http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQCGPVMgJ-M

In today’s Question of the Day, I asked to what depths the civilian disarmament industry could sink to deny Americans their Constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms. Here’s a cautionary tale from arstechnica.com about an incident that went down last Thursday: “It was around 5pm. [security blogger Brian] Krebs, 40, had just finished preparing his home for a small dinner party he had planned for later that evening. While vacuuming his home, his phone rang a few times, but he decided not to answer since he didn’t want to get held up. When he finished, he realized there was still some tape at the entrance of his house where Christmas lights had been. He thought it made sense to remove it before his guests arrived . . .

“As soon as I open the front door, I hear this guy yelling at me, behind a squad car, pointing a pistol at me saying: ‘Don’t move. Put your hands up,'” Krebs, who is a long-time friend and colleague, told me. “The first thing I said was: ‘You’ve got to be kidding me.'”

In all, there were at least a dozen officers with pistols, shotguns, and assault rifles pointed at him. They had police dogs circling his house and cruisers had sealed off a nearby street. Krebs, who was dressed in just gym shorts and a T-shirt, complied. Wisely.

“Two different guys were barking orders at me,” he continued. “I finally said: ‘Which way should I go?'” One officer told Krebs to lie on the ground, but before he could comply the other cop ordered Krebs to walk backwards. Eventually, “they put the cuffs on me and took me up the street. I was freezing the whole time.”

Krebs said an officer of the department told him that police received a 911 call that appeared to come from Krebs’ phone. The caller posed as Krebs and said he was hiding in a closet after Russian thieves had broken into his home and shot his wife. They were now stealing jewelry, the caller reported. Fairfax County Police officials didn’t respond to calls seeking comment for this article.

As well they might not. It’s bad enough when citizens fear crime. When they’re afraid of a police SWAT team converging on their home, well, they might start to question the whole SWAT team thing. In other words, it starts being police militarization when it starts being you.

More than that, this is the kind of danger I’ve warned against since New York’s [not-so] SAFE Act.

A gun control advocate decides that a gun nut (that’s you) is a bad, bad thing. The gun grabber calls the cops to report that they’ve seen you wielding an illegal “assault rifle.” They might do so breathlessly, accusing you of brandishing. Or take the above approach and make-up a “crime in progress.”

Do you think Officer Krupke is going to phone you to check out the story? Arrive on his own and politely knock on your door to make enquiries? Spend some time with a judge getting a warrant? Or do you think a SWAT team flash bang could be the first you hear of it?

I have no idea how to defend against SWATTING, save making friends with your local po-po. That way they know you’re not the bad guy. In theory. ‘Cause in practice, what? Not to mention the possibility that a federal SWAT or SRT team could be steaming into your digs.

I guess the only thing that needs saying here is that if you see ninjas swarming towards you, remember it could be a false alarm. How reassuring is that?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

117 COMMENTS

  1. “Swatting” of a well-armed family of the gun will probably lead to the next RR or Waco. It would be a perfect way for government to say “this is what happens when you resist, even if the police are misled.”

    • So what happens when gang bangers decide to dress all tactical black and storm folks’ homes to loot, rape and kill?

      • Already happening in some areas. You don’t hear about it because the police don’t want it to get out. It will be reported as just another home invasion.

    • One thing’s for sure. If they F*ck up, it will be covered up and the story that will be told by your media, will bear no resemblance to the truth.

      But if you say so you’ll be branded an unpatriotic troublemaking scum bag

  2. > to what depths the civilian disarmament industry could
    > sink to deny Americans their Constitutionally-protected
    > right to keep and bear arms. Here’s a cautionary tale

    So hackers retaliate against an infosec journalist, and you use the incident to slander the gun grabbers?

    If your left-wing counterpart had written

    “In today’s Question of the Day, I asked to what depths gun nuts could sink to deny Americans their Constitutionally-protected right to speak out in favor of reasonable gun control. Here’s a cautionary tale”

    you’d be trotting it out as an example of how mean-spirited and paranoid the gun grabbers are.

      • Robert, do you really think gun-grabbers are the swatting type? Or are you willing to admit you made an awfully big leap there in saying so? C’mon, for honesty’s and credibility’s sake, admit it’s wrong to jump to wild and unfounded conclusions like that.

