And some day... it will be you. by Fremdfirma

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

And some day... it will be you.

POSTED BY: FREMDFIRMA
UPDATED: Monday, October 22, 2007 19:45
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1600
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, October 22, 2007 4:53 AM

Just imagine how these people felt, having a bunch of obnoxious hoo-rah jackboots swarm down upon them and then cuff them with the obligatory roughing up.

Just imagine how badly it COULD have gone, had the homeowner been a gun owner and responded armed to what he thought was a burglary in progess.

Just imagine.. it happening to YOU.

Cause one day, some day, it could be you.

And contrary to the opinion of some folk here, the folks on the recieving end are *not* always guilty, always deserving, of the abuse meted out by the apparatus of the State.

Most folks are going to lay blame on the hacker, and sure hell he deserves it, but the State apparatus of abuse was laying around for him to use in the first place, and their arrogance and paranoia make them easy to exploit in this fashion.

You think about that a while.

==============
Couple Swarmed by SWAT Team After 911 'Hack'

A Washington State teenager is facing 18 years in prison on charges that he used his PC to access Orange County, California's 911 emergency response system and convinced the sheriff's department into storming an area couple's home with a heavily armed SWAT team.

Randall Ellis, 19, of Mulkiteo, Washington is not only facing charges of unauthorized computer access, but he's also facing assault charges by proxy, meaning that authorities want Ellis to be convicted as if he, and not the SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) team, pointed weapons at the victims.

The incident took place late in the evening of March 29, when Ellis allegedly used his computer to call the Orange County 911 dispatch and, during the course of a 38-minute telephone conversation, convinced dispatchers that he had murdered someone on the premises and was about to do it again.

Within minutes, fire, police and a helicopter team had been dispatched to the home of the Lake Forest, California couple, whom authorities declined to identify.

"They surrounded the home, inside were a husband and wife and their two toddlers," said Farrah Emami, a spokeswoman with the Orange County District Attorney's office. "The husband heard rustling outside of his home and believed it to be a prowler. he took a knife and went into the backyard. Instead of finding a prowler he found a SWAT team pointing assault rifles at him."

"It really easily could have escalated into an innocent person being killed," she added. "We're lucky that they didn't shoot him."

Emami characterized Ellis as a "computer hacker," but declined to explain exactly how the attack was carried out. "One of the reasons that we're not disclosing exactly how he did it is because we don't want to teach other computer hackers how to do it," she said.

Still, it's not clear that Ellis's alleged hack involved anything more complicated than tricking the 911 system into thinking he was calling from the Lake Forest couple's number. County officials said Wednesday that he did not exploit a technical flaw in the 911 system's software.

The technique that Ellis used "doesn't require any special skills," said Jim Amormino, [cq] a spokesman with the Orange County Sheriff's Department. "The way he did it: I am not computer savvy, but I can do it."

The March 29 incident cost the county an estimated US$18,000, Amormino said.

Low-cost calling card services such as SpoofCard have been available for years, allowing customers to make it appear that their calls are coming from any number they wish.

In June, four people were charged in Texas with operating a chat line where they taught people how to make false 911 calls, sending emergency response teams to targeted victims, a practice known as "swatting." In a June 12 swatting incident, a swatter called up Cleburne, Texas's 911 dispatch using a commercially available spoof card and Skype and then "stated that he had shot and killed members of the family, that he was holding hostages, that he was using hallucinogenic drugs, that he was armed with an AK-47, and he demanded $50,00 and transportation across the U.S. border to Mexico," according to court filings.

Authorities said that Ellis had made nearly 200 fake 911 calls to dispatch systems in California, Arizona, Washington, and Pennsylvania.

He is set to be arraigned Monday in Santa Ana, Calif.
=================

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 5:17 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Hey frem,

I'm in agreement with you, that just because the cops are the authority, it doesn't make them right, and that it paints a cloudy picture of what you are within your rights to do if ever invaded by a police presence in your own home, however suicidal that right might be,

but absent of a better understanding of what police could have done here, I can't see where they acted improperly.

It may be uncommon, but hostage situations occur, kidnappings occur, and it is for these rare circumstances that we should have something like swat, at least in theory. If somebody has numbers about successes versus failures for this agency of our public "security" then maybe I'll change my mind.

Whether the operator who took the call overreacted, or didn't pick up on signs that this was an illegitimate call, might be a question, but even if this person had had doubts, to not act and be wrong here could have been disasterous as well, perhaps.

The kid was stupid, and that action was reckless, and was a large part of the danger he put his family in. 18 years is harsh and sickening for stupidity that didn't end in any major tragedy, but an abuse of the emergency system shouldn't be tolerated lightly either.

Still, aside from a frightening experience and probably a fine of some sort, or community service, I don't see why this kid should get locked up. Granted, he apparently has a history of making these calls.

.....

What's your take about what the cops should have done, if anything?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 5:40 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

So, Fremd, what should the police have done? Nothing? Send a Candy-Gram?

On another note, if you heard what you thought was prowlers outside in the dark, would you pick up a knife and go outside looking for them?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 7:20 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Little punks like this who hack websites and/or create viruses derserve the maximum jail time allowable. All they do is cost companies millions of dollars, and ruin the internet for everyone else.

It's one thing to wonder "if I can"...but it's quite another to wonder "if I should". These people don't think of the consequences of their actions....and they don't care either.

He'll soon learn some valuable life lessons in prison....mainly how to protect his ass. Hope he has fun...LOL

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 8:16 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

maximum jail time allowable? You don't believe people should ever be able to make a mistake, even a big one, and not pay for it the rest of their lives? No redemption in your eyes? 19 year old kid does something because he doesn't really understand the impact of what he's doing, and you say throw the book at him.

Maybe when we get really efficient at catching people for their youthful indiscretions, everybody will have jail time in common.

The kid fucked up. Nobody died. The world would not be a better place for locking him up. This country would be worse for it, frankly. We already have the most bloated prison industry in the world, and that is a disgraceful fact.

Hell, we are the only country in the world that refused to join an agreement that we will not jail underage criminals for life. How did we sink so low?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 8:50 AM

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
maximum jail time allowable? You don't believe people should ever be able to make a mistake, even a big one, and not pay for it the rest of their lives? No redemption in your eyes? 19 year old kid does something because he doesn't really understand the impact of what he's doing, and you say throw the book at him.

But this isn't his first indiscretion. I guess he didn't learn his lesson the first 'few' times. It might also set a precedent to deter future hackers from doing the same thing.
This guy knowingly endangered innocent lives while abusing an emergency system and needlessly tying up police resources. Not like he was caught shoplifting or some such. And 18 seems to be considered 'adult' age meaning ability to take the consequences of your actions. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 9:01 AM

FREMDFIRMA

"So, Fremd, what should the police have done? Nothing? Send a Candy-Gram?"

Send a damn uniform to politely knock on the door and confirm the call, and yes there is a risk, but goddamn it if they're too scared to do their job, then they can find a new career.

Have the SWAT crew on standby behind him, so if the call is "Live" they can respond immediately to the situation... but can also stand down without risk or damage if it is a miscommunication or a bogus.

In ALL cases, the ambiguity and danger of innocent deaths is reduced significantly by having a uniformed officer knock on the door politely and confirm the situation - when they go protecting themselves at risk to the citizenry, the message that they send is that their lives are more important than those of the people they signed up to protect; in essence, they're the lords and we're the peons, and that mindset has calcified into "us vs them", cause most cops view noncops as a perp waitin to happen these days.

They are employed to protect us, not protect themselves at our risk and expense, and we did not voluntarily sign up to put our lives on the line, they did.

That goes for no-knock/dynamic entry as well, every time they do it, they defile their intent, serving and protecting themselves at risk and expense of the very lives they *claim* to be protecting.

No, it's not "OK" for them to risk our lives to protect their own, it's cowardice of the worst order, since as a rule the citizenry is not armed, armored, doesn't have the backup and resources they do, nor the training - so they can damned well assume the risks they are paid to take, and milk the living hell out of public sympathy for taking (when in fact, they do not) or they can find a different damned job.

Acting like human beings instead of aggressive apes would be a freakin start.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

PS - EDIT, to add a link for Righteous.
This is an interactive map of botched raids of this type, and of course, only the ones reported, that can be proved beyond all doubt.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 9:14 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Frem,

I'll take your word for the uniformed officer knocking first. If that tends to reduce disasters, then by all means, there is no excuse for that not being policy, and I would feel safer in my home for it, not less safe.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 10:23 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Just imagine how these people felt, having a bunch of obnoxious hoo-rah jackboots swarm down upon them and then cuff them with the obligatory roughing up.

Just imagine how badly it COULD have gone, had the homeowner been a gun owner and responded armed to what he thought was a burglary in progess.

Or, imagine your in your house and a person breaks in and shoots your wife and one of your kids. He calls the police and tells them he's going to kill again, perhaps you or another kid.

The cops wait...because they don't want to over react. Your last thought...'what's taking the police so long'?

I note for the record that the teenager was arrested and is facing 18 years in prison.

Nobody got killed, just scared a bit.

Hmm...police get report of man killing people, they respond and find man with knife...guess you'd expect them to ask him to tea, perhaps discuss the weather, even offer to let him cut the throat of...how many would be fair...two, three policmen before requesting in a kind voice to please lower the weapon. Reminds me of that scene in 'Demolition Man' where the politically correct cops get their butts kicked by Wesley Snipes.

Please.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 10:33 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Hero, until you can bring back the dead innocents the police have murdered during these types of hoo-rah jackass raids, shut the fuck up.

How bout actually re-legalizing self-defense, yes ?

The cops, like the fire dept, cannot camp in front of your house to protect you, nor should they - I have a fire extinguisher to handle matters or assist my escape till the fire department gets there, but oh the horror of having a firearm or *gasp* actually daring to USE one, oh the humanity, while you speed-dial 911 to call in the cavalry with your left hand.

The police cannot protect folk 24-7-365 and it's downright ludicious to even try, folk have to take some responsibility for themselves, curse it, and assholes like YOU need to get the fuck off their case when they wind up in court because they did so.

In your little world, the wife or kid lying dead is a more satisfactory result than the perp lying dead with four of the homeowners bullets in him, and as such, your opinion means jack diddly shit to me, cause you'd be the one sending his ass up the river for daring to take responsibility for his own life and defense, instead of bowing to you (face it, asshole) liberal-communist mommy-state agenda.

If pissants like you didn't fuck us out of every right to self-defend, we would not NEED those SWAT goons in the first fucking place.

-Frem
"No, I am not going to be nice, being nice is what got us here, and nice isn't going to climb us back up the slippery slope."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 10:35 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Send a damn uniform to politely knock on the door and confirm the call, and yes there is a risk, but goddamn it if they're too scared to do their job, then they can find a new career.

Have the SWAT crew on standby behind him, so if the call is "Live" they can respond immediately to the situation... but can also stand down without risk or damage if it is a miscommunication or a bogus.

This could very well have been the plan. Read the article you quoted. The homeowner went out into the yard with a knife while the police were moving into position. Sort'a precludes knocking on the door, don't you think?.

Also, no mention in the article of "dynamic entry", "handcuffing", or "roughing up". These are assumptions on your part.

Police may take an oath to 'protect and serve' or some such, but that doesn't mean they should be required to be totally stupid about risking their lives.

I know you got problems with the police in general, but I really don't see much else they could have done in this situation.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 11:16 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Oh please, TELL me they didn't cuff em, yeah right.

If they hadn't practically tripped over the guy in the back yard, you can bet your booty those pumped up hoo-rahs were gonna go dynamic, too.

And with all the adrenalin rush of the situation, it's a fair bet they were pretty cursed rough about it.

Empirical evidence is not assumption, calling something based on literally hundreds of event reports is not assumption - it is a logical conclusion.

If you have a goldfish that turned left 90 times out of a hundred, and you didn't see it turn, you'd be pretty damn sure it turned left when you weren't watching.

The conduct of these goons is a matter of public record, go do your homework.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 11:43 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Here ya go, a nice list of these "isolated incidents".... and related conduct.

Several papers and orgs have conducted their own research as well, much of which is linked in that long list.

http://www.theagitator.com/archives/cat_paramilitary_police_raids.php

A pattern of abusive behavior is undeniably clear.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 1:12 PM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Hero, until you can bring back the dead innocents the police have murdered during these types of hoo-rah jackass raids, shut the fuck up.

Well, there you have it. Another logical and well reasoned argument. Have you ever considered that I CAN bring back the dead innocents? Tell you what, you show me a dead innocent, I'll bring them back...if they don't come back...they were not innocent. Ta daaa...I also do kids parties and weddings.

Quote:

How bout actually re-legalizing self-defense, yes ?

Ok, done. Poof. You can now defend yourself against unlawful folk. If you shoot a cop lawfully executing a warrant...well I'll make it my business to teach you the meaning of "lawfully exectuting".

Quote:

In your little world, the wife or kid lying dead is a more satisfactory result than the perp lying dead with four of the homeowners bullets in him, and as such, your opinion means jack diddly shit to me, cause you'd be the one sending his ass up the river for daring to take responsibility for his own life and defense, instead of bowing to you (face it, asshole) liberal-communist mommy-state agenda.

A dead wife and kid is not your goal, mine, or the police. In this case...and we are talking about this case, the police had a call from the killer saying he had killed and was going to kill again. At that point the homeowners right to defend himself is kinda a side issue. I don't think the police should stop and say, "well, lets see if this one works itself out". You have every right to defend yourself, the police have more then the right...they have the duty.

Quote:

If pissants like you didn't fuck us out of every right to self-defend, we would not NEED those SWAT goons in the first fucking place.

Those guys are cool. We sent out a SWAT raid this morning. Busted a drug lab with wanted felons and automatic weapons. I'm sure you'd prefer to head over there with your .38 and good intentions to back you up. I prefer twelve heavily armed men executing a precision operation. I think we're just different that way.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 1:18 PM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
The cops, like the fire dept, cannot camp in front of your house to protect you, nor should they - I have a fire extinguisher to handle matters

"9-11 emergency."
"Yes, my house is on fire, HELP!"
"I'm sorry Mr. firma, our records show you have a fire extinguisher...your on your own."
"But your truck is right across the street!"
"I'm sorry, they are camped out in front of your neighbor's house protecting them. Have a nice day."

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 2:05 PM

MAZAEN

Frem, interesting question.

Quote:
Send a damn uniform to politely knock on the door and confirm the call

I think the police department probably has procedures written out that they follow for hostage situations. Procedures are usually carefully considered procedures based on past experiences are a balance between law and order and civil liberties. Procedures provide the best chance of a good outcome and they don't always provide a good outcome.

As the computer was hacked, the information coming in suggesting hostages probably might not have been an anonymous call. It could have been that he filled in the dispatch for the policeman to go to the house? New technology + new idiots scenario's probably haven't been dealt with before so give them a chance to learn. How was the computer hacked and what happened is probably important to know.

I think that the balance was achieved in this hostage situation and it wasn't a case of police having cowboy behavior like you think. Ask yourself would you be willing to knock on a door while an armed gunman held hostages and had just killed a hostage? Commonsense says to me that that risk of the policeman being killed is too high. I have been in a firebrigade and the level of risk is important. Policemen probably also consider that risk.

I would prefer a balance and highly trained police protecting me by rarely storming into my home compared to the police hesitating and my family were killed. Then to lock up the really leader behind the fake hostage incident who is that dangerous irresponsible teenager.

Quote:
19 year old kid does something because he doesn't really understand the impact of what he's doing, and you say throw the book at him.

A 19 year old, is completely aware of their actions. A 19 year old is not a child although obviously it is possible for adults to be treated like a child well into their 60's. Some 60 year old's I know still get discliplined by their mothers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 2:48 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
He'll soon learn some valuable life lessons in prison....mainly how to protect his ass. Hope he has fun...LOL

Yeah, he needs to spend a few years with some dudes that can show him why the police send SWAT teams out, because he obviously doesn't get it.

Actually that might be a good exercise for Frem too. Maybe when they both find themselves in a secluded room with a bunch of tattooed dudes named "Ben Dover" they’ll both wish they had some of that “State apparatus of abuse.”

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 4:44 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Maz, if the uniform had a SWAT team at the curb waiting his signal, the difference would be fairly negligable - AND he would have a chance to de-escalate the situation, or provide direct intel to the SWAT guys if their use was warranted by the situation.

Sure, the uniform up front is taking a risk, but that's a risk he's paid to take, he agreed to take, and has no right to shove off on ME.

And he just *might* be able to chill the situation, which is not an option otherwise cause a dyanmic entry is gonna guarantee the perp starts pulling the trigger immediately.

And if you read the link I posted, you'll see that in a substantially high percentage of dynamic entry raids, innocent people are killed.

You should not HAVE to hesitate to determine whether the pack of folk bashing down your door at 3 in the morning is a bunch of drugged up home invaders, or the local police with a wrong address warrant - and you damned sure should not have to worry about the legal repercussions of firing on them.

This is a direct result of vilifying self defense and personal responsibility, when you give another the power to do something FOR you, never forget that you are also giving them the power to do it TO you.

And the conduct and commentary of our resident jackboots is creepy enough in and of itself, their swastikas are showing through the whitewash, it seems - starting to wonder myself if they don't yank it to photos from Abu Gharib, given their rabid embrace of such conduct without question of it's use or legitimacy.

I may not like the police, but at the very cursed least I want them to do the job we pay them for - if the guy you hire to mow your lawn mows your flowerbeds instead and damages you fence joyriding your mower, does he get a free pass for his conduct ?

They need to revise and re-evaluate an obviously failed set of policies and procedures before more people, police and citizens, get hurt.

As for the kid, make USE of him, put him on close supervision parole (yes, I said parole, not probation), and make it a condition thereof that he must come up with an effective solution to the security problems he exploited, and don't let him off till he does... he broke it, make him fix it, and in the doing, given that he would be working with the department and the 911 system, he might also be given the full taste of just what an awful thing his actions caused.

Throwing him in jail might be an object lesson, but it doesn't solve the problem.

-Frem

Mucho thanks to Oleg Volk for the image.
http://www.olegvolk.net/gallery/technology/arms/whoisthis2_0124. jpg.html
(Spaced to avoid direct link)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 7:08 PM

RIGHTEOUS9

a 19 year old kid is not legally a child...it doesn't mean he's mature enough to get what he's doing...fucking a, too many 19 year olds I meet don't have a clue what the world's about. That isn't something that we should ignore, but throwing the book at everybody who fucks up isn't a solution. So you finally have a kid who learned a lesson, and you waste that lesson by throwing him in the slammer for 18 years!...brilliant logic that. Everybody is still alive. Resources were wasted, yeah.

But the kid does me no good in jail. That just wastes more of our fucking money. Picking up cans on the street, or talking to kids in a class, that would be something more valuable.

And then there's the ever present possibility that the kid is damaged, that he's not right in the head, and needs help, not jail time.

You just have to ask yourself what the fuck you think jail is about. Me, I think jail is a sad neccessity because I want to keep people who are likely to do harm to me and others from doing so. Sending this kid away doesn't satisfy that need for me. I don't think this kid is likely to make a crank call like this one again, not after the heat that was brought down on him.

Maybe other people are just ffing angry at him for what harm he could have caused, or the money he wasted or the danger he put people in, and they think of jail as punishment, as payment.

Well it aint paying off shit, and I'm not interested in dispensing punishment, except as a deterrent. Now for a crime like murder, maybe 6 months to a year isn't enough of a deterrent that you won't kill some mother fucker you really hate(I don't know), but for making a phone call, 6 months seems almost like overkill. 18 years...that's cruel and unusual.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 7:35 PM

MAZAEN

Frem

Quote:
if the guy you hire to mow your lawn mows your flowerbeds instead and damages you fence joyriding your mower, does he get a free pass for his conduct ?

Sure I would expect a person who mowed my lawn to do his job. I would expect him to follow usual procedures, but if my cat gets in the way and causes him to go through the fence to avoid it, I would not blame the lawnmower person.

Quote:
Throwing him in jail might be an object lesson, but it doesn't solve the problem.

Your right about jail not solving problems. Intervention in the form of education or good parenting when the teenager was a child would have been the answer. Jail is for the victims of crime and the community to feel safer. Jail is not for criminals at all.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2007 7:45 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
But the kid does me no good in jail. That just wastes more of our fucking money. Picking up cans on the street, or talking to kids in a class, that would be something more valuable.

I’m a proponent of labor camps. I’ll trade 18 years sitting around for 18 cleaning up sewers or something. I’ll even sweeten the deal – we can let some of the kids in jail for possession of marijuana go.

I don’t think some of you are even bothering to contemplate the seriousness of this. What this kid did qualifies as terrorism. This stunt could have ended up with a whole family dead.

Even still, this kid’s age does work in his favor. If he could put on a good enough show of remorse then I might be persuaded to go easy on him were it my decision, but if he’s not a good enough actor, I would slam the door shut and leave him with the rats.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE