Authorities brought 20 police cars, five SWAT officers, and drones to her house

https://www.twitch.tv/grammacrackers/clip/CharmingSolidNoodleKevinTurtle-CCpMMy7EX_W4v7_S

update: Found this video from local news https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGeb3cuqLxE

top 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 344 points 5 months ago (22 children)

you have to be one sick twisted individual to be swatting a person, let alone a freaking elderly woman

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 271 points 5 months ago (17 children)

    While she's trying to raise money for her grandkid's cancer treatment, no less.

    Seriously, fuck whoever did this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 144 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    And fuck who ever supports a system that results in this..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    With cancer even with places that do have socialized medical care you might still need a lot of money.

    Cancer sucks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I agree cancer sucks, but how do you need money? There is no fee to access healthcare here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    You get care that is covered, there might still be some drugs and experimental treatments that isn't. This is because there's still no actual cure for cancer.

    This is why you still can see people collecting money for treatments even when they have socialized medical care.

    When your cancer can be treated with already approved treatments then you are golden otherwise you do suffer similarly.

    This is not attack on socialized medical care, you are still better than no care, you might still get radiation, chemotherapy etc, it is more attack on situation cancer can create.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 63 points 5 months ago* (10 children)

    Dark thought, what if a supporter did it, 'cuz that kid is definitely getting their treatment paid for now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    She couldve died, they frequently shoot innocent people and animals during these raids

    Swatting is fucked up

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    The most fucked up thing is that SWAT teams keep falling for it. What fucking information did they have that warranted this level of a response? How the fuck is someone not fired every time this happens?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Why do you think that? Do they mention some kind of payout in the video? It sounds unlikely to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    They didn’t say THAT HAPPENED FOR SURE, they said β€œdark thought”

    You’re allowed to post random thoughts on the internet

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    If I'm allowed to post thoughts on the internet then why are you yelling at me?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    I didn’t yell, I capitalized part of my comment for effect. You can to that on the internet, too! You can also take people’s comments out of context, like you did, but then you’re liable to incur the wrath of some twat correcting you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 133 points 5 months ago (12 children)

    This happens frequently enough where you'd think there would be a system in place to prevent this type of abuse.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] 21 points 5 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago* (5 children)

    they now are responsible for potentially more victims.

    No they are not. Multiple court cases have exonerated police for failing to respond or not responding quickly enough. See: Uvalde (among many others).

    They are trying to play it both ways: not responsible but also must respond in the most over-the-top aggressive manner possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 5 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    There is Federal precedent on this, actually

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    This story is about the U.S. and very distinct aspects of our society (notably our healthcare system and our policing), hence the context of my comment is about the U.S.

    Grandmothers in other nations would not have to live stream Minecraft to raise money for their grandchild's cancer treatment.

    "Yabbut other nations" isn't going to cut it here because you absolutely 100% know that it is irrelevant to the discussion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    I'm not talking about Europe though. I am talking about the U.S.

    Even in your original comment, the part about Europe was an "aside" in parenthesis, not the main part of the comment. A footnote, as it were. We aren't going to divert the conversation over a footnote when the actual article and main content of your comment outside the parenthesis pertains to the U.S.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    nice that you know better what I meant than me.

    This isn't about knowledge, this about staying on the subject vs trying to be pedantic and thinking that you have some sort of clever gotcha. Sorry, but that doesn't work on me.

    Will let you know when I need your services again

    This doesn't even make sense. I'm not offering any services.

    It's time for you to take the "L" and move on. Bye!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -1 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    The world outside the US exists.

    And this article is about the U.S. very specifically.

    You lost, move on. Thanks! Any further comments will be reported as spam

    Edit: couldn't resist one more comment, could you. Reported as promised, and added to my block list

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    It's the ol' "boy who cried wolf" situation. You probably don't want public services like police and firefighters deciding which calls seem real or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    K but there has to be some happy medium between 20 swat cars and showing up 2 hours after the pizza driver.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    It's really easy to say that when you're not the one calling the police because there's an actual madman with a gun holding your loved one hostage. I think it's a tough situation that, really, has more to do with the overall culture in America than how emergency services respond to particular calls. If the overall level of potential danger was lower due to cultural reasons, I think then we could talk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 5 months ago

    Showing up with 20 swat cars doesn't mean that there's 20 swat cars blindly shooting at the house.

