SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A New Jersey state legislator who is sponsoring a bill against swatting, has himself been swatted:
According to a report by NJ.com, Moriarty received a phone call at his home on Saturday from a police officer asking if everything was okay; the assemblyman was then informed that someone had anonymously called in a report of a shooting at the home. He was then told to describe his clothing and step outside, where he saw a crowd of officers armed with "helmets, flak jackets and rifles."
There was no mention if the legislator questioned the over-militarizing of the police or no-knock raids...
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
New Jersey Legislator Who Sponsored Anti-Swatting Bill Gets Swatted
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 47 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
belief, n:
Something you do not believe.
(Score: 2) by CirclesInSand on Thursday April 16 2015, @10:14PM
Why do we (they) need a bill against swatting? Isn't this already illegal? Is the bill addressing something like telecom accountability?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by snick on Thursday April 16 2015, @10:23PM
Dunno about NJ, but in CA swatting is a misdemeanor. Totally out of synch with the seriousness of the action. SWAT teams kill people. Sending one to someone's house is like tossing a grenade through their window.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Gravis on Thursday April 16 2015, @10:30PM
SWAT teams kill people. Sending one to someone's house is like tossing a grenade through their window.
pff... that's only because SWAT teams actually throw grenades through people's windows. [cnn.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by CirclesInSand on Thursday April 16 2015, @10:35PM
After doing some reading, I think you are right. According to http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2014/Bills/A4000/3877_I1.HTM [state.nj.us] :
SYNOPSIS
Upgrades crime of false public alarm under certain circumstances.
It describes the original penalties:
Under current law, such an act is ordinarily a crime of the third degree, punishable by a term of imprisonment of three to five years, a fine of up to $15,000, or both. The responsible party would also be liable for a civil penalty of $2,000 or the actual costs incurred by or resulting from the law enforcement and emergency services response to the false alarm.
And some of the penalties have increased to:
The crime as upgraded would be punishable by a term of imprisonment of five to 10 years, a fine of up to $150,000, or both, and the responsible party would remain liable for the above described civil penalty.
So a total incarceration time of 8 to 15 years if the text isn't misleading, for a crime that is practically manslaughter.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Thursday April 16 2015, @11:16PM
Yeah, except that SWAT teams are made up of human beings responsible for their own decisions, and the same applies to police departments. They're not merely a force of nature, or a tool.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday April 17 2015, @12:54AM
You wish. They aren't event accountable [reuters.com], why should they feel responsible?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday April 17 2015, @12:59AM
That's not quite what I was getting it. They choose to do these things themselves, so there's no one to blame but them for their own actions.
In an ideal world, they'd actually be held accountable when they violate people's rights.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday April 16 2015, @11:48PM
Read the first link in TFS about how swatting works.
The legislation this guy sponsored was pretty useless. Because swatters don't report the false crime in any traceable way. Even if caught (rarely) in most places they are guilty of only following a false police report, usually a misdemeanor, which they can usually wiggle out of. But most swatting is anonymous or over the internet. Sometimes swatters live in other countries. So the legislation is largely stupid, because swatters are virtually never caught.
The real legislation they need is to tone down Swat team usage and tactics.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday April 17 2015, @07:10AM
Thank god you said this! It's so blindingly obvious and sensible, and none are putting it so plainly: maybe the real answer to SWATting is to not send out a terror response team unless there are actual terrorists involved.
That anyone could reach any other conclusion than what you have stated goes to show how far down the rabbit hole we are already.
Washington DC delenda est.