7 comments

[ 0.24 ms ] story [ 30.7 ms ] thread
> In Seattle, people who believe they are at risk of being swatted can include their information and that of their families on a police registry. When an emergency call about a potential threat comes in, the police check to make sure the home isn’t in the registry. If it is, they call the home first to see if they can reach someone inside, and check with neighbors to see if there are any corroborating reports of shots fired or other disturbances.
Why isn't this SOP?
Yeah it's weird, the article also says that various famous folks (Zuck) are on a flagged list maintained by local police. I guess the innovation here is that anyone can opt into the list.

I wonder if such a system might ever be corrupted by someone for the purpose of slowing down police response. That is, if one gang is planning to attack another gang, could they enter the address of their target on the list, so that police don't respond as quickly (because they're taking time to verify authenticity of the 911 call) when the attack happens.

> [Facebook, Google and Twitter] have asked those employees to take added precautions, such as not publicly giving their whereabouts or listing information about their family.

Ironic.

Another reason for online anonymity.

Police potentially attacking rich people may stop or at least slow police attacking anyone.

Police departments do not need an army.

Even if citizens are armed with assault rifles? Sounds like specialized police to me.

It doesn't mean their primary purpose is responding to the doxes of the mob.

Hope this continues, hopefully one of the tech executives gets shot by a police officer.