    There's no harm on just showing up. As long as they verify the claims before acting on them, I don't see the issue.

    The only issue is that it is expensive and may break a door or something. Which is why the caller should be tracked, and made to pay for all of it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 115 points 5 months ago* (15 children)

    Takes a special kind of asshole to swat a little old lady for trying to host a wholesome gaming stream for a good cause.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 102 points 5 months ago (12 children)

    The fact that swating still happens just proves how much of a joke policing is in general. The fact that you can get a bunch of gun-wielding adrenaline junkies to show up somewhere, frothing at the mouth for violence, in the most spurious of ways is a damning indictment for the whole institution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    I still believe that "defund the police", is the correct choice. The whole damn thing has to go.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    If you don't have someone authorized by the state to enforce laws, you're still going to get people enforcing "laws", it's just going to be vigilantes, people with grudges, etc. Just look how frequently you see incidents of road rage. Cops basically exist to prevent people from taking revenge into their own hands.

    Take all those incidents of people calling the cops on black men having a picnic or taking their dogs for a walk. If there were no cops, do you think these white "Karens" would just leave the black men alone? Or do you think they'd get together and lynch them?

    I think the US needs to scale its policing way back. It needs mental health specialists to respond to certain kinds of calls. The person who responds to a report of a stolen bike probably shouldn't have a gun. But, at some point you are going to need people who will use physical force to enforce the law. Those people should be heavily supervised by a truly independent body. But, they still need to exist in some form.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Cops basically exist to prevent people from taking revenge into their own hands.

    No, cops exist to protect capital.

    This is just one example too, they've issued multiple similar rulings. Also, uh, see: Uvalde.

    If there were no cops, do you think these white β€œKarens” would just leave the black men alone? Or do you think they’d get together and lynch them?

    ...you think cops keep black people safe? Are you being remotely serious here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah for people downvoting this, cops being a problem is largely an American thing. In many other places around the world they are actually beneficial.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Weird how many videos I've seen of German police beating anti-genocide protestors and British police arresting seniors for expressing anti-genocide opinions. Maybe that was just an American psyop.

    White supremacy is the problem, and America may have the worst case of that, but certainly not the only case.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

    Yeah, this is what a lot of people fail to take into account when it comes to the purpose of policing in society. There's obviously a lot of inherent problems with the way the police are structured in many countries as a whole, but to believe that we can just make do without something like them altogether is pretty shortsighted to say the least. I think that prevents a lot of otherwise sympathetic people from taking the backlash against police institutions seriously.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Yea it's funny how they just angry downvote, and if they reply at all, they don't really respond to the points. Who will do the fucking policing if there's no police??? There will always be people who need to be forcefully stopped from what they're doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    I think the idea generally is to replace the police with social welfare programs and unarmed crisis responders, but that’s jumping through so many hoops that it just sounds way too simplistic tbh. It sounds practical, but it treats the problem like it’s something that can be improved with just a few institutions reforming/being abolished.

    There’s never been a society without some form of justice system since cruelty is a part of human nature, and at this point these systems are far too intertwined and embedded in our societies for them to change dramatically without some form of societal collapse or retraction.

    Idealism is well and good but the things many want in place of police institutions seem like they’re ignoring how complex and non-specific the issues are as a whole. It’s definitely not a one size fits all situation, especially with how many factors there are. People can disagree with me but I’d prefer to hear why at least, there are probably things I’m not considering here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 89 points 5 months ago (31 children)

    Confused european here - why?

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Its called swatting. You call police and say someone is dangerous and they come running with all the gear to justify the bloated budgets. Kids were doing this pretty often in the news a decade ago. Especially to streamers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    It never stopped btw. This has been a constant and consistent issue for well over a decade, it rarely ever makes "the news".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    It's an American thing. The goal is to hopefully use the police to kill the streamer since police often are skittish and tend to shoot first before verifying what is going on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Why don't people send police to the white house and houses of CEOs on a cooldown?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    Why don't the king's guards attack the king?

    The police know their job is to enforce the law, but they also know who gets a free pass... or at least who gets a lot more leeway than other people. At a minimum it changes "shoot first and ask questions later" into "ask questions then maybe shoot".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 52 points 5 months ago* (13 children)

    Since guns are handed out in America like chocolate at a Willy Wonka publicity and outreach campaign, every law enforcement agency has to be kitted out to potentially combat a barricaded suspect who can rain a small militia's worth of lead on them and their surroundings. That's why the response team often includes armored vehicles, snipers, and crayon munchers armed to the tits. And because abusing emergency services doesn't cut into the profit of any big corporations, there are no effective means to seek justice against the offenders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    abusing emergency services

    I don't understand - someone called the swat team on her? Why would they go to a private house with a giant swat force based solely on some anonymous tip? That makes no sense in my head.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    someone called the swat team on her?

    some anonymous tip

    That's not what happened. Someone called 911 and described a situation that involved a shooter who has already shot someone. The 911 operator then had to relay that to the responders (in this case, LE). The responding officers might have only received an address, that there was a barricaded active shooter, and that there was at least one shooting victim.

    It's not up to the police to debate the veracity of a report. Imagine being in a hostage situation, you manage to call 911, and they respond with "sounds fake, not coming".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Okay, but surely upon arriving to said address with a huge swat team and discovering nothing amiss, no panicked people, no gunfire, no anything, their first reaction is to raid the house? The US sure is a strange place.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    You know that shooters have the ability to stay quiet, right? A calm atmosphere doesn't mean there isn't someone who is in imminent danger. Back to the thought exercise: you're a hostage, you call 911, police arrive. Then they wait five minutes and fuck off because nobody's firing at them or shouting threats. Do you think that's reasonable? Wouldn't you want them to breach the house and get you out of the situation?

    It's fucked up that this happened in the first place, but "well, the police should have..." is not how you fix it. Misuse of emergency resources needs to be a federal crime, and doing it to harm another person needs to be investigated and penalized as attempted murder with prison sentence for first time offenders, both as punishment and as a deterrent. But I've seen enough court cases to understand that the US justice system has neither the motivation nor the competence to implement or enforce a law like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    Gunfire would not necessarily panic people in the vicinity. If you are in a suburban setting, surrounded by 6 foot fences separating 2 story houses, a few shots could be mistaken for hammering, some kind of construction project. If I did think there was gunfire, I would go inside, and take shelter, not hang around to talk to cops.

    I would never run toward cops period. They might shoot me.

    I have fired guns and been around guns as they were fired, and I am not confident I would know the difference easily. Plenty of Americans have less experience with firearms than I do.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 5 months ago

    Because they have the equipment and are always looking for an excuse to use it to justify the cost and training. And because the more they use it, the sooner they can get more of it.

    It makes zero sense to a normal person, nor does their justification for needing the equipment in the first place, but once they have it they'll use it any chance they get.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago

    Ever seen Stripes, the '80s action comedy film with Bill Murray and other notables?

    There's a scene in it that I think of every time this kind of story crops up, where you have over-equipped and under-educated people who are trained to think that everyone's the enemy, and so prioritise their blood thirst and fear over everything else:

    "All I know is I finally get to kill somebody!"

    Their actions aren't about right/wrong or just/unjust, but that they were let off the leash to do what they have been conditioned to do.

    So you get people calling in hoaxes to police forces who send militarised forces to raid grannies, young children, whomever. It's about the drama and lulz. Objectively horrifying.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago

    The US has lived in a state where any measure to squash terrorism would never be enough, for a long time. All you have to know is an address and say to the police that you heard a group of Arab looking middle aged men speaking of blowing up a place and a small army would be raised ready raze that domicile to the ground if necessary.

    That's what happens when a group of people is armed beyond reason and in constant paranoia.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Swatting also happens in Europe. I get that were the punching bag right now, but it's not a problem that only happens here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    There is an enormous difference between the conduct of police officers between the US and Europe. Again, it mostly comes down to the public's access to firearms, but the quality of training, institutionalized prejudices, and corrective actions (or the absence of those things) are also significant factors.

    The US is not a punching bag. It's receiving fair criticism and experiencing repercussions for decades of failure to improve public safety, and using both legal mechanisms and populist rhetoric to sanctify gun violence and the persecution of vulnerable groups, leading to a deeply divided, damn near tribal society (Us against Them), and the rise of the American Gestapo under the false banner of immigration control. Be patriotic, absolutely. But patriotism without awareness and due criticism is nothing more than zealotry.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 112 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Reminder that SWAT was created in response to the black panthers. It's a Jim Crow tool for dealing with uppity blacks that know their rights.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί