Slashdot Mirror


Swatting 19-Year-Old Arrested in Las Vegas

Ars Technica reports that a Las Vegas teenager is in custody for multiple instances of swatting: Brandon Wilson, who goes by the online handle "Famed God," was arrested Thursday in Nevada and faces an extradition hearing to determine whether he should be sent to face hacking and other charges. Illinois prosecutors said there was evidence on his computers about the July 10 swatting incident, in which he allegedly reported a murder to Naperville's emergency 911 line. The SWAT team responded, but the call was a hoax. The Chicago-Sun Times said that, in addition to the Naperville incident, the suspect's computers held evidence "of similar incidents across the country."

13 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. Guy allegedly does something stupid by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He gets caught and will stand trial. Isn't this how the system is supposed to work? What's the problem here?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Guy allegedly does something stupid by NoKaOi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He gets caught and will stand trial. Isn't this how the system is supposed to work? What's the problem here?

      Exactly, they busted somebody who deserved to be prosecuted. The problem here that when we read a headline (before reading the details) about law enforcement busting somebody, our default reaction is no longer, "good, they busted the bad guy," but rather, "there goes law enforcement abusing their power again, they probably didn't have a warrant and the guy is probably innocent."

      That says something about the state of nation.

    2. Re:Guy allegedly does something stupid by Roger+Wilcox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is that SWAT is prevalent enough that punks like the guy in the article can even pull this kind of prank. SWAT came into prominence in the 1970s, with ~500 SWAT deployments per year. Today, there are more than 50,000 SWAT deployments each year (that's more that 150 deployments every day) and mostly, they are used to round up non-violent people engaging in consensual crimes. There is no justification for using paramilitary police action on non-violent petty crime. It is ridiculous: picture an 8-man armored squad busting in on a teenager smoking weed in his parent's basement. There have been dozens of tragic incidents in which innocents have lost their lives due to this excessive use of force. I don't have a solution to this. Politicians appear to consider the issue a career-danger to themselves to address; seemingly nobody is moving anywhere fast to rectify this trend. However, it has clearly become a problem.

    3. Re:Guy allegedly does something stupid by SgtAaron · · Score: 5, Informative

      As a non-American, I don't really understand US gun culture very well, but: if there is a likelihood of someone brandishing a deadly weapon, wtf don't police come in with full body armour?

      The guy can be rushed, and if it turns out the gun's a toy / he wasn't going to use it, nobody dies - but if they're shot at, no big deal, and he faces justice.

      I understand that some weapons are so powerful that body armour won't help, but how common are they?

      Body armor is great at stopping shots to your chest, but come on. Sure, in Hollywood shots to a limb are shrugged off like they're bee stings, but that isn't how it is in real life. One of my favorites was in CSI: Miami, Horatio gets shot in the gut, but sticks his hand on the wound and walks around toting his pistol and saving the day.

      Gunshots are no joke. One to to your leg can cause lifelong disability. Or how about to one's face? Ouch. I would never want to rush an armed opponent in the hope that his shots will only hit my body armor.

    4. Re:Guy allegedly does something stupid by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Informative

      Gunshots are no joke. One to to your leg can cause lifelong disability. Or how about to one's face? Ouch. I would never want to rush an armed opponent in the hope that his shots will only hit my body armor.

      No kidding. Public media tends to overstate the effectiveness of body armor.

      Little primer people, and yes, I've worn body armor before, the lvl IV military stuff with plates.

      1. Over half of police killed by firearms WERE wearing body armor. It's not like the ancient stuff that provides whole body protection, you have a front piece and a back piece that protects your chest. A hit to the head, or in from the side, and you're still possibly dead.
      2. Police body armor is drastically lighter than the stuff I wore. A rifle round will generally go right through them, as will a shotgun slug* at close enough range.
      3. Part of being lighter, even being shot with a handgun will result in injuries, and they'll probably want to get you checked out in a hospital. But said shot can disable you and make you less able to fight back until the attacker manages to line up a shot to the head, neck(from which you'll bleed out or suffocate), or bypass the armor from the side.
      4. Are there other civilians around? if you have a perp that you're afraid is going to start shooting, the officer is more protected than the others still around.
      They used to call them 'second chances' - you already lost your first chance(don't get shot), they provide a 'second chance' at stopping the round from killing you.

      *results WILL vary depending on numerous factors that I won't get into here.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    5. Re:Guy allegedly does something stupid by nedlohs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You asked for one. You've been given two. My lord you are fucktard.

  2. Longer sentences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Up to 5 years? That's it?

  3. Swatting is much more serious than a "prank" by DutchUncle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The linked article uses the words "prank" and "prankster" multiple times. This is not ordering someone else a pizza; this is ordering someone else a large group of hair-trigger people carrying deadly weapons and expecting violence. People like this should be restrained or executed, not so much for what they have done, as for being the sort of people who would do it.

  4. Re:"computer hacking" the convenient catch-all by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't care about the hacking, but he should be tortured for swatting.

    No kidding. People could die from that. The days of the police sauntering in gun holstered saying "'ello 'ello what's all this then?" are flat gone, if they ever existed. If someone is bursting into your home with guns pointed, things can get lethal very quickly. Regardless of whether any crime was committed.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  5. Body Armor Explained and more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    To understand why there is not a full suit body armor, you have to understand what body armor actually is and what it does. A 'bullet-proof vest' is a multi-layered fabric composed of Kevlar and other fabrics, with a pocket in the center of the front and the back that mostly covers just the heart, and into this pocket goes a ceramic and steel composite plate. The fabric of the vest is designed to take the force of the bullet that hits it and spread it out. So instead of a massive amount of energy concentrated on a point around 2-9mm in size, it gets diffused into the surrounding layers of Kelvar (instead of your flesh). And even then, you still get hurt, very badly, because it cannot stop all of the kinetic force of the bullet, it jsut spreads it out over a large area of your body. Broken ribs, bruised and ruptured internal organs, even spinal injuries are common when getting shot in the vest and that's when it works and stops the bullet from going inside you!

    Why the plates then? Because the fabric mesh is often not enough to stop even handgun caliber rounds at close range. The plates are insurance, they will stop most small arms fire, though rifle rounds quickly overpower even full steel plates. Thus your heart is not likely to damaged in a firefight if you are wearing your vest. Its not foolproof at all and it definitely is not bullet proof.

    The giant bulky armored suits you see the explosives guys wearing? That's not bullet proof either and its the closest thing we've got. That suit is protection against a detonating device because the detonation is usually unshaped. Even it will at best stop small arms fire, still has vulnerable gaps, and its heavy, and extremely hot. Its utterly un-tactical. If you want to see it in action, there is footage out there of a bank robbery in California from the 90's I think where a couple of guys in them held off police for a long while, tore the cops up badly but they were finally taken down due to exhaustion, vulnerability and the fact they were just too slow to actually get away.

    The less than lethal devices in an officers arsenal are unreliable. Not in that they may misfire, though that is certainly true as well. Mace/CS Spray for example is a terrible weapon to rely on. Its a spray, in mist form or stream, that travels through the air to splash onto a target. It can splash back onto the officer at extremely close range. Heavy winds can make you miss your target, hit an innocent, your partner, other officers, and even yourself. Also, a certain (small)_ percentage of the population is flat out immune to it, and even if the target is not, its not debilitating, its just a massive irritant. Police train to work through the pain and distraction and civilians can too. Even alcohol can make a person not feel the sting, and that's a legal substance. Get into narcotics and its a crapshoot if it'll do anything at all other than make it more difficult to apprehend the target. (oh yeah, that stuff is liquid and gets on everything. good luck wrestling that dude to the ground and not getting it all over yourself if it didn't work.)

    Tasers. ugh. Boon and bane in a single device. Injuries from tasing are common as they cause an adult human being to freeze up tight and fall over from a standing position. The effect of them is very powerful, but not that difficult to recover from, especially if you are full of adrenaline. So they come with multiple charges to make him get on the ground again. But, the more juice you pump through someone, the more likely it is for side effects to arise. (like death) Getting hit with multiple tasers at once is not recommended if you want a living suspect, they have a limited range as well, but that range is better than Mace and is like a leash for a target, as long as the barbs are in and the device has a charge, it can zap him again if needed. They can miss the target, they can hit too far apart to be effective, heavy winter coats can stop them. They are not a great solution, but they are what we have now. And using a taser on someone pointing a gun at you or anyone else...all your muscles spasm when you get juiced, there is a high chance the firearm in the targets hand will discharge and injure or kill someone.

  6. Gibson Guitar SWAT raid ... by perpenso · · Score: 5, Informative

    Can you give an example of swat being used to apprehend a non-violent person?

    Gibson Guitars. Gibson imported wood guitar components that we legally harvested and legally exported. Eventually the US gov't admitted Gibson did nothing wrong. However to investigate Gibon's possible improper importation of wood a heavily armed SWAT raid was conducted to seize their paperwork and the wood in question.
    http://www.nationalreview.com/...

    1. Re:Gibson Guitar SWAT raid ... by nedlohs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It answers your "Can you give an example of swat being used to apprehend a non-violent person?" question.

      Why ask for AN example if you are just going to dismiss it as irrelevant. Do you have multiple personalities or something? Or just like moving goal posts?

  7. Re:"computer hacking" the convenient catch-all by dcollins117 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Maybe cops should learn some restraint in their use of force?

    They clearly could use better training. I was reading in the newspaper about a cop shooting. It was recorded on video and shows the cop repeatedly shouting "Don't move!", "Put your hands up!" "Don't move!" over and over again. The guy put his hands up and the cop shot and killed him. The cop says he's not a fault because he told the victim not to move.

    There's another video on YouTube of a guy getting shot at a gas station after the cop shouts "Don't move!", "Show me your ID!", etc.The guy went to get his wallet and got shot because he moved.

    Perhaps the cops could be trained to not give contradictory commands? How does one put their hands up without moving? If I were cynical I'd wonder if these cops just felt like shooting someone and so gave contradictory commands to "justify" doing it.