Very long NYT op-ed on swatting that does not reckon with the idea that maybe "anonymous callers can dispatch gullible policemen to assassinate you based on lies" is the problem. Instead:

liberal with one big button that says 'more cops now': hmm i wonder what this social dilemma requires. i shall think it through and decide which button is best to press

Not the main point, but thinking about the famously undivided Founders and Framers in the years before and after the founding of the new republic "We were just goofing around," said a tearful Aaron Burr as paramedics* attended to Alexander Hamilton, his best friend in the world. *or the equivalent

Did Sorkin write this

People who fans the flams of division should be "cast as traitors". Irony is a dish best served unintentionally.

They're not ready for the blowback that they'd get saying maybe it's Bad Actually that there's a whole type of terrorism that depends on cops being intensely violent

lol at the grand conclusion being “you should be able to swat people for swatting people”

Too often tasks downloaded on us as though we have control over a social phenomenon. Here the provincial premier wants us to 'solve the problem of homelessness': rent out our spare rooms & make suggestions online to win a prize, while the tent city in Halifax grows. 'Resilience' or something.

Seems like we should just get rid of no knock, no announce, no confirm police activities period. Also, it should be a felony if cops go to the wrong house and it is determined that they had reasonable access to knowledge that it was wrong eg real estate records, rental agreements, etc.

lmao Some of that is just actively telling people who would do it that it work

Are they trying to Streisand Effect swatting?