In other news... (humorous news items)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10324
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Tue Apr 29, 2014 1:46 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Polish stadium guard sets fan on fire.


It was only for a second. And he was reportedly not injured.

Still, cool photo.

Very cool photo.
Funny stuff, there.

That shit is 'Playing With Fire'.
I'm thinking it was a mistake.
(i hope)

This guy Poofed and Lived.
That situation might have gone a Different Way.

What to do? What to do?
Even good Police must make difficult choices.
Even good Police make mistakes.

These are Adults taking the responsibility to parent other Adults.
What to do? What to do?

Someone must get that Idiot down!
Why? Beacause!

1. He might fall.
(so don't hit him with a Bean Bag. that, sort of defets, the purpose of saving him from falling.)

2. The Othere Idiots will certainly Join him, if you leave him up there.
(Yelling at them won't help. They are Yelling. They will think you are Joining In.)

3. And; The Big One. Those Police guys get dressed for Something.
They want to Do! Something! Police work can be Sooo boring.

That photo sure Spiced Up that shift.
The Sports Fans have a cool story and a Photo.

The Police get to design a little continuing ed about the Chemistry of Pepper Spray.
If done well, that could be a fun class.

I have a theory about Why police do not do that sort of continuing ed, much.
I think those classes could and should be Public. What's The Secret?

Why?
1. You tell those guys what they have and they might be even more Dangerous.
2. I don't know about Poland. In the US the Police may be Too Stupid to pass a Real Class.
3. Police work seems to be a Working Class profession. Working Class may come with expectations of Work not School.
Sitting in some Sissy Classroom learning Sissy Stuff is not what Police sign up for. These are Doers with a lot of social pressure.

All humans have Social Pressure.
It is a funny photo, once I knew the Sports Fan escaped with minor injuries.
If that Capsin had reached that Sports Fan in Liquid Form, it would not be a laughing matter.

A nursery rhyrime springs to mind.
Hickory-Dickery-Dock
The Mice Ran Up The Clock

The Clock Stuck One
The rest escaped with minor injuries.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby PolakoVoador » Tue Apr 29, 2014 1:59 pm UTC

Big piece UK Space agency equipment found in Brazilian river (link in portuguese only).

Spoilered for images
Spoiler:
Image
Image


The best part of the report says: "Police confirms it is a big chunk of metal".

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Diadem » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:13 pm UTC

firechicago wrote:
Diadem wrote:But those salaries have to be paid anyway.

Police, at least in the US, are generally paid hourly. And they get time and a half overtime when they get pulled out for something like this. So it's entirely possible that all or most of those 70 officers were pulling down $60-$100 per hour in pay + overtime + benefits. So legitimate personnel expenses exclusively caused by this incident could easily run into the tens of thousands.

$100 an hour for a police officer? Where can I sign up? Even if that is correct, that is still only 7000 an hour, and there is no way it took them 14 hours to figure out this was a false alarm.

Also, what speising says. Giving police a personal interest in over-responding seems like a bad idea.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:34 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:See, your assumption there is that this sort of response is warranted even if the call is legitimate.

That part, many of us have problems with. Initial response to a call maybe doesn't need to consist of enough force to invade a small country.
I decided to look up the number of sworn officers in the police forces of a few smaller cities around here. Lots of them don't have 70 officers, period. I can't begin to fathom how an initial response to one individual could reasonably take more officers than it takes to police a city of 35 000 around the clock. I mean, if you need that sort of overwhelming response for just one person, how on earth would those tiny police forces ever manage to deal with a couple of armed robbers?

I would presume that smaller police forces get assistance from neighboring towns during major events.


Yeah, they do when and if stuff really hits the fan...but for an initial call? Nah. They probably send a pair of officers over, fairly quickly. Maybe two cars and an ambulence, if it sounds bad.

While hospitals sending a bill for fictitious cost is normal, police doing the same is not. Police don't bill the public for their services, they are paid for via taxes. So billing is not normal practice, and is basically a fine for bad behavior. I'm fine with fining bad behavior, but a $100,000 fine is excessive.


Fictitious is not the right term. You're looking at things like "marginal cost".

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Tue Apr 29, 2014 6:13 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:See, your assumption there is that this sort of response is warranted even if the call is legitimate.

That part, many of us have problems with. Initial response to a call maybe doesn't need to consist of enough force to invade a small country.
I decided to look up the number of sworn officers in the police forces of a few smaller cities around here. Lots of them don't have 70 officers, period. I can't begin to fathom how an initial response to one individual could reasonably take more officers than it takes to police a city of 35 000 around the clock. I mean, if you need that sort of overwhelming response for just one person, how on earth would those tiny police forces ever manage to deal with a couple of armed robbers?
I would presume that smaller police forces get assistance from neighboring towns during major events.

A few years back, in the flat where I lived back then, a couple of mattresses stored in the basement caught fire. The emergency response consisted of 4 fire trucks, dozens of police cars and a mobile command center. After things calmed down I spent an hour chatting with one of the volunteer firemen at the scene, and one of the things I asked him was why such a huge response. The answer was basically that fires are very unpredictable, and smoke is dangerous in a flat if it gets in the ventilation. So they had to evacuate pretty much the entire flat, and smash open every door where no one answered (which was most of them, since it happened during the Christmas break). The response turned out to be hugely over the top, but they had no way of knowing it was over the top beforehand. It's better to err on the side of caution.

I imagine much the same is true here. The report may have said the people were dead, but it's better to send an ambulance just in case. Imagine the uproar if they had not sent an ambulance, and someone died as a result? There were 2 reported victims, so at least 2 ambulances are needed, plus 1-2 on stand bye in case this turns into a shooting match. Sending a SWAT team in is entirely sensible, given the nature of the report. Add a few negotiators. Add some officers to keep the public away, and more officers to cordon of the area securely (don't want the suspect escaping!). Honestly I can quickly see that adding up to 70 people.
When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. Even if you need a dozen for traffic control, eight to evacuate people, a dozen for a perimeter, eight more for an entry team, a couple negotiators (are they sworn police officers?) and another handful for command and control - which sounds like a pretty damn healthy response to me - that leaves you with a couple dozen officers not accounted for. I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

User avatar
firechicago
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:27 pm UTC
Location: One time, I put a snowglobe in the microwave and pushed "Hot Dog"

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby firechicago » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:22 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:$100 an hour for a police officer? Where can I sign up? Even if that is correct, that is still only 7000 an hour, and there is no way it took them 14 hours to figure out this was a false alarm.

Also, what speising says. Giving police a personal interest in over-responding seems like a bad idea.

I'm not arguing that the $100,000 number is legitimate, only that the personnel costs to these sorts of responses are real, not just an attempt to defray salaries that the department was already committed to paying.

The $100 number is an upper bound and the math goes something like this: A senior policeman with a base salary of $88,000 a year makes $44 an hour. (BLS lists medan pay for a Lieutenant, usually the lowest rank of management in the department as $81,000). With overtime that becomes $66 and if benefits are billed as a straight 50% of pay (which was pretty close to what they were billed at at the last large organization I worked at) then the actual cost to the police department is $100 an hour.

Also, to speising's point, the people who make these sorts of decisions usually also have some sort of budgetary responsibility, which means they're given a specific amount of money by whatever municipal, state or federal entity that provides their budget and that's all they're allowed to spend for the year, anything more involves seriously uncomfortable conversations with their boss. So giving all their buddies overtime for a wild goose chase means that it's harder to give their buddies overtime to work a real case. (The tv show The Wire actually does a great job of illustrating how tightly controlled overtime budgets are in a large police department, and how their use becomes a great subject of both internal department politics and external politics.)

User avatar
AngrySquirrel
Hellish Sex Goddess
Posts: 1005
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:26 am UTC
Location: The Northpole

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby AngrySquirrel » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:29 pm UTC

Saudi Arabia criticises Norway over human rights record
Now, I'm quite on board with critizing Norway for breach of human rights, especially when it comes to treatment of underage immigrants, but I'm finding this a pretty funny example of "being the right arse to fart".

(Fair warning, horrible field of comments, duh!)
Putting the fist into pacifist.

they/them/theirs

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10324
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:43 pm UTC

firechicago wrote:
Diadem wrote:$100 an hour for a police officer? Where can I sign up? Even if that is correct, that is still only 7000 an hour, and there is no way it took them 14 hours to figure out this was a false alarm.

Also, what speising says. Giving police a personal interest in over-responding seems like a bad idea.

I'm not arguing that the $100,000 number is legitimate, only that the personnel costs to these sorts of responses are real, not just an attempt to defray salaries that the department was already committed to paying.

The $100 number is an upper bound and the math goes something like this: A senior policeman with a base salary of $88,000 a year makes $44 an hour. (BLS lists medan pay for a Lieutenant, usually the lowest rank of management in the department as $81,000). With overtime that becomes $66 and if benefits are billed as a straight 50% of pay (which was pretty close to what they were billed at at the last large organization I worked at) then the actual cost to the police department is $100 an hour.

Also, to speising's point, the people who make these sorts of decisions usually also have some sort of budgetary responsibility, which means they're given a specific amount of money by whatever municipal, state or federal entity that provides their budget and that's all they're allowed to spend for the year, anything more involves seriously uncomfortable conversations with their boss. So giving all their buddies overtime for a wild goose chase means that it's harder to give their buddies overtime to work a real case. (The tv show The Wire actually does a great job of illustrating how tightly controlled overtime budgets are in a large police department, and how their use becomes a great subject of both internal department politics and external politics.)

I can't help but Butt In.

Yes. Every Department, in the Old Days, was given a budget.
To go over that budget did cause Important Conversations.

You called them Uncomfortable Conversations.
You also site a fucking Television Show for How You Know.


The way this conversation Really works is as follows.
If you use all your money, Honey.
You must need more money, Honey.

You did not use all your Money.
That is Proof you don't Need it.

Next year we will give that Cash to the Rock People.


What did you do with the Money?
Is a question that comes up.

It is not nice to answer a question with a question.
On Paper? Is the answer to what you did with the Money.

On Paper; We are Prepared for War against Terrorists.
On Paper; We have some Budgetary Latitude.

In Reality; Have you ever been to a Budget Meeting??
yeah. Me, too. They are not all the same. right?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Coyne » Wed Apr 30, 2014 4:52 am UTC

PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."
In all fairness...

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby sardia » Wed Apr 30, 2014 5:05 am UTC

Coyne wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."

Are you saying that if you called 911 during a mass shooting with several people dead that you don't want them to come in force? Cuz that's what swatting is, you send out a fake call with the worst possible details needed to have the police come out in droves.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10324
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Wed Apr 30, 2014 6:29 am UTC

sardia wrote:
Coyne wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."

Are you saying that if you called 911 during a mass shooting with several people dead that you don't want them to come in force? Cuz that's what swatting is, you send out a fake call with the worst possible details needed to have the police come out in droves.

It does not matter what we want.
What we get is Police that will not respond reasonably, under most conditions.

I don't know about your neighborhood.
I know about mine.

The People tell me the Police are More Trouble.
If you have Trouble, Police involvement is More Trouble.

I spoke to a woman that had seven Police cars with ten Uniformed and Armed personal,
as Happy as Happy can be to take out three legal marijuana plants and search her home.

She had been traumatized, brutalized and terrified.
She lost her rental agreement, she had to leave her home in three days.
Her husband was jailed and her son was taken.

Her story will never make the News.

If the stories were rare....
But the stories are Not rare.

The Police that can take seven cars and ten men is closed from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m.
Emergencies are handled by a switchboard 150 miles away.
If a crime is in progress, they can call someone more local.

The People don't feel safe with those guys around.
The People don't feel safe with those guys not around.

People are so difficult to please.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.


Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Apr 30, 2014 1:07 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Coyne wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."

Are you saying that if you called 911 during a mass shooting with several people dead that you don't want them to come in force? Cuz that's what swatting is, you send out a fake call with the worst possible details needed to have the police come out in droves.


Yes. The boston bombing was particularly bad. Did it require 19,000 people, an armored collumn, and a blanket of air support? The concept of a manhunt really isn't a new one...or shouldn't be. The crime was horrific certainly. That doesn't mean they were so horrifically dangerous that a mere 18,000 would have failed to capture them. They had...one gun and about ten bullets fired between them.

The cops accidentally fired a couple hundred rounds at the second one, and still took him alive. This was...mostly an accident.

Hell yes we're getting carried away with coming out in force.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10324
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Wed Apr 30, 2014 2:52 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
sardia wrote:
Coyne wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."

Are you saying that if you called 911 during a mass shooting with several people dead that you don't want them to come in force? Cuz that's what swatting is, you send out a fake call with the worst possible details needed to have the police come out in droves.


Yes. The boston bombing was particularly bad. Did it require 19,000 people, an armored collumn, and a blanket of air support? The concept of a manhunt really isn't a new one...or shouldn't be. The crime was horrific certainly. That doesn't mean they were so horrifically dangerous that a mere 18,000 would have failed to capture them. They had...one gun and about ten bullets fired between them.

The cops accidentally fired a couple hundred rounds at the second one, and still took him alive. This was...mostly an accident.

Hell yes we're getting carried away with coming out in force.

That's the way wars are.
Must we accept the Eternal War?

It will run its course, Naturally.
Or; We can treat it.

Like the Common Cold. We can't cure it.
We know how to treat it.

Not we, Americans.
We, Humans.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Coyne » Thu May 01, 2014 3:21 am UTC

sardia wrote:
Coyne wrote:
PhoenixEnigma wrote:When the closest additional police force is 100km+ away, they're not really going to be a factor in an initial response - you could have an entire massive shootout, or find out it's a guy playing video games, in the time it would take them to get there. Those 50-some men and women are the only immediate response to anything. As well, the article reports 70 heavily armed police officers, not 70 police officers, ambulance crews, firefighters, tow truck drivers, and catering crews. [...] I'm not saying that just sending a couple patrol cars and calling it a day is appropriate, either, but this small army nonsense is just bullshit.


Which happens so often these days.

Your example shows how ridiculous it really is to go overboard, because just who is paying for a legitimate call that...turns out to be a guy playing video games? The taxpayers of course.

So it's all very exciting and everything, but it is a waste of valuable resources, wastes taxpayer money, means other calls go unanswered, often means that charges are trumped up (bust the guy playing video games for intent to "sell" his "joint", to justify the police presence), gets people (including officers) hurt unnecessarily, and tends to cause other people to be resentful and uncooperative with the police.

The first place I remember seeing that was the 130+ officers that showed up to take Elian Gonzalez from his grandparents. I remember a story where about 3 dozen officers went to arrest someone who had offered a voluntary surrender. More and more, we're seeing this type of approach by the police: A massive militarized response to a minor (or even to no) threat.

My parents had a phrase for that type of approach: "Like hail on a flower."

Are you saying that if you called 911 during a mass shooting with several people dead that you don't want them to come in force? Cuz that's what swatting is, you send out a fake call with the worst possible details needed to have the police come out in droves.


In the Army, a platoon is 46 men, consisting of four nine-man squads, with leadership. One would expect a platoon to hold its own against a like enemy platoon; perhaps two if defending a position.

So the police showed up with seventy men, nearly two army platoons, which raises a question: Just what kind of force were they expecting to find anyway?

I know the call is deliberately designed to draw maximum force. But there is a very delicate line between, "There's someone shooting down here and I can see dead bodies," which might be believable but probably doesn't call for seventy men; and the call stating "There's fifty men down here shooting up everything!" that is going to be quickly exposed as the invention it is.

It seems to me that anything that doesn't draw an instant peg of the "baloney" meter, doesn't warrant seventy men. Unless the police are extraordinarily gullible, of course.
In all fairness...

User avatar
rath358
The bone of my bone
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:02 am UTC
Location: west Camberville

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby rath358 » Thu May 01, 2014 4:36 am UTC

If you send your 46 men against their 46 men, your men aren't going to make it out unscathed. It could be seen as wiser to send in an asymmetrically large team to deal with what you are going up against, just to make it less likely for one of your people to be hurt or killed.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Thu May 01, 2014 5:39 am UTC

Fuck that. Call in close air support or an artillery strike, soften em up a bit. Only fools do their fighting on the battlefield...

User avatar
rath358
The bone of my bone
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:02 am UTC
Location: west Camberville

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby rath358 » Thu May 01, 2014 6:35 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Fuck that. Call in close air support or an artillery strike, soften em up a bit. Only fools do their fighting on the battlefield...

Bombarding from orbit is the only way to make sure you wipe them out.

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Thu May 01, 2014 6:48 am UTC

rath358 wrote:Bombarding from orbit is the only way to make sure you wipe them out.


RKVs from another solar system should clean it up.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Thesh » Thu May 01, 2014 6:51 am UTC

Didn't Carter blow up a sun once?
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Mutex
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Mutex » Thu May 01, 2014 9:08 am UTC

rath358 wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Fuck that. Call in close air support or an artillery strike, soften em up a bit. Only fools do their fighting on the battlefield...

Bombarding from orbit is the only way to make sure you wipe them out.


I'm not familiar with the game, but I imagine getting your victim bombarded from orbit would score pretty highly in "Swatting".

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Carlington » Thu May 01, 2014 9:41 am UTC

Obligatory: The only winning move is not to play.


AS, "wrong arse to fart" - is that a Norwegianism? I am curious, simply because I've never heard it before and I think it's brilliant.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

User avatar
AngrySquirrel
Hellish Sex Goddess
Posts: 1005
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:26 am UTC
Location: The Northpole

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby AngrySquirrel » Thu May 01, 2014 1:25 pm UTC

Carlington wrote:Obligatory: The only winning move is not to play.


AS, "wrong arse to fart" - is that a Norwegianism? I am curious, simply because I've never heard it before and I think it's brilliant.

It's "the right arse to fart" and yes probably, "pot calling the kettle black"-type of thing I guess.
Putting the fist into pacifist.

they/them/theirs

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10324
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby addams » Thu May 01, 2014 1:58 pm UTC

rath358 wrote:If you send your 46 men against their 46 men, your men aren't going to make it out unscathed. It could be seen as wiser to send in an asymmetrically large team to deal with what you are going up against, just to make it less likely for one of your people to be hurt or killed.

Unscathed?
It, sort of, depends upon the men.

That is not the point.
You are using the language of War.
Why?

The Police in the US rarely come up against 46 armed and prepared men.
If the Wing-Nut Rancher story is True, the Gov't will back down.

If you are Not armed and dangerous, they you might look like Profit.
Easy fucking Profit.

It's not Really profit if the Money stays inside Gov't Agencies.
It sure looks like Profit when a man's paycheck doubles for two day's work.


From what I have had explained to me, the US has been reorganized to funnel profit Up and Out of Public Control.
The People Love the Idea. I hear it on the Lips of Many. "Fucking Gov't can't do AnyThing Right."


I have no idea how to respond.
To one man I said, "You are Right! The Job isn't getting done! It's Your Job!"
He was Sooo mad at me. I was able to walk away.

Mumbling.
"By The People. Of The People. For The People.
My Fat Ass. Have You Met The People?"

I have moments.
Don't we all?

There are moments when I would have every person that cashes a Gov't paycheck take a test, before they pick up their paycheck.
Yes. You can do the Physical Labor of your Job. You work for the Fucking Government, AssHole. Take a Test! You better Pass!!

You Must conform to a Higher Standard than the Oligarchy's Minions!
You Work for the Government. You take tests every week.

You Pass or As a Professional You Die.
There is a Test for Cleaning the Loo.

Do you think Eight out of Ten of the Uniformed Goons can pass the Cleaning of the Loo test?
It might be interesting. I know from Clean. I would not take that test without reading the book.

Those AssHoles should be Registered and Performing well In Classes!
Not only inside their Own Departments! Talk about an EchoChamber!

You used the language of War.

Who is at War?
Against?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Chen
Posts: 5579
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Chen » Thu May 01, 2014 7:21 pm UTC



In an update he was found guilty of premeditated murder and sentenced to life without parole.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/min ... der-n93166

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1107
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Coyne » Fri May 02, 2014 1:25 am UTC

Chen wrote:


In an update he was found guilty of premeditated murder and sentenced to life without parole.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/min ... der-n93166

And here I thought Stand your Ground was like a vaccine. Guess it doesn't cure everything.
In all fairness...

Drumheller769
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 7:46 pm UTC
Location: ♞♞♞

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Drumheller769 » Fri May 02, 2014 1:24 pm UTC

On one hand...the kids shouldn't have been breaking and entering, specially the crazy old guys house, repeatedly. On the other...rigging your basement steps to drop them into a pit of moldy cheese that they cant climb out of would have been a far more reasonable response than what he did.
The Great Hippo wrote:Arguing with the internet is a lot like arguing with a bullet. The internet's chief exports are cute kittens, porn, and Reasons Why You Are Completely Fucking Wrong.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Fri May 02, 2014 1:36 pm UTC

Stand Your Ground only applies if you are actually attacked. It basically means that when your life or limb is in danger if you don't retreat, you aren't required to retreat. Basically, you are always considered to be in a corner. The castle doctrine is Stand Your Ground but only in your home, because that's where you retreat TO.

The problem is all these nutjobs who cream their pants at the idea of shooting an intruder, because their life is an action movie.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ahammel » Fri May 02, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

I must say I'm relieved to know that if you happen to injure somebody who's trying to burgle your house, it's still illegal in Michigan to execute them.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri May 02, 2014 2:38 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Stand Your Ground only applies if you are actually attacked. It basically means that when your life or limb is in danger if you don't retreat, you aren't required to retreat. Basically, you are always considered to be in a corner. The castle doctrine is Stand Your Ground but only in your home, because that's where you retreat TO.

The problem is all these nutjobs who cream their pants at the idea of shooting an intruder, because their life is an action movie.


Right. Lack of Stand Your Ground is known as Duty To Retreat. In short, if a person tries to kill you, you have to try to flee, and avoid them without, yknow, hurting them. Because basing legal guidelines off the Comics Code or whatever is a good idea.

Stand Your Ground is just what most people think of when they say Self Defense. It has been villified by people who say it does mean, or should mean more...but it really doesn't.

Drumheller769 wrote:On one hand...the kids shouldn't have been breaking and entering, specially the crazy old guys house, repeatedly. On the other...rigging your basement steps to drop them into a pit of moldy cheese that they cant climb out of would have been a far more reasonable response than what he did.


For sure. If the kids were alive, I'm sure they'd be duly convicted of breaking and entering. That doesn't really mitigate his actions, though. He didn't need to do that. There's no danger from someone bleeding on the ground.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby sardia » Fri May 02, 2014 2:48 pm UTC

ahammel wrote:I must say I'm relieved to know that if you happen to injure somebody who's trying to burgle your house, it's still illegal in Michigan to execute them.

How would the NRA set up the trap to shoot the burglars? Less taunting and calling the cops faster? Lying in wait for burgulers isn't inherently bad. I'm assuming one would not intend to break the law while stopping a crime.
If he had shot eac of them in one attempt instead of pausing. Would he have gone free? Excuse the errors. On phone

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Heisenberg » Fri May 02, 2014 4:18 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Lying in wait for burgulers isn't inherently bad.

Yes it is.

Drumheller769
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 7:46 pm UTC
Location: ♞♞♞

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Drumheller769 » Fri May 02, 2014 4:51 pm UTC

The recording and taunting did him in.

The following sounds to me like a probably situation that a normal gun owning homeowner might experience during a break in:

Its not unreasonable to assume a homeowner, upon hearing a door forced open or a window breaking might grab a gun and try to surprise the intruder. Its also not unreasonable that if they claim the intruder made a threatening motion and it appeared that they had a gun (in a dark low visibility situation) that they then chose to shoot first. But in recording it and taunting them he has no leg to stand on. The multiple gunshots could also be explained if the intruder had a gun, or looked like they had a gun, and if the homeowner shoots them in the leg or somewhere else non lethal, then the intruder might still try to shoot back, so the multiple shots were ensuring his safety.


But yea, laying a trap, recording it and taunting the intruders totally doesn't make you look like your in danger.
The Great Hippo wrote:Arguing with the internet is a lot like arguing with a bullet. The internet's chief exports are cute kittens, porn, and Reasons Why You Are Completely Fucking Wrong.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri May 02, 2014 6:19 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
ahammel wrote:I must say I'm relieved to know that if you happen to injure somebody who's trying to burgle your house, it's still illegal in Michigan to execute them.

How would the NRA set up the trap to shoot the burglars? Less taunting and calling the cops faster? Lying in wait for burgulers isn't inherently bad. I'm assuming one would not intend to break the law while stopping a crime.
If he had shot eac of them in one attempt instead of pausing. Would he have gone free? Excuse the errors. On phone


It's the taunting AND the execution. It's pretty hard to claim you were afraid for your life when your actual words sound more like "Wee, I get to kill people", and it's REALLY hard to justify walking back to execute helpless people as "self defense".

There's nothing inherently wrong with defending yourself from a burglary...that's not the problem here.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eSOANEM » Sat May 03, 2014 12:16 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:There's nothing inherently wrong with defending yourself from a burglary...that's not the problem here.


I take issue with this statement.

There isn't anything wrong with protecting yourself from the threat of violence, but conflating that with theft or other crimes leads to dangerous implications. Even a thief's life is worth more than a tv and killing them is unwarranted if there was never any threat to your person.

If, on the other hand, a guy tries to mug a karate black belt and gets his arse handed to him then, well, he had it coming.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby yurell » Sat May 03, 2014 1:33 am UTC

Drumheller769 wrote:Its not unreasonable to assume a homeowner, upon hearing a door forced open or a window breaking might grab a gun and try to surprise the intruder.


That's the assumption that makes American culture seem so weird to me.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Sat May 03, 2014 3:13 am UTC

yurell wrote:
Drumheller769 wrote:Its not unreasonable to assume a homeowner, upon hearing a door forced open or a window breaking might grab a gun and try to surprise the intruder.


That's the assumption that makes American culture seem so weird to me.


Are you from a city? Because out in the backwoods, police response time is next morning. When you have a hungry brown bear in your yard, you can't throw your wallet at it. You can't talk down a rabid coyote. There are places where if you don't have a gun, you're a fool.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby ahammel » Sat May 03, 2014 3:15 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
yurell wrote:
Drumheller769 wrote:Its not unreasonable to assume a homeowner, upon hearing a door forced open or a window breaking might grab a gun and try to surprise the intruder.


That's the assumption that makes American culture seem so weird to me.


Are you from a city? Because out in the backwoods, police response time is next morning. When you have a hungry brown bear in your yard, you can't throw your wallet at it. There are places where if you don't have a gun, you're a fool.
The weird part for me is not that the homeowner might be armed, but that the armed homeowner might try to surprise the burglar.

Really, what the hell is the point of that? Surely the better tactic would be to loudly advertise your presence and the fact that you're armed in hopes that the burglar goes away without having to be shot.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10546
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Sat May 03, 2014 3:18 am UTC

I'll agree with that. The sound of a shotgun pumping from a few rooms over is usually all you need.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby LaserGuy » Sat May 03, 2014 3:35 am UTC

The barking of a large dog works well too. Or a bear. If you have a pet bear.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests