now in Wake Forest!

I will say the cops handled this one fairly well.
 
Aww crap, we’re now in WF.
After @Jeppo ‘s thread about the property gate and providing the code to LEO/EMS, the wife & were just discussing this. I’ve mixed feelings & she tells me I’m paranoid & need to stop reading news.
We probably need to get to know some of the WF LEO.
 
Get Off My Lawn said:
Aww crap, we’re now in WF.
After @Jeppo ‘s thread about the property gate and providing the code to LEO/EMS, the wife & were just discussing this. I’ve mixed feelings & she tells me I’m paranoid & need to stop reading news.
We probably need to get to know some of the WF LEO.
Click to expand...

@Get Off My Lawn Give me a call later tonight.
 
He said he was live-streaming when this happened. What was he live-streaming about?
 
Stogies said:
www.wral.com

Wake Forest family terrified after swatting incident sends dozens of law enforcement officers to their home

Luke Reynolds and his family were victims of swatting, a prank call intended to provoke law enforcement.
www.wral.com www.wral.com
Click to expand...

I can't believe after all this time there still hasn't been some sort of a protocol worked out to minimize the risk of investigating these things.

I mean they called the homeowner inside the house, landline? cell phone? where did they get the number?

is the line of thinking that everyone, everything must be in place for an immediate storming before we make the first confirmed contact with the folks inside?
 
is the line of thinking that everyone, everything must be in place for an immediate storming before we make the first confirmed contact with the folks inside?

That could be the bad guy answering the phone.
"There is no problem here everything is fine. No we didn't call 911."

Just saying.;)
 
commiecuriocollector said:
I can't believe after all this time there still hasn't been some sort of a protocol worked out to minimize the risk of investigating these things.

I mean they called the homeowner inside the house, landline? cell phone? where did they get the number?

is the line of thinking that everyone, everything must be in place for an immediate storming before we make the first confirmed contact with the folks inside?
Click to expand...
Well the point of swatting is to pretend there is a situation where that force will be needed. And getting confirmation that it's not so has to be under the assumption that information you are getting from inside might be given under duress.
 
Stogies said:
Well the point of swatting is to pretend there is a situation where that force will be needed. And getting confirmation that it's not so has to be under the assumption that information you are getting from inside might be given under duress.
Click to expand...

Maybe along with codes to the gate, we should put the family safe word on file.
 
MostWanted said:
I wish they would investigate and prosecute the person who called it in with the vigor used against anyone near the Capitol on Jan 6.
Click to expand...
Oh, but this swatter isn’t a threat to “our democracy” like those insurectionists (that weren’t) are.
 
LarrySr. said:
is the line of thinking that everyone, everything must be in place for an immediate storming before we make the first confirmed contact with the folks inside?

That could be the bad guy answering the phone.
"There is no problem here everything is fine. No we didn't call 911."

Just saying.;)
Click to expand...
Stogies said:
Well the point of swatting is to pretend there is a situation where that force will be needed. And getting confirmation that it's not so has to be under the assumption that information you are getting from inside might be given under duress.
Click to expand...

That argument only goes so far.

That means every 911 hang-up should have a full on SWAT response.

A month or two back, while we were out hiking around in an isolated area, having not seen another soul in hours, the gal I was hiking with somehow managed to butt-dial 911 with her phone in her pocket. This we found out when the 911 operator called her back, to inquire if she was ok. She said yes, because she was fine. But she didn't know why 911 would be calling her. She knew she didn't dial 911. We figured out what happened only after the 911 operator had hung up.

The 911 operator heard a lady doing the proverbial "playing dumb" routine made famous by stage and screen.

The 911 operator had to take my friends word for it that she had accidentally dialed 911, and wasn't just saying she was ok cause there was some creep with a gun to her head about to dunk her in the river.


There needs to be some sort of protocol worked out. There already is one apparently for determining if young women walking around "down by the river" with some guy with a gun warrants a response. I can't see how this is a point that anyone wants to argue against.
 
I aint buying it in this day and age. "What is your name sir, what is your address, what is the phone number you are calling from?" You cant tell me they cant verify who is calling unless its a burner phone and still if it is then maybe do some more verifying before call out the swat boys. When I called 911 for my Alzheimer neighbor when his wife almost died, the dispatcher wouldnt let me off the phone. So if somebody anonomously calls in and then hangs up, maybe the dispatch should take a depth breath, count to 10 and call back. Who did the homeowner piss off or is just some retard that gets off on swatting? I hope they catch and nail his ass.
 
jimmyjames8 said:
I aint buying it in this day and age. "What is your name sir, what is your address, what is the phone number you are calling from?" You cant tell me they cant verify who is calling unless its a burner phone and still if it is then maybe do some more verifying before call out the swat boys. When I called 911 for my Alzheimer neighbor when his wife almost died, the dispatcher wouldnt let me off the phone. So if somebody anonomously calls in and then hangs up, maybe the dispatch should take a depth breath, count to 10 and call back. Who did the homeowner piss off or is just some retard that gets off on swatting? I hope they catch and nail his ass.
Click to expand...
Couple of years ago, out on a rural road, dude jumps out in front of my car waving arms to get me to stop. Didn't get a good feeling, decided I would pass.

