TexasCHLforum.com

mcscanner wrote:I am so old-fashioned / out of touch.

Had to Google 'swatting' to find out what was being talked about. Seems like everything is getting a fancy name. My education continues!

Sorry!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatting" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Swatting is the act of tricking an emergency service (via such means as hoaxing a 9-1-1 dispatcher) into dispatching an emergency response based on the false report of an ongoing critical incident. Episodes range from large to small, from the deployment of bomb squads, SWAT units and other police units and the concurrent evacuations of schools and businesses to a single fabricated police report meant to discredit an individual as a prank or personal vendetta.

E.Marquez wrote:On premise I agree with your position and though on this.
However, I do not wish to see yet another law written when there are laws already on the books to charge and convict with. Perhaps amend and add to a law that ups the punishment for a false call that results in serious bodily harm or death?

Good idea... Didn't mean to sound like I was excluding that path.
Whatever the best way forward is....

E.Marquez wrote:Id guess there is a civil remedy already in place should a person have been detained, arrested, shot based on a false allegation. ("There is a man with a gun pointing it everybody he is going to kill us all" but upon review of videotape and witness testimony it is revealed, the gun was never drawn nor any aggressive action observed at all)

The civil remedies I've found thus far all rely on the accused having filed a written statement or report.
I may have missed something... but.. I have not yet located a clear course for civil action if I am injured by an intentionally false accusation 911 call.

E.Marquez wrote:Secondly, I believe it would be near impossible for a criminal conviction to take place, short of evidence presented that the person calling in the 911 call did so with premeditated malice and intention to deceive. The Caller could simply say later, "I felt threatened" "I thought he was going to kill us all" "I thought he was looking for targets" so I called 911

Perhaps..... But... If the caller accused the gun toter of some action that was not actually happening...??
"There's a man pointing a gun and threatening to shoot people"... can often be proven false with surveillance video.
Just because you can't prove them 100% of the time doesn't mean you shouldn't up the penalties for those you can prove.

E.Marquez wrote:I would like to see those making the false allegations held criminally and civilly liable, I just don't have the background and experience to know the best, most viable way to do that.

Definitely in agreement here.... Not sure about how best to ratchet up the cost for SWATting, but, definitely see the necessity/utility of doing so.

With several high profile SWATting examples recently, and with the possibility of licensed OC still passing into law this session, I find myself looking ahead to dealing with anti-gun folks stepping up their SWATting attacks on legal gun toters.

Of course filing a false report with 911 is already a crime under PC 46.02 and possibly 37.08, but it's only a Class A misdemeanor, worst case.
What about when a SWATting incident results in serious bodily injury or death? or even destruction of property at substantial expense to the person falsely accused?

Like this one last month: Link
And of course there's the MDA and CSGV members recommending SWATting as an effective tactic: Link

Might be a good idea to address this illegal activity with a more severe penalty and clearer civil remedies, especially if someone (a responding officer or a legal gun toter) is injured.

Thoughts?