As much as i hate this guy's smug face and want to see him get locked up, I still think he's not main culprit for this death. A man was shoot by law enforcement based on nothing more then a phone call from a random person.
I'm baffled by the fact that this guy just pointed at a random house and SWAT came in and shot the owner ... he's like some kind of 3rd world dictator.
You'd think there'd be stricter punishments for repeat offenders than what he's getting. The whole point of punishing EXTREMELY DANGEROUS crap like this is to get the person to stop, so if they continue repeating it anyways (like this guy did after he was arrested and jailed the first time long ago), it's a clear indication that the punishments are failing and this person is nothing more than a pox to society and a continued danger to people who should probably NEVER be let out of jail because he's only going to do it again as soon as he's out (as shown by how he... well, did it again as soon as he was out the last time)
Felony charge was due to the fact that the crime was perpetrated across state lines... and that it involved the 9-1-1 system.
The severity of the punishment is limited to the legal limits of the law. Until the law changes, their hands are tied on the matter. Whenever someone perpetrates a new form of crime, that crime isn't defined by the law, and as such, the punishment often doesn't equal the crime. Distracted driving laws are new... before they were enacted, those involved often got a slap on the wrist instead of what is being imposed today. Swatting is the same thing. There is no law defining the crime... but now there undoubtedly will be.
It's sad that we need laws to cover common sense... apparently we've been given far too much freedom. We don't understand that with such freedom comes more responsibility. You are free to drink. You are not free to drink and drive. Some people seem to think their freedom is worth more than others freedom. The special snowflake phenomenon.
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
"Sean (Murray) saying MP will be in the game is not remotely close to evidence that at the point of purchase people thought there was MP in the game." - SEANMCAD
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
They absolutely can harm lifeguards during their panic. The point of the statement, however, seems to have went over your head.
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
They absolutely can harm lifeguards during their panic. The point of the statement, however, seems to have went over your head.
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
I see no fault of police, subject did not follow orders.
" Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Those Who Would Threaten It " MAGA
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
They absolutely can harm lifeguards during their panic. The point of the statement, however, seems to have went over your head.
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
The police officer expect full maniac with potential hostages or maybe already dead person. Armed and dangerous. Thats why swatting is dangerous, because cops go in armed and prepared to take down armed individual who potentialy could hold lives of others. And it is also normal to not act rationally when somebody break into your house screaming, especially with mentality "my house is my castle" which can be observed in US.
Basically swatting is a very serious and very dangerous prank. Now everyone see how exactly. Sadly it costed innocent man his life.
I hope the guy who called swatting will be sentenced for 1000y of harsh labor in some camp.
I dont know who is worse, the guy who called 911 or the policeman who shot an unarmed man answering his door.
Or the guy commenting online on an event he did not participate in, and hence has no idea of exactly what went down ?
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
They absolutely can harm lifeguards during their panic. The point of the statement, however, seems to have went over your head.
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
You missed the actively...as in ambushing to kill...making calls to get police to come out to kill them....preparing a hidden weapon to kill police if they show up....being in a emotional state that they what to kill police....and you think swimmers are the same with lifeguards....
Meh, it's not like this incident happened in a vacuum.
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
Are swimmers actively trying to kill lifeguards....great example you used....
They absolutely can harm lifeguards during their panic. The point of the statement, however, seems to have went over your head.
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
You missed the actively...as in ambushing to kill...making calls to get police to come out to kill them....preparing a hidden weapon to kill police if they show up....being in a emotional state that they what to kill police....and you think swimmers are the same with lifeguards....
A really pissed off swimmer who doesn't think he needs help might be!
So what about the cop who did not follow orders and shot the guy?Like that cop pulled his gun and killed a guy for NO REASON,he should be in jail more so than the guy who faked the call.
The last poster "emergency situations"there was NO Emergency and it was apparently NOT assessed on the scene either,this cop obviously assessed it BEFORE he knew anything and had already drawn a conclusion before he got there that he would pull his gun in rogue fashion.
