this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
292 points (96.2% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2326 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 59 points 10 months ago (2 children)

There needs to be a much more severe punishment for the person who makes the fake call, especially if anyone is hurt as a result of it.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 44 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

There needs to be a decent charge/punishment absolutely, but harsher punishment will not stop this.
The monopoly of violence lies with the government and they need to treat that with much more tact and finesse than they currently do in the US. No knock raids, SWAT teams filled with former veterans trained to kill by the military are employed without hesitation, this is wrong. The responsibility lies with the government and law enforcement to be more careful and know what they are getting into before even considering employing deadly force.

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 34 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I know a bunch of vets that swear that police rules of engagement are insane and they would have gotten in deep shit for acting in a fucking war zone the way cops do here.

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 10 months ago

This, if swat teams and police raids weren’t as violent and deadly as they are, swatting would cease to be a thing in the first place.

Shithead trolls would lose a tool to harass.

[–] skulblaka@startrek.website 4 points 10 months ago

For one thing, opening fire on a civilian or other non-combatant that hasn't already fired live rounds at you will get your ass court-martialed, dishonorably discharged, and imprisoned faster than you can say "Miranda rights"

And somehow that happens dozens of times per day in American police departments

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Didn’t Biden make no-knock raids illegal?

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 26 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If anyone dies it should be a 1st degree murder charge.

[–] rifugee@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You know your country is fucked when your first thought is, "if someone dies when the cops show up at the home of someone completely innocent, then whomever called them should be charged with murder."

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I mean, it should be true for any country. SWATting isn't a US only phenomenon.

[–] rifugee@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I expect any country's SWAT team to be able to show up at an innocent person's house and NOT kill anyone. I guess I have high standards.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah they should. But if while committing a crime you cause the death of someone, then that's murder.

Like if I'm robbing you and you get so scared you have a heart attack and die, I can say, "well I expect people to exercise more and keep in better shape so they don't have heart attacks. I guess I have high standards." I can say that, but I'm still getting charged with murder in most places, because if I didn't commit that crime you'd still be alive.

[–] rifugee@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, I understand the legal concept. My point is that police, and especially SWAT, should be trained well enough that the idea that anyone would be in danger if they were to show up at an innocent person's house would be so ridiculous that we wouldn't even be having this discussion. In the US, it takes about 650 hours of training to become a police officer on average, and 3000 to become a cosmetologist. That's fucked up.

https://www.trainingreform.org/not-enough-training

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] rifugee@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I guess I don't understand what we are talking about, sorry. This thread is in reply to:

I mean, it should be true for any country. SWATting isn't a US only phenomenon.

Which I know wasn't your comment, but I took that to mean that because it happens in other countries then the US isn't that fucked. My original comment didn't specify the US and was a benchmark that could be applied to all countries, so the reply sounded argumentative to me.

Maybe I was reading something into it that wasn't there? Sorry for being a dumbass!

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online -4 points 10 months ago

I'm not confident you actually know what swatting is.

[–] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 16 points 10 months ago

If no one dies, it should be attempted murder.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 3 points 10 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule

In a lot of places if someone dies as a result of you committing a felony you catch a murder charge.