By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - 5 years in jail for being stupid and careless?

 

5 Years in jail for swatting

Well deserved? 108 49.09%
 
Not enough? 84 38.18%
 
Too much? 19 8.64%
 
Don't care, it's not me LOL 9 4.09%
 
Total:220
theprof00 on 13 February 2015
The_Yoda said:
theprof00 said:
 

I'm pretty sure they peak through the window among a bevy of other actions.
Generic is saying they should send two cops from around the corner to check out the scene and make sure the call is legit. That is nonsense.

When we have devolved to a point where we have to check if our citizens are telling the truth, then society is lost.
When the marathon bombers were hiding out in my neighborhood, they didn't move in with 1 or 2 cops at a time. You know what happened when previously, a lone cop responded to suspicious activity in that same area? He was killed. After that they sent into 8 cops to respond to the scene in watertown, along with the military.

My point isn't that we should respond with over the top force to ensure safety. My point is that if someone makes a call about a potentially extremely dangerous force, it should be met accordingly. Swat has all sorts of high tech equipment. Long range mics, radio scanners (all cops have these), jamming equipment, night vision, and most importantly layers upon layers of bulletproof gear. Cops have a gun and a notebook.


Average SWAT response time is 20 to 30 minutes in metropolitan areas, an average beat cops response time in those same areas is 5 to 10 minutes, do you need a lot of fancy equipment to gather information?  Sure it might help but does a jammer help you peak in a window?  Would you rather have someone trying to help you within 5 to 10 even if said help is just getting a handle on what SWAT will be facing or wait 3 to 4 times as long before the process starts. Also regular police forces are armed with more than a gun and notebook.  My cousin is a county cop in a rural county in Indiana and from what I understand he has access to all kinds of "toys".

 

Personally speaking if I were in such a situation I'd take any kind of help I could get as quickly as possible.

That's not the argument in question though is it? I'm all for fast response. His argument is send a cop in first, not because of response time, but "to verify".



Around the Network
SlayerRondo on 13 February 2015
Baryonyx said:

I completely understand swatting someone is dangerous, can get someone killed and what if something did happen somewhere else, and the Swat team was busy with arresting innocent people.

But 5 years?

 

He deserves 5 month in jail, 50 days community service, 3000$ bill, to compentsate to the wasted police resources and the family he swatted. That is justice. that is atleast my opinion.

 

 

 

 
   

I cost way more than $3000 for a fake swat raid and people can easily die in a swat raid gone wrong.

Five years is very fucking light for this moron.



This is the Game of Thrones

Where you either win

or you DIE

SlayerRondo on 13 February 2015

This guy also made serious threats and stole personal data.



This is the Game of Thrones

Where you either win

or you DIE

Areym on 13 February 2015

Not enough time for that type of goddamn scumbag.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

curl-6 on 13 February 2015

I'll be surprised if this piece of shit actually serves five years.
He got off easy.



Around the Network
generic-user-1 on 13 February 2015
theprof00 said:
The_Yoda said:
theprof00 said:
 

I'm pretty sure they peak through the window among a bevy of other actions.
Generic is saying they should send two cops from around the corner to check out the scene and make sure the call is legit. That is nonsense.

When we have devolved to a point where we have to check if our citizens are telling the truth, then society is lost.
When the marathon bombers were hiding out in my neighborhood, they didn't move in with 1 or 2 cops at a time. You know what happened when previously, a lone cop responded to suspicious activity in that same area? He was killed. After that they sent into 8 cops to respond to the scene in watertown, along with the military.

My point isn't that we should respond with over the top force to ensure safety. My point is that if someone makes a call about a potentially extremely dangerous force, it should be met accordingly. Swat has all sorts of high tech equipment. Long range mics, radio scanners (all cops have these), jamming equipment, night vision, and most importantly layers upon layers of bulletproof gear. Cops have a gun and a notebook.


Average SWAT response time is 20 to 30 minutes in metropolitan areas, an average beat cops response time in those same areas is 5 to 10 minutes, do you need a lot of fancy equipment to gather information?  Sure it might help but does a jammer help you peak in a window?  Would you rather have someone trying to help you within 5 to 10 even if said help is just getting a handle on what SWAT will be facing or wait 3 to 4 times as long before the process starts. Also regular police forces are armed with more than a gun and notebook.  My cousin is a county cop in a rural county in Indiana and from what I understand he has access to all kinds of "toys".

 

Personally speaking if I were in such a situation I'd take any kind of help I could get as quickly as possible.

That's not the argument in question though is it? I'm all for fast response. His argument is send a cop in first, not because of response time, but "to verify".

i was wrong, raiding a house without first checking whats going on is the right way, if someone phones in a swat raid, they should storm that house. hold every people you can find at gun point(children and seniors could mean danger too) and shot every dog.

living in a police state sounds fun...



The_Yoda on 13 February 2015
generic-user-1 said:
theprof00 said:
The_Yoda said:
-snip


Average SWAT response time is 20 to 30 minutes in metropolitan areas, an average beat cops response time in those same areas is 5 to 10 minutes, do you need a lot of fancy equipment to gather information?  Sure it might help but does a jammer help you peak in a window?  Would you rather have someone trying to help you within 5 to 10 even if said help is just getting a handle on what SWAT will be facing or wait 3 to 4 times as long before the process starts. Also regular police forces are armed with more than a gun and notebook.  My cousin is a county cop in a rural county in Indiana and from what I understand he has access to all kinds of "toys".

 

Personally speaking if I were in such a situation I'd take any kind of help I could get as quickly as possible.

That's not the argument in question though is it? I'm all for fast response. His argument is send a cop in first, not because of response time, but "to verify".

i was wrong, raiding a house without first checking whats going on is the right way, if someone phones in a swat raid, they should storm that house. hold every people you can find at gun point(children and seniors could mean danger too) and shot every dog.

living in a police state sounds fun...

So GU1 is theprof00 right about your argument ? I didn't take your argument as send in two beat cops to break down the door first, I assumed (and perhaps incorrectly) you were talking about having one of the officers first on the scene see what they can see.



fatslob-:O on 13 February 2015

5 years is well deserved if you ask me, no more and no less ...

I'm well aware that some cops are more trigger happy than others but that doesn't mean we should condemn the fool more because of his feeble mindedness unless ofcourse he premeditated to be so ...

They also need to be held accountable too for their end of the side since it means life and death ...



generic-user-1 on 13 February 2015
The_Yoda said:
generic-user-1 said:
theprof00 said:
The_Yoda said:
-snip


Average SWAT response time is 20 to 30 minutes in metropolitan areas, an average beat cops response time in those same areas is 5 to 10 minutes, do you need a lot of fancy equipment to gather information?  Sure it might help but does a jammer help you peak in a window?  Would you rather have someone trying to help you within 5 to 10 even if said help is just getting a handle on what SWAT will be facing or wait 3 to 4 times as long before the process starts. Also regular police forces are armed with more than a gun and notebook.  My cousin is a county cop in a rural county in Indiana and from what I understand he has access to all kinds of "toys".

 

Personally speaking if I were in such a situation I'd take any kind of help I could get as quickly as possible.

That's not the argument in question though is it? I'm all for fast response. His argument is send a cop in first, not because of response time, but "to verify".

i was wrong, raiding a house without first checking whats going on is the right way, if someone phones in a swat raid, they should storm that house. hold every people you can find at gun point(children and seniors could mean danger too) and shot every dog.

living in a police state sounds fun...

So GU1 is theprof00 right about your argument ? I didn't take your argument as send in two beat cops to break down the door first, I assumed (and perhaps incorrectly) you were talking about having one of the officers first on the scene see what they can see.

normal cops shouldnt break down any door, thats not their job, but they should check whats going on. the swat team isnt a normal police unit, they are a special unit for dangerous situations. they should be called by the local police when the situation is too dangerous for the normal police.



SjOne on 13 February 2015

You don't understand the severity of swatting do you