By: Andrew Peoples
Acts labeled terrorism used to come from predictable sources. When confronted with large-scale acts of violence, the American public was able to look to the usual crowd of anarchists, Islamic fundamentalists, or disgruntled Postal Service workers. But with the rise of the Internet and the online gaming scene, a new threat has recently joined their ranks: sore-loser adolescent gamers. Welcome to the world of “SWAT-ing”, where teenagers unleash the most militant branches of the United States’ police force upon whomever they choose.
Swatting involves making a phone call to 911, inventing a fake hostage situation or other made-up story of violence, and directing the emergency responders to the home of unsuspecting victims. The crime’s appeal clearly comes from how easy it is to carry out—all you need is your neighbor’s address and some method of concealing your identity, and you can have helmeted paramilitants storming their home in minutes, with small chance of repercussions to you. The simplicity of the tactic may explain why the swatting incidents are becoming more common, as well as why it is often employed by teenagers, who may not realize the potential consequences of their actions. Indeed, swatting has already led to disastrous outcomes in certain situations.
Swatters often target “livestreamers,” or gamers who broadcast their gameplay live on the Internet. One such livestreamer who goes by the username “Whiteboy7thst” was swatted as a prank, but the police found large amounts of marijuana at his home and promptly arrested him. A more serious example involves young gamers in Louisiana. A 15-year-old named Paul Horner swatted a rival gamer after losing to him in a game of Battlefield 4. Horner reported a murder/hostage situation at the game winner’s home, leading police to invade the home and shoot the rival gamer’s father, seriously injuring him. The high school student was tried as an adult and proven guilty on two counts of domestic terrorism, and sentenced to 25 years to life in federal prison.
Although online gaming has popularized swatting, gamers are not the only victims, nor the only culprits. Pranksters have perpetrated swatting incidents against a group of major celebrities in the past few years, ranging from the Kardashian family to Rihanna. Swatters have also demonstrated political motivations. A rush of incidents in 2012 involving conservative bloggers, one of whom lived in Georgia, prompted Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) to get involved by asking Attorney General Eric Holder to review whether federal laws had been broken. Other legislators seeking to limit the problem have been targeted. Democratic California State Sen. Ted Lieu, who sponsored an anti-swatting bill, found police outside his home one night responding to a call that claimed he had killed his wife.
While much of the blame for swatting rightfully falls on those making fake emergency calls, the spike in swatting incidents is causing police forces and Special Weapons And Tactics (SWAT) teams to come under scrutiny in the United States. The deployment of SWAT teams to the homes of innocent people, as well as recent interest in police tactics following the Ferguson riots, means that a review of SWAT teams may be in order. A primer: The first SWAT team was created in Los Angeles in the late 1960s to combat riots and groups such as the militant wing of the Black Panthers. SWAT tactics became more widespread with the declaration of the “war on drugs”, and protocols such as the no-knock raid, which allows police to break into homes unannounced, became widespread.
Congress repealed the no-knock raid in 1974, but the practice made a quick comeback without Congressional approval. From the 1970s to 2005, the number of SWAT raids made in the United States each year ballooned from a few hundred to 50,000 raids. According to the Wall Street Journal, certain federal agencies now have their own SWAT-style teams, including even the Department of the Interior and NASA. Being a member of a SWAT team is one of the most dangerous jobs a police officer can undertake, and therefore teams can develop tendency to act with excessive force out of self-preservation. This fact, combined with the number of raids, means that incidents of excessive and unjustified violence by SWAT teams are not uncommon. A Virginia SWAT team killed 38-year-old optometrist Sal Culosi in a botched raid in 2008. They had been sent to investigate illegal gambling after a detective overheard Culosi mention betting on a football games to his friend in a bar. A police officer killed Culosi in a single shot when he reached for his pocket to pull out his phone. Another example made headlines in Atlanta this year. In May, a SWAT team conducted a no-knock raid on a home in Atlanta, in which they accidentally tossed a stun grenade into a baby’s crib, severely burning the child’s face. The police then arrested the child’s relative for selling drugs.
As the practice of swatting becomes more widespread, every American has cause to learn what they can about the most militaristic wing of the police. Utah this year became the second state, after Maryland, to pass a law requiring police agencies to record and release data concerning SWAT teams. Those states must now collect information regarding how and how often SWAT teams are used, as well as what results from their deployment. This is a welcome step, but only a start.
When a cruel prank can send paramilitants into any person’s living room, perhaps we should force those paramilitants to knock first, rather than simply tossing grenades or opening fire. When the most dangerous type of law enforcement can be sent to raid celebrities, or bloggers, or the families of hapless teenage gamers at the drop of a hat, maybe we should reexamine what kinds of guns and explosives we allow those police to have. Because in the era of swatting, the police are not just sent after the bad guys anymore. They could just as easily be sent after you.
