Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

12-Year-Old YouTuber 'Swatted' After Spike in Channel Followers - Fortnite - MMORPG.com

135

Comments

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,505
    Vrika said:
    Horusra said:
    Waiting for the first lawsuit against youtube and facebook live for broadcasting underage people.
    I don't think there will be a (successful) lawsuit. It would limit the freedom of speech so severely.
    I'm sure the TOS states no minors without parental consent or even supervision.

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • ArskaaaArskaaa Member RarePosts: 1,265
    why they allow child to live stream? a lot stuff can go wrong with that.
    ScotKyleranMrMelGibson
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,407
    edited February 2018
    Phry said:
    ...snip...

    Assault is hitting someone, it rarely involves using a deadly weapon which is why that is a seperate category of itself, it rarely results in significant injury, the difference is that when someone is SWAT'd there is a significant risk of the person or persons being SWAT'd being shot, as has already been demonstrated, which is why i made the analogy of the pointed gun, the intention is to do harm, i could for instance shoot at you with the intention to injur your leg or arm, but despite this intention you suffer a fatal wound, or perhaps i am such a poor shot that i miss you entirely, either way there was the intention to cause harm even if no harm was actually done other than you suffering a bit of  nasty scare.
    It does not take magical powers of deduction but just basic reasoning to decide that if you carry out an action that puts another persons life at risk, then your intention is to do harm, you are not after all sending them a nasty note with a bouquet of flowers through interflora :/
    No.  Assault has different "degrees" just like murder has different degrees.

    What you mention would be aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

    The problem is that you are making assumptions without proving anything. We can "reasonably" say there was intent to cause harm, yes this flies, but you can't "reasonably" say that you know there was intent to cause a "killing".  If the swatter has been making death threats on social media or in some other way then yes a murder or attempted murder charge could fly but if not... then it's assault.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault#United_States
    American common law has defined assault as an attempt to commit a battery.

    Assault is typically treated as a misdemeanor and not as a felony (unless it involves a law enforcement officer). The more serious crime of aggravated assault is treated as a felony.

    Four elements were required at common law:

     The apparent, present ability to carry out;

     An unlawful attempt;

     To commit a violent injury;

     Upon another.

     Simple assault can be distinguished without the intent of injury upon another person. The violation of one's personal space or touching in a way the victim deemed inappropriate can be simple assault. In common law states an assault is not committed by merely, for example, swearing at another; without threat of battery, there can be no assault.

    As the criminal law evolved, element one was weakened in most jurisdictions so that a reasonable fear of bodily injury would suffice. These four elements were eventually codified in most states.

     Laws on assault vary by state. Since each state has its own laws, there is no universal assault law. Acts classified as assault in one state may be classified as battery, menacing, intimidation, reckless endangerment etc. in another state. Modern American statutes may define assault as including:

     an attempt to cause or purposely, knowingly, or recklessly causing bodily injury to another

     negligently causing bodily injury to another with a dangerous weapon (assault with a deadly weapon).[34]

     causing bodily harm by reckless operation of a motor vehicle (vehicular assault).[35]

     threatening another in a menacing manner.[36]

     knowingly causing physical contact with another person knowing the other person will regard the contact as offensive or provocative[37]

     causing stupor, unconsciousness or physical injury by intentionally administering a drug or controlled substance without consent[38]

     purposely or knowingly causing reasonable apprehension of bodily injury in another[39]

     any act which is intended to place another in fear of immediate physical contact which will be painful, injurious, insulting, or offensive, coupled with the apparent ability to execute the act.[40]

    The laws on assault differ significantly from state to state...snip...


    Post edited by Asm0deus on

    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 7,837
    Kyleran said:
    What the hell is swatting?
    Something you can watch a video on YouTube of the top 10 streamers who have been swatted live.

    Apparently an occupational hazard and really highlights my point, never give out your address if public on the internet.
    Oftentimes, you don't have to. Social media, advertisers, phone providers, and other such companies sell personal information freely enough that a skilled and determined enough internet troll need only find the start of someone's paper trail to uncover enough to dox or swat someone. I wouldn't be so quick to blame the swat victim in any of these cases. 
  • HulluckHulluck Member UncommonPosts: 839
    People who do this should be charged with attempted murder.  The caller intentionally gives a scenario where LEO must act, calculated and intentional. The caller is using LEO as a weapon. Best case scenario is that occupants are held at gun point. Worst cast victims end up dead. Caller can't claim they don't know right from wrong. Or that they didn't intend for it to get that serious.  It was their intent all along.
    [Deleted User]MrMelGibson
  • DragnelusDragnelus Member EpicPosts: 3,503
    Gorwe said:
    SBFord said:
    I agree with Cizzorz -- whoever did this should rot in a cell for a good long while.
    They should string him by the balls while slowly and painfully pulling out fingernails. Really...something ought to be done about this.

    GorweKyleranMrMelGibson

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,505
    Aeander said:
    Kyleran said:
    What the hell is swatting?
    Something you can watch a video on YouTube of the top 10 streamers who have been swatted live.

    Apparently an occupational hazard and really highlights my point, never give out your address if public on the internet.
    Oftentimes, you don't have to. Social media, advertisers, phone providers, and other such companies sell personal information freely enough that a skilled and determined enough internet troll need only find the start of someone's paper trail to uncover enough to dox or swat someone. I wouldn't be so quick to blame the swat victim in any of these cases. 
    Fair enough,  once people figure out "who" a person really is additional information isn't that hard to obtain for the talented and / or determined hacker.

    The price of celebrity I suppose.

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • KiwiHypeKiwiHype Member UncommonPosts: 233
    Poor darling I hope he's ok and I hope he gets triple the amount of followers now, big hugs little man!
    SBFordConstantineMerus[Deleted User]
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,407
    Hulluck said:
    People who do this should be charged with attempted murder.  The caller intentionally gives a scenario where LEO must act, calculated and intentional. The caller is using LEO as a weapon. Best case scenario is that occupants are held at gun point. Worst cast victims end up dead. Caller can't claim they don't know right from wrong. Or that they didn't intend for it to get that serious.  It was their intent all along.
    The problem with this reasoning is that for it to fly you must also accept that LEO are darn incompetent which equals LEO intervention = death or a killing.

    LEO are suppose to be trained and ABLE to handle such situations so that innocents that have done no wrong don't end up dead.  I do believe right now LEOs are not handling such cases adequately but then swatting is relatively new and LEOs tend to take awhile to learn how to handle new situation properly and find proper RoE. This is another bag of worms though.

    Typically if someone calls the cops on me and they come to my door I shouldn't reasonably expect to be shot dead, not if LEOs are doing their jobs properly and take the "serve and protect" motto like they should be.


    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,766
    edited February 2018
    Trolling on the internet goes too far, crosses every line, and hardly ever gets punished for things that are clear crimes.

    Need to crack down on this and similar sort of behaviors and make one example out of them to finally send the message that this is not OK, there are seriously some utterly ridiculous trends on the internet that result on the deaths of innocent people, for the sake of a sick version of entertainment.
    JinxysAsm0deusjimmywolf
  • KonfessKonfess Member RarePosts: 1,667
    There are bullies in this world. When their victims are easily identified by swatting or suicide we call for their punishment. But when their victims are pushed to school shootings we let them off scot-free? Now I am not saying any school shooting is not a crime. I am saying that the bullies are equally guilty of pulling the trigger and deserve the spotlight in all three scenarios. Swatting, Suicides, and School Shootings would not happen without bullies.
    Asm0deus

    Pardon any spelling errors
    Konfess your cyns and some maybe forgiven
    Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
    Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
    As if it could exist, without being payed for.
    F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
    Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
    It costs money to play.  Therefore P2W.

  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 7,837
    edited February 2018
    Asm0deus said:
    Hulluck said:
    People who do this should be charged with attempted murder.  The caller intentionally gives a scenario where LEO must act, calculated and intentional. The caller is using LEO as a weapon. Best case scenario is that occupants are held at gun point. Worst cast victims end up dead. Caller can't claim they don't know right from wrong. Or that they didn't intend for it to get that serious.  It was their intent all along.
    The problem with this reasoning is that for it to fly you must also accept that LEO are darn incompetent which equals LEO intervention = death or a killing.

