If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ars Technica)   SWAT team throws flashbangs, raids wrong home due to open WiFi network that allowed the teen next door to make online threats against the local cops. But wait, there's more   (arstechnica.com) divider line 38
    More: Asinine, SWAT team, Wi-Fi, Internet Crime, internet police, Spring Hill, hand grenades, open wifi, american police  
•       •       •

21830 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:36 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-06-28 10:20:18 PM  
7 votes:
So SWAT raided the wrong house, terrorizing innocent people and causing property damage, but then they went to the real perp's home they treated them with dignity and respect.

That's some great police work there, guys.
rka
2012-06-28 11:31:02 PM  
5 votes:

austin_millbarge: baka-san: When did we become so damn afraid, needing to swing the big dick as a Weeners.

It's not about fear, it's about the Rambo complex. We live in a nation of man-children who want to live out their childhood fantasies of being a hero.


A bit of both. These guys will come with guns a blazin, all Rambo, if they think they have the drop on you. But, the minute that there might be any real danger they'll all hunker down behind their SUVs and wait for backup after backup.

Go look at the complete cowardice that the entire Denver metro area police forces showed during Columbine. Two kids with guns, who had killed themselves 30 minutes into the "standoff", caused a hundred cops to piss in their boots outside for 4 hours while innocent people bled to death.
2012-06-28 10:54:54 PM  
5 votes:

freewill: hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.

^ This should be printed on the front of the Quick Start guide that comes with the router.


Again, you have the right to not run a secure network and should reasonably expect not to be raided by SWAT.
2012-06-28 10:52:34 PM  
5 votes:
FTA:

Not that all Evansville residents think the SWAT raid was in any way improper. Writing on the same Topix message boards where the initial threats emanated, one resident responded to critics: "They had a warrant. Sometimes warrants turn up nothing. Her home was repaired. On with your life now crusader!!! Lol"

"Noodle heads come on here thinking they are just big bad asses, threatening cops and their families," wrote another, "then the cops come back and biatch slap them with SWAT teams and flash bang grenades. Awesome. Teach these fools a lesson and make examples out of them."


Really dude? DID YOU NOT READ THE STORY BEFORE COMMENTING? They didn't "biatch slap" anyone except some 18-year old chick who hadn't secured her WiFi. The only person they "taught a lesson to" was the INNOCENT civilian with the unsecured WiFi, and the "lesson" was most likely that you can't trust the police. And the only "example" they made was an example of how farking inept they are.

As many have pointed out, the people they REALLY were looking for got the white glove treatment, they weren't "taught a lesson", they didn't get "biatch slapped", and the only "example" is that the cops sure can be sweet when they want to. What do you want to bet that this guy masturbates furiously with both hands while watching Glenn Beck, listening to Lee Greenwood and singing 'God Bless America' at least 10 times a day?
2012-06-28 10:31:26 PM  
5 votes:
At what point do we, as the employers of these f*cking lunatics, demand that they stop doing things like this? Is there any outrage at all, or have the majority of us surrendered to complacency and a false sense of security?
2012-06-28 10:49:22 PM  
4 votes:

hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.


It is simple to set up, but not everyone knows that it even exists. Also you have the right to not run a secure network and should have a reasonable expectation that SWAT won't assault your house.

I worked with an FBI SWAT agent for some time in Afghanistan and we were talking about missions and the difference between conducting operations in America and in Afghanistan. He started talking about this big bust and I chimed in I would just of went in guns a blazin'. He asked me why, we sat there and reasoned it out. Our conclusion, there is never any initial circumstance that SWAT should just go assaulting a house because it is a high risk-low reward situation.

It is time to demilitarize American police forces.
2012-06-28 10:48:37 PM  
4 votes:

baka-san: And if the homeowner had a gun, and thought, as most of us would, they were under attack(which they were) and shots were traded, wounding or killing one or more people?


That's what the kilo of coke in the back of the cruiser is for.
2012-06-28 10:43:44 PM  
4 votes:
I like how the video ends with them talking about ensuring the safety of "these brave men and women."

Because nothing says brave like sending a SWAT team to blow the shiat out of some stupid teenager's house.
2012-06-28 09:54:28 PM  
4 votes:
And if the homeowner had a gun, and thought, as most of us would, they were under attack(which they were) and shots were traded, wounding or killing one or more people?

How about a little more "policing" and less "COD" guys.

It says serve and protect, not search and destroy on the cars...

When did we become so damn afraid, needing to swing the big dick as a Weeners.
2012-06-28 10:57:42 PM  
3 votes:
I wish I could say that I am surprised by the idiocy of this particular group of cops but I cant. People who makes it their lifes work to run around with guns and badges looking for a fight while purposefully acting like a bunch of badasses are rarely on the upper end of the intellectual spectrum.
2012-06-28 10:52:41 PM  
3 votes:

hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.


^ This should be printed on the front of the Quick Start guide that comes with the router.
2012-06-28 10:40:37 PM  
3 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: At what point do we, as the employers of these f*cking lunatics, demand that they stop doing things like this? Is there any outrage at all, or have the majority of us surrendered to complacency and a false sense of security?


Considering that the police are just agents of the city to generate revenue, it won't happen unless we elect brand new officials. Which, let's be honest, won't happen because too many farktards are too busy thinking their "team" is the best and vote blindly for their side.

And fark the police. I hope they get the shiat sued out of them.
2012-06-29 02:14:58 AM  
2 votes:

NightSteel: But I doubt anybody there with a badge on cared about de-escalating the situation.


That's the saddest part, I think. Not long ago, maybe 10 years or so, most police were experts at de-escalation because failure to de-escalate situations quite often meant that someone got shot and killed, and it wasn't always the "suspect". Now they can send in SWAT with no warning, taser anyone they damn well please for any reason whatsoever and even charge people with resisting arrest with no accompanying charges. And if you try to catch them doing this, they will usually trash your recording devices and arrest anyone trying to help you, hide behind bullshiat anti-terrorism laws and even if you do manage to get them to admit that something was done wrong, all the actual cops get as punishment are paid leave for a few weeks, followed by a promotion upon their return and maybe, if they did something REALLY bad, sensitivity training classes.

There's just no legal check on their power anymore. They can do almost anything and get away with it... and they actually believe that they can do pretty much anything they want and get away with it. Their job isn't dangerous anymore. Well, at least not to them. To the rest of us... a different story.
2012-06-28 10:52:19 PM  
2 votes:
I love the comment someone posted on the website about "teaching people who make threats a lesson".

Because blowing up their neighbour's house will totally learn 'em!
2012-06-28 10:52:04 PM  
2 votes:

baka-san: And if the homeowner had a gun, and thought, as most of us would, they were under attack(which they were) and shots were traded, wounding or killing one or more people?

How about a little more "policing" and less "COD" guys.

It says serve and protect, not search and destroy on the cars...

When did we become so damn afraid, needing to swing the big dick as a Weeners.


At least their SWAT helmets still have a peace sign:
www.peacelink.it

On a more serious note, wasn't there recently an article describing how Indiana residents can legally shoot and kill cops who break into their houses without cause? This seems like the perfect situation for that.
2012-06-28 09:16:55 PM  
2 votes:
Doggone that 99% making the other 1% look bad.
2012-06-29 09:34:22 AM  
1 votes:

Dokushin: You geniuses got any plans for how to handle violent conflict in the world you breathlessly envision without police?


I have an idea what it would look like, armed people kicking down your door in the middle of the day, throwing explosives through the windows to deafen and disorient you, shooting your dog, and all the while there's no fear of prosecution by the courts. GORRAM, what a nightmarish scenario. I hope we never see those days.
2012-06-29 06:29:26 AM  
1 votes:

Nuclear Monk: I'm not so sure you can have that 'reasonable' expectation though. You are providing a means to perform actions, including illegal ones, online under your name (or IP address, anyway) if you leave the network unsecured. It'd kinda be like openly advertising your car is freely available to borrow anonymously.


Uh, well, IANAL but if it's publicly known that you lent your car out anonymously it would be pretty hard to convince a sane judge that your house needed to be broken into to prevent you from committing any more crimes with that car.

But to most people over 40, computers and the internet are a satanic conspiracy powered by black magic and big voodoo, so let's just send the Apache gunships, no sense in taking a chance that one of those computer viruses might have mutated and started taking over guns and automobiles like in the movies.
2012-06-29 05:18:34 AM  
1 votes:

freewill: dlp211: freewill: hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.

^ This should be printed on the front of the Quick Start guide that comes with the router.

Again, you have the right to not run a secure network and should reasonably expect not to be raided by SWAT.

In principle, I agree with you, but this isn't a perfect world.

If you leave your garage open and drug dealers start making meth in it at night, the police may become legitimately confused and you may end up devoting a lot of resources to clearing up a dangerous misunderstanding.

Your router isn't different.

This is, of course, a separate issue from whether or not throwing flashbangs is a reasonable response to some dumbass kid making threats on the internet in the first place.


I gotta say that it seems odd that we would expect end-users to understand the technology at their disposal when clearly the cops and judges are also behind the ball. You need security on your router, to be sure... but can we just once all agree that the cops, lawyers, and judges, who purposely muddle the difference between an IP address and an actual identification of a person are also contributing greatly to this problem.

An IP address alone shouldn't be grounds for legal action, law enforcement action, or anything... if you want to go raiding places with guns, placing civilians and cops in harms way, you should have some clear, articulable target.
2012-06-29 01:38:36 AM  
1 votes:

freewill: NightSteel: All you folks making analogies to unlocked houses, open garages and unattended cars should keep something in mind; each of those requires someone to physically enter and/or steal your property to perpetrate a crime. Using open wifi is NOT the same and is generally NOT treated as a criminal act (despite a few edge cases). If it was, cops would already be rolling with AP/direction finder combos in their cars, waiting for people to connect and busting them for unauthorized use wholesale. It'd be easy to do with some cheap hardware and a little bit of design work, and we all know how much they love the easy busts. Call it the digital equivalent of a bait car.

Actually, I gather that this is a complicated issue that involves a lot of poorly written state laws. It's certainly risky to infer that just because the police don't actively investigate, it must not be a crime.

Without trying to comment on individual statutes, just to follow your analogy, even if there is no other criminal act involved (like breaking and entering or theft), using someone's unlocked router is still similar in principle to trespass, and I believe this is the charge in those "edge cases". The router *is* the homeowner's property, installed on their property, and you're using it. The owner left the door unlocked or left their property in plain view in their yard, maybe even within reach of the sidewalk, but that doesn't mean you have any implied authorization to use it.

When you begin using this unlawful, unauthorized access in order to commit another, potentially more serious, criminal act, I'd say that's going to step up law enforcement's interest in your trespass considerably, just as with a trespass that becomes a burglary.


It is absolutely not similar in principle to trespass. It IS similar in principle to listening to music from your neighbor's stereo system because he left the window open.
2012-06-29 01:11:22 AM  
1 votes:

ialdabaoth:

No.


Wow... What a well thought out and lengthy rebuttal.

There is NO GODDAMN EXCUSE for this behavior. NONE. Not only did they not get the right person, but they traumatized a family for someone posting a message on an internet board? SWAT teams are not supposed to be used in this manner. For a hostage situation? Sure. Armed standoff? Yeah. Someone posting an anonymous threat online? HELL NO. There is no reason they couldn't just go up and knock on the door. Especially when that's what they did when they finally DID have the right person identified.
2012-06-29 12:56:13 AM  
1 votes:

ialdabaoth: dlp211: hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.

It is simple to set up, but not everyone knows that it even exists. Also you have the right to not run a secure network and should have a reasonable expectation that SWAT won't assault your house.

I worked with an FBI SWAT agent for some time in Afghanistan and we were talking about missions and the difference between conducting operations in America and in Afghanistan. He started talking about this big bust and I chimed in I would just of went in guns a blazin'. He asked me why, we sat there and reasoned it out. Our conclusion, there is never any initial circumstance that SWAT should just go assaulting a house because it is a high risk-low reward situation.

It is time to demilitarize American police forces.

No.


Yes. It is past time to demilitarize the American police. Violent thugs using military tactics and equipment are not necessary to enforce American laws. Enough is enough.
2012-06-29 12:01:05 AM  
1 votes:

dlp211: freewill: hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.

^ This should be printed on the front of the Quick Start guide that comes with the router.

Again, you have the right to not run a secure network and should reasonably expect not to be raided by SWAT.


In principle, I agree with you, but this isn't a perfect world.

If you leave your garage open and drug dealers start making meth in it at night, the police may become legitimately confused and you may end up devoting a lot of resources to clearing up a dangerous misunderstanding.

Your router isn't different.

This is, of course, a separate issue from whether or not throwing flashbangs is a reasonable response to some dumbass kid making threats on the internet in the first place.
2012-06-28 11:39:15 PM  
1 votes:
farm5.staticflickr.com
2012-06-28 11:33:47 PM  
1 votes:
"They had a warrant. Sometimes warrants turn up nothing. Her home was repaired. On with your life now crusader!!! Lol"

My response to this would be:

"So you would be OK if they did this to you?"
2012-06-28 11:31:52 PM  
1 votes:

Nuclear Monk: I'm not so sure you can have that 'reasonable' expectation though. You are providing a means to perform actions, including illegal ones, online under your name (or IP address, anyway) if you leave the network unsecured. It'd kinda be like openly advertising your car is freely available to borrow anonymously.


No, it's not.
2012-06-28 11:19:04 PM  
1 votes:
Police really need to hire outside techies to handle anything computer related. Whoever reads and signs the warrants too probably.
2012-06-28 11:09:41 PM  
1 votes:
My vote is for the public execution of all officers who were involved in the error. There should be zero tolerance for this kind of police action.
2012-06-28 11:02:06 PM  
1 votes:

dlp211: freewill: hej: Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.

^ This should be printed on the front of the Quick Start guide that comes with the router.

Again, you have the right to not run a secure network and should reasonably expect not to be raided by SWAT.


I'm not so sure you can have that 'reasonable' expectation though. You are providing a means to perform actions, including illegal ones, online under your name (or IP address, anyway) if you leave the network unsecured. It'd kinda be like openly advertising your car is freely available to borrow anonymously.
2012-06-28 11:00:37 PM  
1 votes:
Too bad the real terrorists THE EFFIN' JUDGES are not being held accountable for not doing their jobs and allowing the po lice and the DA's and of course the crime lab to manufacture shiat up and frk over people. If they do their jobs, po and others will actually start obeying the law.
2012-06-28 10:58:31 PM  
1 votes:

Mikey1969: FTA:

Not that all Evansville residents think the SWAT raid was in any way improper. Writing on the same Topix message boards where the initial threats emanated, one resident responded to critics: "They had a warrant. Sometimes warrants turn up nothing. Her home was repaired. On with your life now crusader!!! Lol"

"Noodle heads come on here thinking they are just big bad asses, threatening cops and their families," wrote another, "then the cops come back and biatch slap them with SWAT teams and flash bang grenades. Awesome. Teach these fools a lesson and make examples out of them."

Really dude? DID YOU NOT READ THE STORY BEFORE COMMENTING? They didn't "biatch slap" anyone except some 18-year old chick who hadn't secured her WiFi. The only person they "taught a lesson to" was the INNOCENT civilian with the unsecured WiFi, and the "lesson" was most likely that you can't trust the police. And the only "example" they made was an example of how farking inept they are.

As many have pointed out, the people they REALLY were looking for got the white glove treatment, they weren't "taught a lesson", they didn't get "biatch slapped", and the only "example" is that the cops sure can be sweet when they want to. What do you want to bet that this guy masturbates furiously with both hands while watching Glenn Beck, listening to Lee Greenwood and singing 'God Bless America' at least 10 times a day?



You beat me to it. Yeah that retard lacks the even most basic of reasoning skills.
2012-06-28 10:55:41 PM  
1 votes:
farm1.staticflickr.com
2012-06-28 10:49:17 PM  
1 votes:

baka-san: When did we become so damn afraid, needing to swing the big dick as a Weeners.


It's not about fear, it's about the Rambo complex. We live in a nation of man-children who want to live out their childhood fantasies of being a hero.
2012-06-28 10:47:57 PM  
1 votes:
Because most people aren't stupid enough to make obvious threats from their own home Internet connection...

Apparently we are getting news stories from the Fringe universe now.
2012-06-28 10:47:18 PM  
1 votes:
Glad to see my hometown police force getting national recognition.

Seriouly, though, the local PD are in full paramilitary mode pretty much all the time.

They sent dogs in after a PC tech at one of the local schools as he was doing weekend upgrades in preparation for some standardized tests. No calls to the school district or alarm company, just send in the hounds.
2012-06-28 10:46:25 PM  
1 votes:

Fark Me To Tears: So SWAT raided the wrong house, terrorizing innocent people and causing property damage, but then they went to the real perp's home they treated them with dignity and respect.

That's some great police work there, guys.


Out of spite, I would've shattered every window in the place as well as destroy the front door.

Well that was enough tough guy talk. I am glad stories like this makes my paranoia seem logical. Lock down everything and don't trust too many people.
2012-06-28 10:46:14 PM  
1 votes:
What no golden retriever around to shoot? They are slacking.
hej
2012-06-28 10:40:56 PM  
1 votes:
Wifi security is simple enough to set up. If you're too lazy to turn it on, you deserve to be assaulted by a SWAT team.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report