        • Well, let’s take a look at who’s been targeted in these events, and what they stand for. Now the most likely suspects are those who believe the opposite. And who might those be?

        • Poor Mikeb, having second thoughts, you chose your side, be proud of what you are and be proud of what your cohorts say and do in support of your agenda.

        • There is no proof they are not. Here in CT the gun grabbers are running radio ads. In those ads they are ourright lying according to even the State PD as to the event of Newtown in order to promote their agenda. If they are willing to lie, according to the State PD, themselves, what else are they willing to do? Some of the grass roots pro-2a websites in CT have been hacked. There is an investigation that is going on to see who did it. Would not be surprised if it linked to gun grabbers. It is only a matter of time. You can search Google for some of the stuff that members of PETA have done, I ask you Mikeb — what makes you think there is not some zealot in the gun grabber side that is not willing to do this? Why is it not in the realm of possibility given other things that have already been done? Many local NRA district people have already recieved death threats, and that is true and documented. You believe those death threats came from pro-2a. It is only a matter of time.

          • Pascal, don’t you guys object when I infer that gun owners are like some of the extreme examples that make the news? Loughner was legal and enjoying Constitutional Carry that day, so what does that say about the rest of you???

            You’re right to object to that kind of thing, but this is even worse. No gun control person has been found doing anything. It’s all made up nonsense.

        • Since I personally know someone who had the cops called on them by an anti-gunner, who lied and said he was waving his gun around a McDonalds…

          Yes, I absolutely believe that there are some people who will lie because me having a firearm threatens and offends them THAT much!

          Now, I’m not saying all or even a majority of anti-gunners would do that… But it only takes one mean spirited call to ruin someones life.

          Long story short, thankfully my friend was not arrested and the woman lied to the cops was almost cited for filing a false police report.

        • Well Mike, the coblogger in question tried to get one blogger’s concealed carry permit revoked by calling that person’s local sheriff. To me that sounds like the same type of sociopathic behavior that would attempt SWATting.

          • I don’t think so, Ruff. Calling the sheriff on a guy for harrassment and threats is nothing like calling in an anonymous false tip to cause the Swat team to come out.

        • Welcome back MikeyB.

          To new readers Mike is the house troll useful for generating outrage for his typically “progressive” thinking and as a primer for continuing examples of flawed logic.

          Mike you created a strawman argument (aka red herring) and made a paasive aggressive attack on the authors integrity whilst setting yourself up as the moral authority.

          You been given the benefit of the doubt many times but dont seem to be getting it that most of us dont buy it when you trot out the same schtick.

          I for one would like to think that intelligent informed and principled liberals would engage in civil discourse and be amenable to considering facts even while respectfully agreeing to disagree about their opinions.

          But I gotta tell you that it would be unfair to them to generalize by including you in their group. In fact the fact that you stoop to such tactics is typical of the “ends justifies the means” thinking that tends to be the norm in Marxist-Leninst writings as advocated in Alinskys Rules for Radicals to effect wins with low information voters and in the MSM media. Abusing an official process for the public safety ie calling out SWAT has been well documented extensively by Stacey McCain annd linked to with insightful coomentary by constitutional law prof Glenn (Instapundit) Renolds who besides Drudge is probably the most well known sources of thoughtful linking and thinking in thd blog world.
          The examples are too numerous to mention but a few stand out: Journolist. Media Matters. Think Progress. DOJ in F&F. State in Benghazi. OFA and funding for GUN GRABBERS using campagn funds and WhiteHouse staffers on taxpyer nickel.
          So to summarize “if it quacks like a duck walks like a duck and leaves duck poo on your kitchen floor everytime it comes into your living room … its probably MikeyB”

    • Slandering gun grabbers is like slandering Stalin. Kind of hard to do when you stop to think who we’re discussing here. In fact, I’ll bet it’s never been done. Do you have examples of this remarkable activity that you’ve just invented? I’m guessing you’re playing devil’s advocate here.

  3. Why do tiny ass towns in Conneticut need swat?

    Even some Lanza type could be put down by a single officer with a vest and a rifle.

    • lanza types are untrained cowards. all the recent shooters have surrendered or committed suicide at the first signs of opposition. i don’t think it would even require a officer with a vest and an ar in most cases. i think a teacher or any citizen with a LCP would get the job done. (in most cases.) the december shooter in the mall confronted by a guy with a CCW is the best example.

    • Ask James Yeager, he tried establishing a SWAT team for a town of 80 people. The mayor fired his ass.

    • This was Fairfax in VA.

      My tiny ass CT town has a joint SWAT deal with some neighboring towns.

      • Fairfax COUNTY. There is not, in any practical sense, a town or city by that name.

        West of DC, by about 30 miles.

  4. Protip: move outside of city limits into county jurisdiction. Not many sheriff’s offices have swat teams. You also pay less in taxes this way.

    • My wife may not like this idea, but I love the idea of living outside of town. Of course, there will most likely still be some petty tyrants who will still mess with you, but it won’t happen as often as in town.

      • It happens, but it’s a different situation. I’ve had my share of altercations with one neighbor in particular, but after lots of talking, we’ve worked things out. I can tell you that the police were never involved…it takes 15 minutes (at least) for them to show up, and they are not in the business of getting in your business. The local sheriff knows what his job is, and his office does an amazing job. FWIW, my wife strongly disliked living outside of town for a couple years, but now that we’ve been here for 5 years (and she has a couple of horses), she wouldn’t want to move back inside city limits again.

      • One thing to consider, check city limits closely, there may be housing opportunities that are outside the city limits but still inside the general area considered the “city”

        • Unincorporated areas FTW. Also, no HOAs. If you want amenities join a club and keep your liberties.

      • I wonder which would be preferable: a LESS petty tyrant, or a MORE petty one.

        NOT being a smart alec; I really can’t figure out which is which.

    • “move outside city limits” = Mayberry R.F.D. bliss.

      It’s really close to the 1950’s America here, still. A few years ago, my wife came from work late, and reported our mailbox missing, and a car sitting in the middle of the road with its lights off.

      I grabbed my shotgun and got in the truck and headed down the lane. The probably drunk teen hoodlums saw me coming, turned on their lights and scrammed. I didn’t give chase, even to get a license, because I didn’t feel like rising my life and limb over a mailbox, and felt protecting my family was priority.

      My wife called the sheriff, and a deputy drove up the lane. I still had my shotgun in my hand, he just pointed to it, and I put it in the bed of pickup. He took a report, and said there wasn’t much to worry about, the kids had taken out a couple miles of mailboxes and they were going to get the kids.

      Later that afternoon, the sheriff deputy brought back my mailbox back that the Ohio State Highway Patrol had found on the Interstate (the kids were dropping them on trucks) and returned to the sheriff. “That’s your number, right?”

      “Yep, thank you.”

      I took the mailbox to the barn, got it bent back into shape, bolted it down with four lags into the post, and never have had another problem.

      P.S. Don’t move here. Land is over $10,000 an acre now anyway. Well, at least don’t tell too many people, but I reckon you folks from TTAG are welcome any day! 😉

      • “It’s really close to the 1950′s America here, still”

        So no cell phones, Walmart, or frozen yogurt joints? You don’t have to lock your doors at night?

    • Sorry Cody, I live in the county, and they (The County Sheriffs) have a swat team. And as I posted in an earlier story, my good friends son who is on their swat team is being sent to sniper school on the 50 BMG!

  5. I could see anti-gunners doing this to spotlight how “crazy” us gun people are. Probably gonna get someone killed as well. Maybe multiples. How many people here would draw their gun if they were watching TV in their living room when their door was kicked in? If you were the victim of a SWATting attack, bets on the cops NOT shooting you when you have a gun in your hand?

    • Win-win for the grabber. Another gun nut dead and a big news story about a shooting gone wrong.

      • “Win-win for the grabber”

        Also lose-lose for the occupant(s). I have to think I’d grab my .45, if it were within reach. Under the circumstances postulated, it’s the right thing to do – IF they turn out to be bad guys. A bad thing if they turn out to be cops. I guess we’re just gonna have to go telepathic, folks!

  6. SWATing is all kinds of messed up. It remind me of one of my soldiers who lived on post housing. His wife called to talk to someone about marriage counseling. It spiraled into the MP’s surrounding his house because the person on the phone made it their personal duty to elevate a basic call out of realm of reality. Luckily nothing happened.

  7. This is a real problem, and I have been trying to figure out if there is any kind of effective solution. So far all I can think of is this- if I responded to a call of this type, and the first person to come out had their ID with them, showing the correct address, and they were in a relatively calm, rational state, then on their word that everything was fine inside I would personally be comfortable without entering the house.

    There are many clever people who post here, does anyone have ideas how to deal with the problem? I don’t think the problem is SWAT, either. Regular patrol officers will go to the same call if there’s no SWAT team available. And while there is no legal requirement for police to protect your life, we’re certainly going to try.

    Standard procedure here is to start with loudspeaker announcements to come outside. This is where I think the most potential exists to defuse everything.

    • It is definitely a problem. One of which is liability on the part of the police department. If they have a “serious” call, and fail to investigate, then they could face significant civil liability. Rightly or wrongly, police agencies lose millions of dollars a year to lawsuits. They may lose millions out of a single incident.

      Part of the solution may lie with effective communication from the reporting party. Some reporting parties are vindictive bastards, some are panicked morons, and some are people in legitimate distress. Couple this with the fact that a call may be funneled through several 911 dispatchers. Each transfers can change perception of the call. Although some calls are clearly bogus, it is often difficult to decipher what is going on from a short 911 call.

      Personally, I’ve had dispatch re-call reporting parties to confirm and verify details. Most people call from cell phones, and re-calling witnesses who are legitimate can definitely clear things up.

      • Sounds like that’s what they tried to do in this case — the guy’s phone ringing was the police dialing his residence to check the situation. If he’d answered, they would have known it was a false alarm.

        • Doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t respond and verify.

          A 911 hangup will get a response (in my neck-o-da-woods anyway), even if they call back and the person who answers says “all is well”.

      • The police have no liability for failing to respond to any particular request for service. And they have no responsibility to protect anyone or anyone’s property. Failure to properly clean up a mess (after the fact) might be a cause to sue.

        • I’m pretty sure police can get sued for that, on account of the fact that they actually do.

        • If they get sued, they win. The courts have rules numerous times the police are under no obligation to protect anyone. Add to that “qualified immunity” and you have a very fat chance of winning any suit against the police. Victims of SWAT raids on the wrong house have been denied even getting their property damage repaired. Unless you have a very clear cut case and proof positive of negligence, you are SOL.

    • Matt, I think the absence of a landline phone on your part will not prevent your neighbor or some loony gun-grabber from calling 911 and sic-ing the cops on your ass. I think if the loony were denied access to a phone, that would make you safer.

    • Bad idea. Certainly if you have kids at home.

      Dial 911 from a landline the dispatch center knows where call came from (addressing) and can send the Fire Dept/Ambulance. Call from a cell phone, and in most of the US, dispatch can only tell from what cell tower your call was routed (does not know where you are). This can be a pretty large circle .

  11. Yeah, this is really not an example of gun grabbing. Let’s keep the reporting accurate to maintain our credibility. Thanks.

    • The question is, what would stop and anti-gun person from doing this? There are zealots on each side. See the previous post about the father in NJ. He was swarmed due to a simple picture. Are you sure this can never happen? That is the point of the post.

      • I know, I know, lots of s__t can happen from anti-freedom nuts and it bugs the hell out of me daily. The bigger problem is the fact that with computers and the internet we are all being tracked, collated, spied upon and categorized 24/7/365, and that’s just by people/entities (corporations/government) that claim to have legitimate reasons to access the data. Mix in the fact that the networks/cellphones etc will never be fully secure and we are living George Orwell’s wet dream.

        I feel truly remorseful of the world I am leaving to my children.

  12. There is no easy answer here , We had a guy with problems come out of his house holding a AIR rifle … long story short ,,, the cops shot first and asked questions later … a sad end for a sick guy who could not hurt the cops… was ruled just shooting…. you might try not going out side and calling on phone to say they have wrong house etc. better to talk on a phone and maybe the cops will have time to THINK and cool down … worth a try !

  13. Sure, it’s possible that anti-gun people would make such a call maliciously, but I think much more likely is the possibility that they might make the call in the total belief that you were dangerous. For example, if they saw a firearm inside the house? For these people, firearms are not part of their daily lives; they panic when they see them.