    LEO are suppose to be trained and ABLE to handle such situations so that innocents that have done no wrong don't end up dead.  I do believe right now LEOs are not handling such cases adequately but then swatting is relatively new and LEOs tend to take awhile to learn how to handle new situation properly and find proper RoE. This is another bag of worms though.

    Typically if someone calls the cops on me and they come to my door I shouldn't reasonably expect to be shot dead, not if LEOs are doing their jobs properly and take the "serve and protect" motto like they should be.


    Let me ask you this: how would you react if you are a small town police department and you get a call from a smooth-talking, emotionless, clearly sociopathic individual claiming to have killed someone with the intention of killing women and/or children currently being held hostage? For bonus points, they claim to have spread gasoline around the house to set it on fire.

    This was the exact situation in the fatal swatting incident a month ago. This is a high pressure incident with lives at stake and an unstable individual. The LEO doesn't have time to find out if the resident of that house has a goddamn Twitch channel.

    The one and only person at fault for these instances is the caller. End of story.
    KyleranSolar_Prophet
  • Asm0deusAsm0deus Member EpicPosts: 4,407
    edited February 2018
    Aeander said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Hulluck said:
    People who do this should be charged with attempted murder.  The caller intentionally gives a scenario where LEO must act, calculated and intentional. The caller is using LEO as a weapon. Best case scenario is that occupants are held at gun point. Worst cast victims end up dead. Caller can't claim they don't know right from wrong. Or that they didn't intend for it to get that serious.  It was their intent all along.
    The problem with this reasoning is that for it to fly you must also accept that LEO are darn incompetent which equals LEO intervention = death or a killing.

    LEO are suppose to be trained and ABLE to handle such situations so that innocents that have done no wrong don't end up dead.  I do believe right now LEOs are not handling such cases adequately but then swatting is relatively new and LEOs tend to take awhile to learn how to handle new situation properly and find proper RoE. This is another bag of worms though.

    Typically if someone calls the cops on me and they come to my door I shouldn't reasonably expect to be shot dead, not if LEOs are doing their jobs properly and take the "serve and protect" motto like they should be.


    Let me ask you this: how would you react if you are a small town police department and you get a call from a smooth-talking, emotionless, clearly sociopathic individual claiming to have killed someone with the intention of killing women and/or children currently being held hostage? For bonus points, they claim to have spread gasoline around the house to set it on fire.

    This was the exact situation in the fatal swatting incident a month ago. This is a high pressure incident with lives at stake and an unstable individual. The LEO doesn't have time to find out if the resident of that house has a goddamn Twitch channel.

    The one and only person at fault for these instances is the caller. End of story.
    I think you are having a kneejerk reaction and from this post you seem to think I am a all coppers are aholes type when I am not.

    Right now in the USA LEO have a protect myself and ask question later mindset which I feel goes against the "serve and protect" oath. 

    That said it doesn't matter if a LEO is out giving a routine traffic ticket or in a situation like you mention in either case they should be careful but that doesn't give the excuse of I got "scared" nervous etc etc so my shooting someone dead is okay.

    There far far too much of the coping out attitude of it's not my fault.  In the case of kansas the caller was primarily at fault, the guy at the door was also at fault and so were the LEO.

    IMO the caller for the kansa thing should be charged with murder, the cops need better training or different training.

    All this doesn't have much to do with this case though were this caller should be charged with aggravated assault.

    I am not bashing LEO but I wont kiss their backside when they mess up either.

    Saying it's all on the caller and giving LEO a free pass to do w/e is ludicrous, everyone is responsible for their actions even LEO, even solders that are "just following orders"....


    Brenics ~ Just to point out I do believe Chris Roberts is going down as the man who cheated backers and took down crowdfunding for gaming.





  • PemminPemmin Member UncommonPosts: 623
    edited February 2018

    Scot said:


    Kyleran said:




    Kyleran said:


    Scot said:thats

    Fortnite is a 13+ game, his parents should not be allowing him to play it. Also how did they find his address, again parents should be making sure kids understand not to give details out. That's one of the reasons there is a 13+ age limit.


    We are reaching the stage where there may be calls for players of certain games to register with the police so when they get a call saying its a drug den or whatever they do not overreact!



    Regardless of all that a stiff sentence called for, but doubt they will be caught.


    That's a good idea,  create a database streamers and players can register on which police can check first just to see if it's a possible hoax and perhaps a phone number to call first before they rush in hard.


    Great idea !, so now a drug dealer can just sign up to twitch . Come on guys you need a better solution.



    We are all ears, please feel free to share your better solutions.

    Besides, should police bust into drug dealers homes ready to kill? At least with this info cops could take a breath and scope the situation out with greater care than a call about an active shooter might warrant.


    I actually think his idea in the subsequent post is a good one, but still huge issues holding passport numbers online. It is always possible to get round systems that society puts in place to regulate anything.

    That's why end of the day its down to the parents, if they had done their job he would not be playing and when he got to 13 he would know not to give out details.



    I don't blame the parents in this situation. the child may have been mature enough to handle twitch and fortnite. the 13+ rating is there because the child may be exposed to content they might not be ready for...but SWATing is well outside the scope of any ToS and the childs age is irrelevant because it shouldn't happen....even to an 18+ adult.

    the only person(s) responsible here is the jackass that called the police and possibly our society as a whole. the jackass should be charged with a separate count of assault for each and every one of the police officers that had to get involved and there should be a civil suit for emotional distress.
    AeanderAsm0deusIselinSpottyGekko
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 9,000
    Kyleran said:
    Scot said:thats
    Fortnite is a 13+ game, his parents should not be allowing him to play it. Also how did they find his address, again parents should be making sure kids understand not to give details out. That's one of the reasons there is a 13+ age limit.

    We are reaching the stage where there may be calls for players of certain games to register with the police so when they get a call saying its a drug den or whatever they do not overreact!

    Regardless of all that a stiff sentence called for, but doubt they will be caught.
    That's a good idea,  create a database streamers and players can register on which police can check first just to see if it's a possible hoax and perhaps a phone number to call first before they rush in hard.
    I was thinking of the same thing.  If you think you may become a victim of swatting you should be able to register with your local police department.  You get a code word or number.  Anything happens and they call you or your parents first if your a minor and give them the code.  

    I would think that with swatting it only has to happen once before the police think it may be a prank the second time and so will be less likely to kick in the front door.  They still have to respond but like one streamer said the next time they just knocked on the door and asked if everything was ok.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • Cyber_wastelandCyber_wasteland Member UncommonPosts: 192
    What the fuck is wrong with people....like.....i just don't even have words for this shit.

  • kanechartkanechart Member UncommonPosts: 707
    I noticed a lot of people commenting on his age and should not be streaming and too young. Did you guys also say that when the children were shot up in the schools? There should really be no age restriction for a kid having a good time playing a video game. When I was younger giving out your info had no consequences but it has gotten worse these days. That being said society is getting worse and worse and rather then fix it or prevent it we try to put more restrictions on what someone can and can't do. Enjoy your police state in 50 years.
    [Deleted User]

    SNIP

  • VrikaVrika Member LegendaryPosts: 7,888
    OG_Zorvan said:
    kanechart said:
    I noticed a lot of people commenting on his age and should not be streaming and too young. Did you guys also say that when the children were shot up in the schools? There should really be no age restriction for a kid having a good time playing a video game. When I was younger giving out your info had no consequences but it has gotten worse these days. That being said society is getting worse and worse and rather then fix it or prevent it we try to put more restrictions on what someone can and can't do. Enjoy your police state in 50 years.
    Removing restrictions from children and letting them do as they wish is one of the reasons society is where it's at. Children need more restrictions, not less.
    Haven't people in the US been placing more and more restrictions so that children can barely go anywhere without an adult.

    Discipline used to be harsher, but restrictions used to be lot less.
     
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 22,983
    OG_Zorvan said:
    kanechart said:
    I noticed a lot of people commenting on his age and should not be streaming and too young. Did you guys also say that when the children were shot up in the schools? There should really be no age restriction for a kid having a good time playing a video game. When I was younger giving out your info had no consequences but it has gotten worse these days. That being said society is getting worse and worse and rather then fix it or prevent it we try to put more restrictions on what someone can and can't do. Enjoy your police state in 50 years.
    Removing restrictions from children and letting them do as they wish is one of the reasons society is where it's at. Children need more restrictions, not less.

    Just to point out this is not a new restriction we just made up and want to impose on the world. He is underage according to the age rating for the game.
  • AmbiorixEburoneAmbiorixEburone Member CommonPosts: 3
    people are getting terrible in the entire world
    this is maybe of topic but i had to say it
    yesterday wife came in the room crying of a story in france we live in Belgium

    a boy had been taking to the hospital 7 years old
    he went to a public bathroom and his bottom got glued on the seat
    when they got him off the seat his skin was still on there
    how about tthat for a horrible cell if they ever catch the guys
  • DragnelusDragnelus Member EpicPosts: 3,503
    people are getting terrible in the entire world
    this is maybe of topic but i had to say it
    yesterday wife came in the room crying of a story in france we live in Belgium

    a boy had been taking to the hospital 7 years old
    he went to a public bathroom and his bottom got glued on the seat
    when they got him off the seat his skin was still on there
    how about tthat for a horrible cell if they ever catch the guys
    Thats why I almost never poop in public toilets and if I do I put clean it like no 2morrow and put paper on it. 

    But in all seriousness, I can understand pranks at that age but that isnt right.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,505
    kanechart said:
    I noticed a lot of people commenting on his age and should not be streaming and too young. Did you guys also say that when the children were shot up in the schools? There should really be no age restriction for a kid having a good time playing a video game. When I was younger giving out your info had no consequences but it has gotten worse these days. That being said society is getting worse and worse and rather then fix it or prevent it we try to put more restrictions on what someone can and can't do. Enjoy your police state in 50 years.
    At an individual level there is no way to "fix" society, other than making sure your own chiildren don't grow up to be part of the problem. 

    So what you do is learn to cope with the society as it is, and the internet has always been a dangerous place since I first joined back in the mid 90s because, you know, it's full of other people.

    I learned the lesson of giving out TMI very quickly in my online gaming career (2002) as a clan leader in Lineage 1.  

    A creeper joined the clan and for various reasons it became necessary to kick him (or her)

    As I had overshared personal details this individual threatened to come to my hometown and harm my family members.

    Long story short NCSoft quickly dealt with the problem, but it took several tries as this person kept buying new accounts and stalking me in game, fortunately attempting to apologze rather than directly threaten.

    I learned my lesson,  and really tightened down on info about myself or family in online games, and made sure my children were safe there. 

    I wish it didn't have to be that way, but again, we deal with the world as it is.

    Swatting is a terrible thing to happen to anyone and stopping it is a worthy goal, but there aren't many ideas you can come up with that won't result in the "police state" you fear.

    Better to just keep your children safe until they are better able to prevent or deal with the consequences from the nutjobs out there.


    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • alivenaliven Member UncommonPosts: 346
    Aside from Swatting needing to be punished severly, i have to say that kids shouldn't be on the internet.

    When i was this kid's age i was playing local multiplayer (pve and pvp) with my real life friends and it was the best thing ever. And this kid is just 12 years old, he has enough free time to meet up with this friends and play games that way.

    This kid's mom is in part responsible for not paying attention to what her kid was doing and the risks he was taking on the internet. Some parents are a bit to flexible with the wrong things.

    Just my thoughts. 
    Victim blaming. 

    The kid is playing video game and somebody decided to punish him for it with commiting crime. And you say that it is partialy parents fault. 

    FFS> 
    Asm0deus
  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Vrika said:
    Horusra said:
    Waiting for the first lawsuit against youtube and facebook live for broadcasting underage people.
    I don't think there will be a (successful) lawsuit. It would limit the freedom of speech so severely.
    12 year olds are not suppose to post and technically while we throw around rights minors can have their rights limited for safety or for other reasons.
  • HorusraHorusra Member EpicPosts: 4,411
    Platforms like Facebook and YouTube will be held accountable for the safety and monitoring of their space.  It is coming.
    MrMelGibson
Sign In or Register to comment.