Called 911 on my cell phone, one that is on a cell phone plan, to inform them that someone may need assistance, tried to hang up after simply reporting where and what, and the operator stops me

"sir, sir, I need your name"

"i'm just reporting what I saw, I know nothing else"

"yes but sir we need your name for our records"

"What? You don't know it?"

Long pause....

"well yes, but we still need you to say it"


........


Being that, I believe, that phone plan is in my mother's name, I am still not entirely sure what to make of that.
 
jimmyjames8 said:
I aint buying it in this day and age. "What is your name sir, what is your address, what is the phone number you are calling from?" You cant tell me they cant verify who is calling unless its a burner phone and still if it is then maybe do some more verifying before call out the swat boys. When I called 911 for my Alzheimer neighbor when his wife almost died, the dispatcher wouldnt let me off the phone. So if somebody anonomously calls in and then hangs up, maybe the dispatch should take a depth breath, count to 10 and call back. Who did the homeowner piss off or is just some retard that gets off on swatting? I hope they catch and nail his ass.
Click to expand...
I'm actually okay with the SWAT Rollin on Scene rather than dorking around with verbal verifications that are not verify-able. Pros to my aid faster as far as I'm concerned.

And if it was a false alarm, I'd go out and say Hi. I reckon there aren't too many instances of death by compliance. But then I grew up with LEO friends and family and kinda figure if you're not going to Trust God and a LEO, ya might as well just get used to being miserable.
 
Last edited:
Sharps40 said:
But then I grew up with LEO friends and family and kinda figure if you're not going to Trust God and a LEO, ya might as well just get used to being miserable.
Click to expand...

Trusting the wrong LEO might mean a quick trip to see God. I'd rather just trust God.

The number of good guys the cops end up shooting when "rolling up on scene" without sussing out the details is disconcerting.

To boil this down to a binary choice: either submit to whatever the heck law enforcement wants to do with you or be miserable, is probably one of the most asinine things I've read on this forum.
 
Sharps40 said:
I'm not the slightest bit surprised by the nature your response. Your Godhead fails you.
Click to expand...

I'm going to restrain myself from telling you what I really think. Consider yourself fortunate.

Back on March 24th you acknowledged that the feds shoot women and children and said:

"Well the feds to shoot women and babies behind doors or watch them burn to death so what do you expect?"

But today we're supposed to just trust LEO and let them roll in with the Bearcat I guess. Some consistency on your part would not go awry.
 
Tracking these swatters down is impossible with out a dedicated TSA super computer. Those are full up hunting down far right white nationalists.

So for those not in the know, let me explain how this works. This is a paid for service (via crypto) on the dark web. The "caller" is AI generated. The call is placed through the dark web (untraceable) through a virtual phone number.

NOW, here's what bothers me. With simple technology, the police (probably already can) can know whether this is coming from a real (cell or landline) number. If it's coming from a virtual number (even though the number can be masked to "show" a caller ID of the real landline number, you can tell if it's virtual) that should give instant red flags. At that point the burden of proof should be far less. A callback or maybe even a simple drive-by?

Here's my theory. They don't care. Less swat calls means less money. The more calls, the more they can justify their existence to us peasants.
 
clay_fv said:
Tracking these swatters down is impossible with out a dedicated TSA super computer. Those are full up hunting down far right white nationalists.

So for those not in the know, let me explain how this works. This is a paid for service (via crypto) on the dark web. The "caller" is AI generated. The call is placed through the dark web (untraceable) through a virtual phone number.

NOW, here's what bothers me. With simple technology, the police (probably already can) can know whether this is coming from a real (cell or landline) number. If it's coming from a virtual number (even though the number can be masked to "show" a caller ID of the real landline number, you can tell if it's virtual) that should give instant red flags. At that point the burden of proof should be far less. A callback or maybe even a simple drive-by?

Here's my theory. They don't care. Less swat calls means less money. The more calls, the more they can justify their existence to us peasants.
Click to expand...
How many people use virtual phone numbers for legitimate everyday reasons? If that's not a thing then I would say you are spot on - virtual number put the brakes on the SWAT team and call the place the call is about instead.
 
@Stogies
I honestly don't know. I know the "spam" world uses it almost exclusively. Just about anything from overseas uses it. Locally though? Especially when it's a masked number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom