6 ms·

48 months for 375 attempted murders isn't exactly getting the book thrown at you. It should have been life.

potato3732842 2y ago
Calling it attempted murder says a lot about the cops and how they do things does it not? Do the cops have no culpability? Were they not so predisposed to shoot first and ask questions later there would barely be a crime here. It would be on the same order as pushing a bunch of fraudulent paperwork.
- tptacek 2y ago
  They do not, as you can see from the fact that 375 people were not in fact killed.
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    What's an acceptable conversion ratio between false calls and bodies? As far as I care it should be close enough to zero that if falls below the noise threshold of accidents en route and other occupational hazards. It's beyond baffling that people will defend the existence of a magic phone number that can be called and if you say the magic words to it there's a really, really good chance a bunch of armed guys kick in the door of whoever you want. The system should not work that way. The fact that the thugs showed up and decided it was BS and shot nobody most of the time is not a redeeming factor. The "close calls" should not be that close.
    - gibusen 2y ago
      With respect, I find your perspective hard to believe because I don't buy that you would not yourself call that very same number if something truly drastic happened to you. I have a difficult time believing any detractors of 911, for that matter, would truly actually abide by that standard. Implying first responders are thugs irks me too, I'm unsure if you've considered the true proportion of cases they respond to that are time sensitive (during which, information parity is low). You could, of course, assert that this means they ought to not respond in the first place - but I think you would find there are a wide range of scenarios that strictly require a rapid and forceful response due to the potential for many victims to be involved (bolstered by gun ownership) with little time to actually validate the circumstances without incurring casualties. Accidents are unacceptable but our world is complicated and sometimes requires we meet lack of information with immediate action. That is not to say accidents are permissible, but the men putting their lives in harms way to respond to these incidents don't actually know what's occurring either. You seem to be fairly opinionated about what the system should or should not do, what have you personally done to help improve the conversion ratio between false calls and accidents? I understand this is theoretically ad hominem but I'm personally using it as a heuristic as to the likelihood that your perspective is a luxury belief. We agree that close calls should not be that close, but it's not very different from shaking your fist at the sky unless you actually happen to work in this space (in which case I'm actually very interested in hearing your thoughts). I don't mean to be rude, I'm just being blunt because I believe you're washing over some extremely difficult problems and have little to bring to the table - which is by definition unproductive.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        I mostly agree with this, and also think the "magic telephone number" is a very message-boardy kind of argument, sort of like when software developers are aghast at the idea that the criminal justice system adjudicates "intent" ("you can't read people's minds!"). I think outside of message boards, people generally do want a phone number they can call during an armed robbery.
      - potato3732842 2y ago
        Local swat teams should not be a thing. They're the human resources equivilent of extraneous MRAPs. The idea that we dispatch a bunch of thugs larping as infantry (because let's be real that's what swat teams are) based on a single piece of un-corroborated intelligence from a source of unknown quality (i.e. no preexisting reason to believe they're legit) would not pass muster in any situation with "real stakes" therefore it's not ok for local police departments to act that way. There needs to be some check. Swat teams weren't even a common thing until the 80s. Society isn't gonna collapse without them. And their response times aren't that great anyway. Send a normal officer. Any situation demanding a real swat team probably needs to be triaged anyway.
        tptacek 2y ago
        You're fixating on the name "Swatting". The technique works whether or not you get an according-to-Hoyle SWAT team called.
        ryandrake 2y ago
        Whatever word you use for it, a single, often anonymous, phone call should not directly and immediately result in an armed assault on an address.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > a single, often anonymous, phone call should not directly and immediately result in an armed assault on an address It wasn’t anonymous. The teenager impersonated an officer.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Calling it attempted murder says a lot about the cops That they’re operating at a high-trust setting in a high-stakes context, yes. The flip side is more Uvaldes, where everyone is waiting for paperwork or their balls to drop before bothering with doing something productive.

Calling it attempted murder says a lot about the cops and how they do things does it not? Do the cops have no culpability? Were they not so predisposed to shoot first and ask questions later there would barely be a crime here. It would be on the same order as pushing a bunch of fraudulent paperwork.

tptacek 2y ago
They do not, as you can see from the fact that 375 people were not in fact killed.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  What's an acceptable conversion ratio between false calls and bodies? As far as I care it should be close enough to zero that if falls below the noise threshold of accidents en route and other occupational hazards. It's beyond baffling that people will defend the existence of a magic phone number that can be called and if you say the magic words to it there's a really, really good chance a bunch of armed guys kick in the door of whoever you want. The system should not work that way. The fact that the thugs showed up and decided it was BS and shot nobody most of the time is not a redeeming factor. The "close calls" should not be that close.
  - gibusen 2y ago
    With respect, I find your perspective hard to believe because I don't buy that you would not yourself call that very same number if something truly drastic happened to you. I have a difficult time believing any detractors of 911, for that matter, would truly actually abide by that standard. Implying first responders are thugs irks me too, I'm unsure if you've considered the true proportion of cases they respond to that are time sensitive (during which, information parity is low). You could, of course, assert that this means they ought to not respond in the first place - but I think you would find there are a wide range of scenarios that strictly require a rapid and forceful response due to the potential for many victims to be involved (bolstered by gun ownership) with little time to actually validate the circumstances without incurring casualties. Accidents are unacceptable but our world is complicated and sometimes requires we meet lack of information with immediate action. That is not to say accidents are permissible, but the men putting their lives in harms way to respond to these incidents don't actually know what's occurring either. You seem to be fairly opinionated about what the system should or should not do, what have you personally done to help improve the conversion ratio between false calls and accidents? I understand this is theoretically ad hominem but I'm personally using it as a heuristic as to the likelihood that your perspective is a luxury belief. We agree that close calls should not be that close, but it's not very different from shaking your fist at the sky unless you actually happen to work in this space (in which case I'm actually very interested in hearing your thoughts). I don't mean to be rude, I'm just being blunt because I believe you're washing over some extremely difficult problems and have little to bring to the table - which is by definition unproductive.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      I mostly agree with this, and also think the "magic telephone number" is a very message-boardy kind of argument, sort of like when software developers are aghast at the idea that the criminal justice system adjudicates "intent" ("you can't read people's minds!"). I think outside of message boards, people generally do want a phone number they can call during an armed robbery.
    - potato3732842 2y ago
      Local swat teams should not be a thing. They're the human resources equivilent of extraneous MRAPs. The idea that we dispatch a bunch of thugs larping as infantry (because let's be real that's what swat teams are) based on a single piece of un-corroborated intelligence from a source of unknown quality (i.e. no preexisting reason to believe they're legit) would not pass muster in any situation with "real stakes" therefore it's not ok for local police departments to act that way. There needs to be some check. Swat teams weren't even a common thing until the 80s. Society isn't gonna collapse without them. And their response times aren't that great anyway. Send a normal officer. Any situation demanding a real swat team probably needs to be triaged anyway.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        You're fixating on the name "Swatting". The technique works whether or not you get an according-to-Hoyle SWAT team called.
        ryandrake 2y ago
        Whatever word you use for it, a single, often anonymous, phone call should not directly and immediately result in an armed assault on an address.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > a single, often anonymous, phone call should not directly and immediately result in an armed assault on an address It wasn’t anonymous. The teenager impersonated an officer.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Calling it attempted murder says a lot about the cops That they’re operating at a high-trust setting in a high-stakes context, yes. The flip side is more Uvaldes, where everyone is waiting for paperwork or their balls to drop before bothering with doing something productive.