    • Krebs said an officer of the department told him that police received a 911 call that appeared to come from Krebs’ phone. The caller posed as Krebs and said he was hiding in a closet after Russian thieves had broken into his home and shot his wife. They were now stealing jewelry, the caller reported. Fairfax County Police officials didn’t respond to calls seeking comment for this article.

      You were saying?

      Having dealt with a wack-a-loon head of the local PETA chapter and taught her a lesson in tactics, facts and dirty pool, the wack-a-loon progressives do indeed use the police as their pawns!

      Antis as a rule have no morals, only insanity and are capable of doing and saying anything, just look at anonymous, hmmmm, LBD, lenins ghost & Mikeb postings which I would lay odds are all the same person, split personalities are indeed possible as doctors have identified a genetic link to mental illness, schizophrenia being linked to the defective gene, and since antis believe guns have voices and command them, well, it may be it is simply destiny for the mental illness and actions of the antis.

      • Sure, there’s a chance of it — some people are indeed this malicious. However, it doesn’t even require malice, is my point.

        Most anti-gun people are not malicious, I believe. Most have a completely sincere belief that guns are dangerous and should be controlled. It doesn’t require malice to be WRONG, especially not when the issue is complicated and there is much wrong and misleading information out there.

        I generally find that Hanlon’s Razor (“Don’t attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity”) is a good rule to live by. It’s always worth considering the fact that one’s opponents on any issue are well-meaning but wrong. The vast majority will be.

        You also have a major misunderstanding about schizophrenia. Most schizophrenics are harmless or only a danger to themselves. Schizophrenics do not have multiple personalities — MPD is something completely different. Schizophenics have hallucinations which, in serious cases, they can’t distinguish from reality — audible ones are the most common, but they may also have visual or tactile hallucinations as well. Normally these hallucinations are disturbing and distressing. It’s a fucked-up thing to have, and I would not wish it on anyone. Paranoia is common, but a lot of that is a side effect of having one’s perception of reality so damaged.

        • Most gun owners are harmless also, less danger to society than a doctor proven with facts yet again and again, yet here we are with the minroity portion of the govt. wanting to put more restrictions on those less dangerous than those who so many times are indeed mentally ill, schizophrenic and go postal and you simply cannot deny that is true.

          If mental illness is indeed genetically linked, then it is plausible that the other mental illnesses are similarly linked cause how does one rationally explain, the antis perpetual fear of the law abiding?

          As for most anti gun extremists being well meaning, yeah, Lenin was well meaning, and we see how his preferred society morhped into and even more viscious haves and have nots with such terror and violence. So we expect nothing less from progressives who mean well but eventually as others before, morph into the inherently violent existence so often associated with such sociopathic beliefs.

        • And MPD is less common than popular culture (Sybil) supposes. A more common ani-social personality type is the sociopath that is self-convinced the ends justifies the means and they dont have to play by the rules. Some anarchists/hackers/journolist/bloggers/politicians fit the profile.

      • I don’t think great lenin’s ghost is an anti, is he? I thought he was a leftist/communist who supported the need for an armed populace.

        I don’t recall anonymous being an anti either.

        • Cant be a true communist and support an armed populace, reread anonymous posts as well.

    • I was thinking about this issue during the week. I was working on one of my rifles and had it out. It would have been easy for somebody to call the cops on me if they saw me through the windows. Luckily I do live outside of the city and the nearest neighbor is 150 yards away and can’t see. Even if they did, they probably have their own guns and wouldn’t care.

      • Same. As I was cleaning and lubing my AR and shotgun, I thought about how easy it would be for a nosy neighbor to see thru the blinds and immediately call the cops, assuming I’m plotting an insurrection or some such nonse

    • Not all that many people have an axe in the house. For these people, an axe is not part of their daily lives. How many would call 911 if they saw an axe in your home? Maybe they watched a show about Lizzie Borden.

      Both guns and axes are undeniably deadly. I’m unsure as to how to frame my point; but I don’t think weapons virgins would be as likely to rat out an axe-owner. It all comes down to a kind of hysteria-based anti-gun brainwashing. When the guns are all collected, edged weapons will be next. If it had a shred of logic about it, they’ve have gone after cars, planes, pools and staircases first.

  14. It did say that his phone rang a few times and that he did’nt pick up. For all we know it may have been the police checking in with him.

    • The story does say they tried to call. In this specific case, Krebs’ has been SWATED before. They police have done this dance before. That did not stop them from putting him in cuffs. If you read more, Krebs is trying to have laws passed where police need to follow certain procedure. He is afraid that someone will be eventually killed by the police and he is advocating for different procedures by the police.

      If you do a little research, this is more common than you think. Someone who is not involved in anyway may someday get killed.

      There are enough zealot anti-gun nuts that I do not put it past them.

      • Brian Krebs hadn’t been SWATted before. He did warn the police about 6 months before that it was a possibility, as he knew it was a tactic of the criminals he reports on. His website is subject to dDOS attacks on a regular basis from the same criminals.

      • ” trying to have laws passed where police need to follow certain procedure”

        If they ignore the rules of common procedure, can we believe they’ll be born-again constitutionalists because of a LAW?

  16. The easiest way to stop SWATing is to find out who the anti-gunners in your area are… And SWAT them as many times as you can.

    Once they are on the receiving end of such actions, they’ll cease.

      • No, I’m not. Anti-gun people have no morals and an over inflated sense of self righteousness. They have no problem with saying or doing anything to further their cause.

        At the very least they should receive the same in return.

        The time for playing nice passed some time ago, now is the time to play mean!

        • Real Americans represent freedom. Freedom is preserved by rule of consitutional law. If we go lawless, we tear down our protection. Tearing down institutions is the goal of the left. Anything we do to tear down just rule of law helps their cause. Frustrating when the other side operates without the same constraints, I know.

    • So that would be a felony, with a possible manslaughter or 2nd degree murder charge if anyone actually died during the event. Also, you would potentially be putting police officers in danger over a bogus call. I really don’t recommend declaring your intention to commit a felony over the Internet. Don’t call 911 unless there is an actual emergency.

  17. Did I see this correctly?!? In the video at 5:45, guy starts a handgun engagement by loading an empty pistol with a magazine.
    A swat member can’t run with a loaded weapon at a training range? Is this any way to train and develop proper muscle memory?

  18. SWATing has becoming a nearly commonplace “prank” of hacker types. When they get tired of harassing a target with DDOS attacks and attempts to break into their networks and computers, they pull this one. Woody (Woodysgamertag) of Youtube quasi-fame has had this stunt pulled on him multiple times, to the point where his local police all know him and usually just call and ask him if everything is OK before they disregard it. I would not jump to the “antis are SWATing people!” step just yet, though I can see something like that happening to grim results.

    I agree with the above poster that is looking for a protocol in place to avoid this kind of thing. SWAT is designed to stop bad guys with overwhelming force and tactics when all else fails, having them misused and abused by miscreants its not good for anyone, especially the poor innocent that has them sicked on him.

  19. Not sure why people are blaming the cops for this.

    Only in very small municipalities is an average Joe going to be known to all the cops, and if he had no identificajution on him, well…

    They received a call for help. They came, as far as they knew risking it all, and went by the book.

    Blame lm the hackers, not the hacked OR the cops who were made the goat.

    Shall we mandate a 30 minute wait and background checks before permitting calls to go through? No? Then let’s press on, shall we?

  20. The outcome of this would have been the same if it was SWAT with M4s or your standard town police with a Glock 17, and I can’t really fault the police for responding to the call. It’s unfortunate that people do this, but I’d rather the police respond than to ignore people.

    It’s nice to bring awareness to the people who are unfamiliar with these tactics.

    As for tracing the call, if the cracker/phreaker was any good, it’s basically not worth the effort. The phone system is just not designed to be secure.

  22. I realize that the point you’re trying to make is that we need guns to defend ourselves. But I don’t see how this story works in your favor. I mean, suppose the SWAT team does show up. What are you going to do? Shoot at them? If you shoot at the SWAT team after they’ve gotten a call about an armed robbery in-progress, they will probably thing you are the robber; they’re unlikely to think you are defending your home if they don’t know you live there.

    Also, in many counties, police no longer make house-calls, so this kind of prank/misunderstanding wouldn’t work everywhere. Where I live, police will only respond if you have a home security system setup, and if the home security calls the police dept. then they will respond. It’s their way of trying to filter out prank calls, since they’ve gotten a lot of those.