Also obvious is that no,not every cop who shoots someone is guilty or a bad cop,in this case,100% he is a bad cop,i would not want a cop in my neighborhood that pulls his gun that easily.I know cops personally,i have 3 family members who are cops,my grandfather was the chief of police,i also played hockey with them for 5 years and drank at the bar with them afterwards.What i saw,learned is that cops are not special ,there are some really good people and some really bad apples and hiring is NOT done with any realistic criteria and most often just family and friends get hired. If i was to pull out a number based on the cops i know/knew,i would say about 10-15% should no way in hell ever be allowed to carry a gun,extremely violent people who would beat you to a pulp just for looking at them wrong.So there is obviously terrible systems in place in monitoring cops and their behavior and the unions that stand behind them are basically above the law.
How long have you been a cop? Or better yet, how many life or death situations have you been in? I would bet none in either case.
All of you arm chair quarter backs have the luxury of having ALL of the information after the fact. When you open a door and have no idea what is on the other side, things are very different. Having done a similar job I am pretty comfortable saying you have no idea what you are talking about.
Did the cop make a mistake? yes, he did. However, not the one you are all dreaming he did. I would bet that two of us at the most in this thread could speak intelligently about shoot/no shoot situations the rest of you have no dog in that fight.
Stick to trying to pretend you know something about the law, not the enforcement there of or the tactics used in an actual apprehension.
The kid is the criminal here, not the LEO.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
While I'm absolutely glad he's being charged, the cops involved should also be charged. They asked the man to come to the door and shot him before he could even open it. That is cold blooded murder without a second guess.
While I'm absolutely glad he's being charged, the cops involved should also be charged. They asked the man to come to the door and shot him before he could even open it. That is cold blooded murder without a second guess.
Maybe you should watch the video because he opened the door.
This type of stuff needs to stop. It's terrible to think that this person didn't even think about what might happen to the victim or his family. Blatant disregard for human life.
I don't agree with Swatting, but still he isn't the one who did the murder, he did a crime absolutely, but as we all know police who shoot innocent people get away with pretty much everything and are not held accountable simply because of the fact they are the LAW, and because of Training, even though it was clearly a hoax they could have prevented the shooting in the first place I mean Swat Team has AR-15's with scopes they could have known if they were armed for sure.
Also, clearly this kid was dumb because he clearly used his home phone, with spoofing APPS to make a prank call, this is something you would never do, and it is absolutely possible to SWAT people while remaining 100% untraceable, and Anonymous given the fact anyone can buy disposable phones which are only used one time, and much better methods to actually make it untraceable which is why this kid was indeed stupid.
3 Years may not seem like a long time to most, but 3 years in jail is a long time to those who are actually in jail/prison for years.
Either way Law Enforcement needs to do a better job at screening these calls because even I knew just by listening to the 9/11 call that this was a hoax, but then I've been around the whole internet trolling/griefing thing for years to recognize these kinds of calls very easily.
Going to have to disagree with you. Involuntary Manslaughter is for these reasons. If you read what the charge means. "A killing was unintentional which resulted from recklessness or during another unlawful act." Drunk drivers get charged with this when they end up killing someone due to their poor decisions. The person has committed multiple swattings and shows no remorse for what he did. He had an interview and clearly showed that.
911 Operators don't have the luxury of "screening" calls. If a call comes in and life is being threatened, that would call would be treated as an emergency. Same with car accidents and what not. Every second wasted is a second paramedics, swat, firefighters is not on the scene. Things happen unpredictably during emergency situations.
That being said, I am not saying the Officer shouldn't be held accountable for his actions. Whenever a killing is involved; an investigation should always happen. That is literally what happens in every case where a cop kills someone. However, had the caller not placed the call, that officer wouldn't have had to pull a trigger that night, and a man wouldn't have lost his life. The actions of this individual took 1 life, but also ruined many. The caller should be held accountable to the maximum punishment for what he did. Specially since he held no remorse for it happening.
Every cop who kills someone is not always a bad cop. Leading back to what I said "Things happen unpredictably during emergency situations". Until an investigation is completed; we won't know if the cop acted too quickly, or acted following protocol.
Did u watch the video when the man was shot? He was standing at his door step, no weapons, and was killed by 1 and only 1 bullet by one of the officers surrounded his house. That shot was fired right in front of him. While police gets my respect for putting their lives against criminals, but shooting an unarmed man who was in a shock and freeze in his thought as to why his house was swatted is not justified. The cop who killed him should be held accountable for his actions as well, the victim's mom also stated: "Cops can't just shoot anyone, anywhere!"
Am I the only one finding the whole story very sketchy? Why did Person 2 give out any address at all? And it just so happened to be to the home of a man who was killed instantly? I think stopping at Person 1 and lightly investigating the officer is irresponsible at best. Person 2 could very well be the mastermind behind it all and he's getting off clean. Sad.
Comments
I'm baffled by the fact that this guy just pointed at a random house and SWAT came in and shot the owner ... he's like some kind of 3rd world dictator.
The severity of the punishment is limited to the legal limits of the law. Until the law changes, their hands are tied on the matter. Whenever someone perpetrates a new form of crime, that crime isn't defined by the law, and as such, the punishment often doesn't equal the crime. Distracted driving laws are new... before they were enacted, those involved often got a slap on the wrist instead of what is being imposed today. Swatting is the same thing. There is no law defining the crime... but now there undoubtedly will be.
It's sad that we need laws to cover common sense... apparently we've been given far too much freedom. We don't understand that with such freedom comes more responsibility. You are free to drink. You are not free to drink and drive. Some people seem to think their freedom is worth more than others freedom. The special snowflake phenomenon.
~~ postlarval ~~
There are many instances where a cop can be seen as justified in using his or her weapon that are, quite frankly, overreaching.
A citizen crawling towards you by your own command, for instance. Neither the crawling is needed nor the response that was given when the suspect reached down to pull up his pants.
Being a cop assumes you will have to deal with dangerous situations like this. Merely being a citizen does not. Cops need to be prepared to respond to situations, not exacerbate them with unnecessary instructions and an itchy trigger finger. Too much blame is placed on citizens not trained to respond to a situation like this. They aren't the situational expert; the cops are. Lifeguards are trained to deal with uncooperative swimmers that might try to hurt them to save themselves. They don't demand the swimmers themselves know exactly what to do in that situation.
I encourage everyone with the means to help, considering to do so.
Link: https://www.gofundme.com/funeral-expenses-for-andy-finch
I'm pretty sure that bubba is going to love his smart ass look. lol
Police are the experts in the situation. They issue the instructions, they're supposed to maintain as much control over the situation as possible. There are examples of officers responding poorly to situations they're supposed to exert control over, ones that shouldn't have ended in death. Does that mean all police are out to get folks? No. It means there's an issue with the culture and training that could use work.
I see no fault of police, subject did not follow orders.
MAGA
Basically swatting is a very serious and very dangerous prank. Now everyone see how exactly. Sadly it costed innocent man his life.
I hope the guy who called swatting will be sentenced for 1000y of harsh labor in some camp.
You missed the actively...as in ambushing to kill...making calls to get police to come out to kill them....preparing a hidden weapon to kill police if they show up....being in a emotional state that they what to kill police....and you think swimmers are the same with lifeguards....
How long have you been a cop? Or better yet, how many life or death situations have you been in? I would bet none in either case.
All of you arm chair quarter backs have the luxury of having ALL of the information after the fact. When you open a door and have no idea what is on the other side, things are very different. Having done a similar job I am pretty comfortable saying you have no idea what you are talking about.
Did the cop make a mistake? yes, he did. However, not the one you are all dreaming he did. I would bet that two of us at the most in this thread could speak intelligently about shoot/no shoot situations the rest of you have no dog in that fight.
Stick to trying to pretend you know something about the law, not the enforcement there of or the tactics used in an actual apprehension.
The kid is the criminal here, not the LEO.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
Did u watch the video when the man was shot? He was standing at his door step, no weapons, and was killed by 1 and only 1 bullet by one of the officers surrounded his house. That shot was fired right in front of him. While police gets my respect for putting their lives against criminals, but shooting an unarmed man who was in a shock and freeze in his thought as to why his house was swatted is not justified. The cop who killed him should be held accountable for his actions as well, the victim's mom also stated: "Cops can't just shoot anyone, anywhere!"