Canadian Teen Arrested For Calling In 30+ Swattings, Bomb Threats
tsu doh nimh (609154) writes "A 16-year-old male from Ottawa, Canada has been arrested for allegedly making at least 30 fraudulent calls — including bomb threats and 'swattings' — to emergency services across North America over the past few months. Canadian media isn't identifying the youth because of laws that prevent the disclosure, but the alleged perpetrator was outed in a dox on Pastebin that was picked up by journalist Brian Krebs, who was twice the recipient of attempted swat raids at the hand of this kid. From the story: 'I told this user privately that targeting an investigative reporter maybe wasn't the brightest idea, and that he was likely to wind up in jail soon. But @ProbablyOnion was on a roll: That same day, he hung out his for-hire sign on Twitter, with the following message: "want someone swatted? Tweet me their name, address and I'll make it happen."'"
good
... the fact that you can do this with a telephone is pretty scary.
Just recently I saw a massive police overreaction (closing off a block of downtown DC in front of a university hospital, complete with police abusing citizens) just because some student left her backpack lying around. If this is all it takes to provoke this sort of reaction, and if a few phone calls can get someone "swatted", then why the hell does al-Qaeda bother with bombings and flying planes into things? Send over a few sleeper cells with nondescript bags and boxes and watch the panic fly.
This is pretty damn analogous to an allergic reaction: "ack, a piece of peanut antigen! FETCH ALL THE CYTOKINES, BOYS, THIS MEANS WAR!"
There is no 'but'.
The next time someone calls with the exact same wording, and they don't respond appropriately.....you'll be calling for their heads to roll.
Yes, I get that the police have too any toys they need to use. But wtf are they supposed to do? Send Officer Snuffy with a single bullet in his pocket every time?
At the risk of being modded into the ground, how is this Slashdot material?
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
Send out the SWAT team, but do a smidgen of reconnaissance before clearing the area and bashing down the doors.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
The reason you are only aware of those instances (and of course implying those are the first instances) is because you are a partisan hack.
FYI swatting has been used significantly longer that your partisan views ascribe. I a guy that someone tried to swat (the community didn't have a swat) in 1994 via modem redial on a BBS. Why don't you try climbing out of your partisan cave? There is nothing more disgusting than anyone trying to claim (or imply in this case) that persecution makes them right or virtuous in their cause.
The next time someone calls with the exact same wording, and they don't respond appropriately.....you'll be calling for their heads to roll.
It seems you've mixed me up with imbeciles who want perfect safety and find it acceptable for authority figures to ruin innocent people's lives. That is a mistake, because I'm not like that.
Take note that you're talking to a specific individual. After the 9/11 attacks, I was opposed to the government taking away our freedoms and giving us 'safety'.
It's very troubling when the police overreact to things and respond with an overwhelming amount of force, and idiots who think the police should be 100% perfect shouldn't even be taken into consideration.
It certainly dates back to the 1960's, when faking bomb threats from peaceful protesters was used to bring in police and National Guard against them. The Scientologists made an art form of it. Mary Sue Hubbard, L. Ron's wife was convicted for her involvement in "dead agenting" Paulette Cooper, which included faked bomb threats against the Israeli embassy, in order to discredit Paulette's book called "The Scandal of Scientology". And who can forget "The Maine", whose faked fraudulently advertised bomb destruction in 1898 was a vital trigger of the Spanish-American War?
Discrediting your opponents by making fraudulent bomb threats is an old, old political hobby.
On one hand, glad the little fucker got caught. on the other, also glad he was Canadian. Had he been in the US, he'd probably get a life sentence.
16 year old kids do really incredibly dumb anti social stuff, problems arise with something as easy to pull off as this -- and the supposed anonymity of the internet. How many of you remember winnuke (circa 1996)? Nowadays nuking someone would have been met with a knock on the door, and being hauled away in cuffs.
(NOT defending swatting. more criticizing penalties for teenagers in the US. At 16 you're a moron -- you have some inkling of the consequences but you don't really *get* it.)
All behavior is learned... just not necessarily from a person's parents.
If you don't think behavior is learned, guess what happens to babies who aren't given any stimulation whatsoever beyond being fed and kept only as clean as necessity may dictate?
And for what it's worth, some psycho actually did such an experiment in Europe a few centuries ago.... and if I'm remembering correctly,, he wanted to discover what language babies would learn to speak if they weren't exposed to social interaction. The answer is, of course... they don't learn any language. They die.
Everything that we do is learned... copied from somewhere, possibly mutated by our own imagination or combined with other things we have learned to perhaps produce entire original behavior, but in the end, it sill is all learned.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The first victim of war has always been truth. Hell, the crap in the Ukraine isn't even a war yet and truth is already dead and buried.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You should stop at 29 swattings and fake bomb threats.
Seriously, how did he not get caught earlier?
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
the one time you don't react, someone will die and there will be a huge investigation and people being fired with no pension benefits
No one is saying "don't react", they are saying "react appropriately". You put together a well thought out response plan BEFORE the event, then follow it. Such a response plan should not call for busting down the doors with guns blazing on the strength of a single anonymous phone call. Not following the plan is what should result in disciplinary actions.
The Cuban government promoted that conspiracy theory, but there's no evidence for it at all. It was most likely an accident, which happened pretty often in the late 19th century, before modern safety standards. Tensions with Spain were already so high, and war was already imminent. "it was cited by some hawks already inclined to go to war with Spain"
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
bombing. The response to this was to have about 3-4 thousand police soldiers(DEA, FBI, staties, and local) show up and shut down about 3 cities here in Massachusetts for a day. I've heard the cost of the shut down was on the order of 300-400 million dollars. Should I point out this was to stop 2 idiots(with little training) with a couple of pressure cooker bombs, some pipe bombs, and a pistol. Wonder what that cost, maybe a thousand dollars? (Geez, if Al-Qaeda wants to hurt us by warfare on the cheap that response given to how much it must of cost would be absolutely no deterrent.
Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
That is not the intended use for surveilance. What he did was naughty, but no copyright violation.
... CCTV footage at the time of the call until you get a shot of their face...
Which is why da yout' of today seems to like wearing hooded sweatshirts *with* baseball caps as they walk around the (indoor) mall. Of course, if one reacts with suspicion to someone dressed thusly, one is clearly being prejudiced and/or racist and/or classist, and any attempt at regulation insisting that a face be visible is clearly religious oppression against religions that insist half their population must be invisible.