99.999% of the costs that arise from legal action against LEO are borne by the taxpayers. Essentially the person who was wronged and managed to prevail in court against an officer and/or agency must then see their taxes used to pay the cost of the settlement.
If individual LEO's were held financially accountable for their willing mistakes, just like MD's and other professionals are personally accountable we would see a lot less callous disregard displayed by their acts.
Nice try but it don't fly. We have enormous legal precedent showing that LEO is not liable for failure to act or to protect the citizens from harm. There have been multiple attempts to sue LEO agencies for not responding in an adequate and timely fashion to calls for help. The few that have been successful are invariably overturned on appeal. The vast majority are dismissed outright. As for " I don't have pockets that deep" statement? I wish. LEO are rarely, and I do mean rarely held personally financially accountable for their actions. 99.999% of the costs that arise from legal action against LEO are borne by the taxpayers. Essentially the person who was wronged and managed to prevail in court against an officer and/or agency must then see their taxes used to pay the cost of the settlement.
If individual LEO's were held financially accountable for their willing mistakes, just like MD's and other professionals are personally accountable we would see a lot less callous disregard displayed by their acts.
C96
Member
Is it too early for the "Jeff White SWAT Team Out of Control Checklist" ?
MIL-DOT
member
Well said,xrayboy. Personally, the whole concept of SWAT scares the hell out of me, and anyone that doesn't think their very existence would have most of the founding fathers rolling over in their graves is delusional.
nalioth
Member
You are thinking of the money saving phone service from back in the day.feedthehogs said:
The 'chat line' the OP refers to is a new way to make money for anyone with a bunch of incoming phone numbers and a computer with a bunch of phone jacks attached. 'Meet hot singles in your area' and that sort of thing. Sort of like the 900 numbers of a few years ago.
Gunnerpalace
Member
I don't know what the founding fathers would think as I don't think they in-visioned the crime we have nowadays,
And what does this thread have to do with guns except give anti's more encouragement to take them away?
Red Dragon
Member
That's the thing though, to the police, it isn't a random call. The number is being "Spoofed" to the police leading them to believe that it is coming from the house that the SWAT team shows up to.
(i.e. caller's actual number is 555-1234, but through a spoofing setup, they make their number 555-2008, the number of someone the actual caller does not like. The cops see the number from the 911 call as 555-2008 and the caller says something along the lines of "Listen, I have hostages, I have killed one person already and if you don't meet my demands I will kill the rest of the hostages.")
How would you expect the SWAT team to handle that situation? They are responding to what appears as a legitimate call from a legitimate number and the guy on the other end of the line is claiming that he is holding hostages and has killed one already. The SWAT team follows the rules and regulations written for dealing with this type of situation.
A lot of this is Monday morning quarterbacking. We are reading the article and know that there is someone playing a prank. We know that the guy doing it has basically "counterfeited" the caller ID to lead the police to believe that the number is coming from the house the phone number is registered to. The police, however don't know any of this. All they know is someone called and claimed to have hostages.
For those of you who instantly jump to calling the SWAT teams jack-booted thugs or gestapo, try looking at the situation objectively and try to see things from both sides. Yes, the guy getting his door busted in is not the criminal that the police believe he is but the police are going off of what they believe to be a threat to the safety of the public.
Look at this scenario for instance:
If someone shows you pictures of your wife cheating on you, then shows you video of your wife going into a hotel with some guy, and then shows you signed confessions of your wife cheating on you, more than likely, you will start to believe that your wife is cheating on you.
Only later do you find out later that your wife was, in fact, not cheating on you and the photos and video were of someone who looked like your wife, her handwriting was forged and it is all later exposed to be a "prank".
This is what it is like for the SWAT teams. Everything leads them to believe one thing and only after the fact do they find that it was all some sort of messed up prank by some juvenile punk who thought it would be a real chucklefest to watch someone get hurt or worse.
MIL-DOT
member
(quote) "I don't know what the founding fathers would think as I don't think they envisioned the crime we have nowadays".
That statement displays a profound ignorance of the founding fathers statements and intentions,not to mention,that same argument is a favorite of the anti-gunners (they didn't envision AK-47's,etc). Thomas Jefferson said (i'm gonna have to paraphrase) that he'd rather deal with the problems associated with too much liberty than those associated with too little.It doesn't matter how bad crime gets, we don't cast aside our civil liberties and our civil control over our government for ( now paraphrasing Ben Franklin) " a little safety and convenience".
That statement displays a profound ignorance of the founding fathers statements and intentions,not to mention,that same argument is a favorite of the anti-gunners (they didn't envision AK-47's,etc). Thomas Jefferson said (i'm gonna have to paraphrase) that he'd rather deal with the problems associated with too much liberty than those associated with too little.It doesn't matter how bad crime gets, we don't cast aside our civil liberties and our civil control over our government for ( now paraphrasing Ben Franklin) " a little safety and convenience".
Old Dog
Member
So it appears you believe that getting fired, having your career prospects dead-ended by disciplinary action and reprimands, suspensions without pay, etc., don't constitute being "held financially accountable for their willing [sic] mistakes" ... (Perhaps you meant "willful?")
Another opportunity for those that believe law enforcement officers can get away with anything to post in support of said gross misperception. Can't believe no post has yet contained the phrase, "blue wall of silence" ...
Count me firmly in the delusional faction. I don't live in Mayberry and unarmed Andy Taylor can't aw-shucks talk our criminals into throwing down their guns and coming out peacefully at the offer of some of Aunt Bea's peach cobbler ...
Y'all blame the SWAT guys for a criminal phone caller, yet get your panties all a-twist 'cause the anti-gun folks blame the guns for the crime ...
TallPine
Member
As much as I criticize the cops, a (real) hostage situation is one of the few occasions when a SWAT-type response is warranted.
It's a bad situation for both the responding officers and the innocent residents, with a high likelihood of someone getting seriously hurt on both sides.
When they catch these people making the false calls, they should be skinned alive while being hung by their thumbs in the city square
It's a bad situation for both the responding officers and the innocent residents, with a high likelihood of someone getting seriously hurt on both sides.
When they catch these people making the false calls, they should be skinned alive while being hung by their thumbs in the city square
Gunnerpalace
Member
thexrayboy
Member
When I said being held financially accountable for a willing (or willful if you prefer) mistake I meant not only should they face whatever internal department consequences arise ( even though these are doled out far less often than I personally believe is merited), they should also be personally accountable civilly. That means that when an agency is sued for the deliberate conduct of an officer and the officers conduct is found to be wrong he should pay, not the department ( read taxpayers). It is oh so rare that an officer is held to this standard.
If I willfully disregard policy and procedure in my area of expertise or fail to excercise due diligence and care not only can I be terminated, suspended and otherwise disciplined by my employer I can be sued personally and held personally liable for damages. My employer may choose to defend me if my conduct is not egregious and blatantly wrong. However if it can be shown that my actions were not merited by established policy and standards of care I can be held personally responsible civilly for damages and in the case of physical harm or death the potential for criminal charges would exist.
I would expect LEO to be held to the same level of expectations but this only occurs in rare and particularly newsworthy instances. For the most part LEO are shielded by the department and taxpayer dollars.
No one is 100% immune from the consequences of their actions but LEO is far far closer to that mythical realm than any other group of people. They are granted the "benefit of the doubt" in circumstances that no normal person would even consider if they were not carrying a badge. This generates an air of invincibility and unaccountability. From this arises the contempt so often displayed for mere citizens as seen more and more often on youtube etc.
If I willfully disregard policy and procedure in my area of expertise or fail to excercise due diligence and care not only can I be terminated, suspended and otherwise disciplined by my employer I can be sued personally and held personally liable for damages. My employer may choose to defend me if my conduct is not egregious and blatantly wrong. However if it can be shown that my actions were not merited by established policy and standards of care I can be held personally responsible civilly for damages and in the case of physical harm or death the potential for criminal charges would exist.
I would expect LEO to be held to the same level of expectations but this only occurs in rare and particularly newsworthy instances. For the most part LEO are shielded by the department and taxpayer dollars.
No one is 100% immune from the consequences of their actions but LEO is far far closer to that mythical realm than any other group of people. They are granted the "benefit of the doubt" in circumstances that no normal person would even consider if they were not carrying a badge. This generates an air of invincibility and unaccountability. From this arises the contempt so often displayed for mere citizens as seen more and more often on youtube etc.
MIL-DOT
member
(quote) "what do we do without SWAT teams in high risks situations?"
You're right,gunner,my bad,don't know what i was thinking. As crime escalates,we should keep strenthening the governments ability to control the population. You're missing the point,here,dude. We don't sacrifice something we can't get back because of a percieved need. That was the essence of many founding fathers' staements,I.E. Patrick Henry's "give me liberty or give me death". We're selling our sovereignty down the river for a little "safety and convenience". We're handing over our right to protect ourselves to a government that on it's best day can't really protect us,and can only truly be counted on to protect its own ass.
P.S. I don't mean any of this as maliciously as it may come off,we're just shootin' the breeze here. Merry Christmas !!
You're right,gunner,my bad,don't know what i was thinking. As crime escalates,we should keep strenthening the governments ability to control the population. You're missing the point,here,dude. We don't sacrifice something we can't get back because of a percieved need. That was the essence of many founding fathers' staements,I.E. Patrick Henry's "give me liberty or give me death". We're selling our sovereignty down the river for a little "safety and convenience". We're handing over our right to protect ourselves to a government that on it's best day can't really protect us,and can only truly be counted on to protect its own ass.
P.S. I don't mean any of this as maliciously as it may come off,we're just shootin' the breeze here. Merry Christmas !!
thexrayboy
Member
A lot of consternation and speculation regarding the need for the existence of SWAT teams is evident. The salient question to ask is is it worth the price that honest citizens are paying for the use and misuse of these groups to keep them available.
When SWAT teams were first envisioned and created they were few and far between and were called up for only the most dire of tactical situations. As time has progressed these teams have sprouted like mushrooms in a field of "bovine excrement" to the point where every podunk town and burg has a
SWAT, SORT, TAC or other alphabet team sucking up tax payer dollars while looking for nails to hit since the only tool they know is the proverbial hammer.
The widespread use and abuse of these groups and the constant violation of
civil rights that their actions engender,( and I don't give a rats ass if some judge rubberstamps them as good to go, they still violate rights on a daily basis) now gives rise to the need to disband them. The good they did is far outweighed now by the damage these groups and their paramilitary actions are doing to our civil rights.
The Civil Forfeiture laws intended to stop drug kingpins have been perverted into a tool to assault and impoverish ordinary citizens just as Tactical teams that were intended to deal with extreme violence have multiplied like rats in a granary and now are used for virtually any cause that some lazy assed watch commander can dream up. BOth of these items need to go.
When SWAT teams were first envisioned and created they were few and far between and were called up for only the most dire of tactical situations. As time has progressed these teams have sprouted like mushrooms in a field of "bovine excrement" to the point where every podunk town and burg has a
SWAT, SORT, TAC or other alphabet team sucking up tax payer dollars while looking for nails to hit since the only tool they know is the proverbial hammer.
The widespread use and abuse of these groups and the constant violation of
civil rights that their actions engender,( and I don't give a rats ass if some judge rubberstamps them as good to go, they still violate rights on a daily basis) now gives rise to the need to disband them. The good they did is far outweighed now by the damage these groups and their paramilitary actions are doing to our civil rights.
The Civil Forfeiture laws intended to stop drug kingpins have been perverted into a tool to assault and impoverish ordinary citizens just as Tactical teams that were intended to deal with extreme violence have multiplied like rats in a granary and now are used for virtually any cause that some lazy assed watch commander can dream up. BOth of these items need to go.
Gunnerpalace
Member
Ah, its cool, it happens, I think it has a lot to do with criminals not getting what they deserve, poverty, and all that fun stuff, I also think that gun control laws correlate into that to (crime in CA vs crime in TX), Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night, or at least until I find another thread.
C96
Member
The original post was about SWAT Teams answering to spoofed phone calls. It was kind of long, lots of words. Red Dragon did a nice cliff notes version in post #33.
Spoofed calls to 911 can cause some real problems and eliminating spoofed calls would seem to be a good thing.
Apparently this group is much more into bashing SWAT in any form rather than addressing the problem shown in the original post.
When it comes to anything involving the police I see very little High Road here.
Spoofed calls to 911 can cause some real problems and eliminating spoofed calls would seem to be a good thing.
Apparently this group is much more into bashing SWAT in any form rather than addressing the problem shown in the original post.
When it comes to anything involving the police I see very little High Road here.
Aguila Blanca
Member
Nice bunch of people.
Not.
Not.
Black Adder LXX
Member
Well I for one would be in favor of the SWAT guys busting in on the hoaxters...
(he said trying to get back to the op)
I respect our LEOs. They're not all perfect, but they do a tough and thankless job...
(he said trying to get back to the op)
I respect our LEOs. They're not all perfect, but they do a tough and thankless job...
wally
Member
No I think out of control SWAT/Gestapo teams are a way larger threat to our safety and way of life than is Osama Bin Laden and other terrorists. There should be no knee-jerk deadly force reactions to be triggered by "hackers".
Civilian society needs police work, not military shoot first ask questions later death squads.
As to the N Hollywood situation, the video I've seen suggests any decent hunter could have taken them down with a head shot from a random deer rifle. Overall this was the worst display of shooting skills on both sides that I've ever heard of, and statistically would suggest firearms are largely ineffective if you look at the rounds fired per casualty.
As to the claims the cops let the perps bleed to death, I say its the only thing they did right!
--wally.
Wolfgang2000
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 376
Wally and xrayboy, all I will say is that you are more than welcome to get out there and SHOW us how it should be done.