    • Whiskey tango foxtrot?

      Police respond to calls for help, period. If someone calls in third party and says “the house across the street just got invaded,” they come. If you dial 911, they come.

      The only reason they’re slow or don’t show in some areas is an automatic alarm – a motion or a door. They can be lackadaisical in that case, and in many municipalities won’t dispatch for an automatic unless you’ve registered the alarm system with them.

      Also, while some commercial systems do have a direct line to the police, this is rare and becoming more so; the vast majority of systems contact a monitoring centre,and the staff there then contact whomever is apropos depending on he nature of the alarm and the wishes of the subscriber.

      A human-initiated alarm, though – panic button, duress code and such – gets a response every time, as do medical and fire calls, automatic or otherwise.

  26. I have a simple answer to this: we need to be able to formally “opt out” of police responses to 911 calls for home invasions. Given all the tactical and legal hazards, I really have no interest in calling the police any more. My family is comfortable taking care of ourselves. And if we need some assistance, we’ll call trusted neighbors who can be at our door in less than 60 seconds.

    After everything calms down, we can call the police if needed … who can respond “casually” at that point without guns drawn and without the need to break any land speed records.

  27. What’s your next knee-jerk anti-government rant: complaining about firefighters running code to a fire that turns out to be a false alarm? Sounds like this was the right response to the info the police had. God forbid an armed intruder makes it into a friend’s or relative’s house and someone is able yo call 911. As a result of this article the police may just take their sweet time getting there.

  28. SWATing is the coward’s way, so yes, the wingnuts will use it (and may already have). Fortunately for Krebs, he’s not a black man in New York, or he would have been shoot at 207 times and hit twice.

  29. The Amish farms have been attacked lots of late all over the country by SWAT teams and ABC police…. seems that they have been selling raw milk and jams and produce for over 200 years with no problems …. and these people have next to no guns (Amish live like people did 200 years ago) the SWAT teams of 12 to 50 show up about 3AM to 6AM …. That milk is now a public danger…. no the ABC police are a public danger…….

  30. Yes. Utilize our authority as voting citizens to ensure that SWAT teams are dismantled at the local level and county level and never replaced with anything similar. By which I mean the FBI may have an HRT and SWAT team active at each field office. The BATFE may not have either of those things or their equivalent. The ICE may not have either of those things or its equivalent. Each state may have one SWAT team or HRT team available at the state level (state police) per city that has more than 150,000 residents. Any city with 200,000 or more residents may have it’s own SWAT team. One. Single. As in no more than that.

    The SWAT team thing serves a purpose, but not the purpose that it ends up being used for and it’s our responsibility to put an end to it by voting responsibly and encouraging our politicians to dramatically crack down on SWAT teams.

  31. If you see ninjas swarming your home and you don’t immediately reach for your .223 and commence charging a price for the totalitarian attack on your person, then you are one of those who will surrender your arms when the government says so.

    And, I misspoke – it isn’t a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.

  32. Good thing you did not have a family dog run out to greet the thugs. They would have killed your beagle or basset hound.

  33. Twenty three years ago (or so) Kansas City, MO police were walking through an apartment complex, looking for a suspicious person who had been reported. A police officer noticed a door was slightly ajar (closed but not quite latched). He entered the apartment without any verbal notice and no warrant. He proceeded to the back of the two bedroom apartment and was standing in the hall between the two bedroom doors. An unarmed resident, clad only in his briefs, opened his bedroom door and got blown away by the cop. A judge dismissed charges against the cop. The suspicious walker was never found, if indeed he existed.

  34. Fantastic blog you have here but I was wanting to know if you knew of any community forums that cover the same topics discussed in this article?

    I’d really like to be a part of community where I can get comments from other knowledgeable individuals that share the
    same interest. If you have any suggestions, please
    let me know. Appreciate it!

  35. Simply desire to say your article is as surprising. The clearness for your put up is just cool and that i
    could assume you’re knowledgeable on this subject.
    Well along with your permission allow me to clutch
    your RSS feed to stay up to date with impending post. Thank you one million and please continue the enjoyable work.

Comments are closed.