• stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Ok, so granny got swatted, why?

    What was the police told about the situation?

    Is there an article about this which explains the cause of this.

    • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Those questions would only matter if this kind of police reaction wasn’t almost exclusive to the US. So American police are idiots.

      In Europe there were a few cases in France, but they led to changes in police procedures to verify reports more thoroughly before busting through doors.

      • BillyClark@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        There are a lot of things that can be pointed at as to why this happens so much in the US. But I think most people forget that this is a problem that can literally be fixed using laws and technology.

        Swatting can only happen because the US telecom system is so full of holes and because the US legal system isn’t doing its job.

        The primary thing you have to do is fix it so that the emergency operators can know where a call actually originated. And all we need to do to make that happen is to change the law so that telecom companies are held criminally and civilly liable when a person uses their infrastructure to fake where an emergency call is coming from.

        Calls that come from foreign sources or from internet sources would harbor great suspicion. Imagine that the operator gets a big flashing notice that the call is suspicious right from the start.

        I’m not saying that police and gun nuts and police gun nuts and incompetent police and nazi assholes don’t have a lot of culpability, or that we shouldn’t have severe penalties for people who do the swatting but the core fault lies in our elected representatives being too corrupt to hold telecom companies to account.

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Your argument is almost exactly the same as the ones being used to rationalize things like age-verification, surveillance, deanonymizing platforms, etc.

          The people supporting these measures are going after operating systems, VPNs, web browsers, everything but targeting the actual people committing the crimes that they’re pretending to be trying to prevent.

          Holding telecom companies primarily responsible for how their platforms are misused is a very large step towards the dystopian future that we’re already sliding towards.

          • BillyClark@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            40 minutes ago

            When you call emergency services, they need to know your location. You know, because you’ve got an emergency, which is almost always where you are, and you might not know exactly where you are.

            And, this is information that the telecom companies should already know. And it’s information that the caller might not know.

            This isn’t a “very large step towards [a] dystopian future.” It’s your vision that is dystopian here. In your vision, people can have emergencies and die because the emergency services don’t know where to go. In your vision, people can easily fake emergencies and swat innocent people. You have a choice between a good thing and a bad thing, and you’re actually choosing the bad thing. It’s hard to fathom.

            You gotta love people who would create a dysfunctional government just because they don’t realize that similar things can be good or bad depending on context, and that emergencies are exceptional circumstances.

        • Rothe@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I don’t think giving the police more surveillance options is the best option. The main problem is the extreme militarisation of the US police. This amount of force is a ridiculous response to almost any likely scenario they would have encountered.

          • BillyClark@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            15 hours ago

            That’s not surveillance. That’s basic service, allowing the recipient of a call to know who is actually calling them. The same thing would also stop a lot of scammers.

          • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            14 hours ago

            they also get alot of surplus equipment from the military that is outdated, which makes it even worst.