I would also suggest that you deal with actual fact and case rulings instead of Internet blather.
I would also suggest that you deal with actual fact and case rulings instead of Internet blather.
Tommygunn
Member
Sergeant Sabre said:
Of course not. I can certainly understand that things may not be "what they should seem to be." Which is why I would want as much facts as possible before crashing in on somebody. And these may not always be evident even to trained, observant and experienced investigators.
There's a lot of elements in policework that make me very, very thankful I did not choose law enforcement as a profession.
While I don't have all the solutions to the problems, doing away with police is not one of them. Besides, we'd only discover that we would have to re-invent them again anyway. We had that chance as we moved west in the 19th century. We had circuit court judges, and sheriffs, and when need be, they'd form a posse and go after the bank robbers, and nine times out of ten (despite what hollywood would have us believe) they would catch them alive, bring them back alive, hold a trial, and if found guilty, they'd be punished. The law moved into western towns because it was needed. The sheriff might have been on the other side of the county, and you can't always depend on getting the farmers together 'cause the criminals didn't care about planting seasons and cattle drives -- they did what they wanted when they wanted, thus driving the need for professional law enforcement people who made it their 24/7 job without worrying about who was manning the assembly lines and industry, and even farms.
If we're smart enough we'll learn from example and not "throw out the baby with the bathwater."
Sure there may be things wrong with how some police functions work. These can and should be solved without vacuous, vituperative remarks about police. And let us all not forget one thing.
The police don't make the laws, they enforce the laws.
The POLITICIANS make the laws. Don't like the laws? Fine. There's laws I don't like.
But don't blame the policeman who's got you in the hammerlock and cuffing you -- blame the politician who passed the law that the policeman is enforcing.
The policeman isn't the one who's "scr@w@d" you; it's the politician who is the one who's _______ you ......
wally
Member
No internet blather, all I know about the N Hollywood incident was an alleged documentary which replayed what was supposedly broadcast on LA TV live as it happened, spun of course to help deprive us of our 2nd Amendment rights.
The 4th Amendment is already gone. When are you going to wake up to what is really happening and stop shilling for big brother?
I in no way defend the "hackers" and they should be given cruel and usual punishment.
As to showing how its done, make it legal to carry any where any time, any how, no exceptions, and me and my neighbors will have no need for SWAT teams.
The whole Waco thing was an SWAT operation gone bad, they could have quietly arrested him with real police work on his way to the next gun show or supermarket trip or whatever, if they had any real case against him instead of putting all those other people at risk with their terroristic raid.
--wally.
Edit: I suggested doing away with SWAT, not Police. We need a return to neighborhood policing where the cops know who belongs and who doesn't. Its low tech and needs more Police not fewer.
The 4th Amendment is already gone. When are you going to wake up to what is really happening and stop shilling for big brother?
I in no way defend the "hackers" and they should be given cruel and usual punishment.
As to showing how its done, make it legal to carry any where any time, any how, no exceptions, and me and my neighbors will have no need for SWAT teams.
The whole Waco thing was an SWAT operation gone bad, they could have quietly arrested him with real police work on his way to the next gun show or supermarket trip or whatever, if they had any real case against him instead of putting all those other people at risk with their terroristic raid.
--wally.
Edit: I suggested doing away with SWAT, not Police. We need a return to neighborhood policing where the cops know who belongs and who doesn't. Its low tech and needs more Police not fewer.
thexrayboy
Member
To wolfgang2000, I can honestly say I don't know a better way. There might be a course of action that is superior to the use of SWAT teams or there might not be. I am not saying that SWAT teams have no useful purpose. In dire situations they do. I am saying that when you weigh the damage they do to honest citizens and the Bill of Rights compared to the good they do it is my opinion.....let me stress that, opinion that they do more harm than good and should be done away with. This country somehow managed to survive from the founding fathers until Daryl Gates and the LAPD magically created SWAT teams, I think it would survive fine without them.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
"As to showing how its done, make it legal to carry any where any time, any how, no exceptions, and me and my neighbors will have no need for SWAT teams."
really?! you and the neighbors that good at hostage negotiations? all that tactical and trained together?! thats right impressive! if its true. tell you what though if you and the guys from the hood are ever around me and thinking about showing all that tactical prowess to save me i'll pass. wait till the cops show up and then kick back and kibbutz
really?! you and the neighbors that good at hostage negotiations? all that tactical and trained together?! thats right impressive! if its true. tell you what though if you and the guys from the hood are ever around me and thinking about showing all that tactical prowess to save me i'll pass. wait till the cops show up and then kick back and kibbutz
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
