The article I read is about a recent trend of what is known as "swatting" sweeps New Jersey. Swatting is a
fake call to 911 or the FBI using a disguised voice and a fake number and claiming to have a hostage. This
causes a SWAT team to be sent to the location of the phone call. It is being used to have schools, hospitals,
and malls shut down and evacuated. According to experts on the subject, it is a relatively easy criminal
"prank" to learn to do. They say it is easy to do, and catching the perpetrator is the difficult part. The Robert
Wood Johnson University Hospital, and several schools in Princeton, Cresskill, and West Milford were all
victim to these criminal hoaxes.
The wave of fake calls plaguing New Jersey is likely only to be stopped by a large scale investigation by an
agency such as the FBI. The FBI wants to make the penalty more severe for people caught doing this
because of how costly it is to the public safety. Most instances of swatting are reported to have computer
generated voices in the call. Dallas Texas had a similar problem, they had a spree of hoax calls that lasted
years. The man behind it was Matthew Weigman. He was tried and sentenced to 11 years in a federal
prison, at the age of 19. A concern was expressed by a few different police agencies that fake calls were
being used to observe police resources.
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2015/06/swatting_easy_to_do_harder_to_investigate.html?
13 comments:
NJ.com, Kevin Shea | For. "Swatting in N.J.: Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate." N.p., n.d. Web.
24 Sept. 2015.
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2015/06/swatting_easy_to_do_harder_to_investigate.html?
I read the article called “Swatting in N.J. : Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate”, which was critiqued by Eric. I think he did a good job summarizing the article and gave an explanation of what swatting was (fake call to 911 or the FBI with a fake phone number pretending to have a hostage). The article did a good job explaining how big of an issue swatting is becoming especially places in New Jersey and Texas, and how much of a danger this poses for civilians. It was nice the way the article put sub-titles in order to organize the information and make it easier to understand what the article was going to talk about. However, the critique needs to explain the significance to humanity (done with very little detail in the summary), and there is no critique of the article. This article was interesting and helped me understand how big of a problem swatting is, even if people are just doing it as a prank.
Eric I think you chose a great article to do. I liked how you included a lot of information regarding how this occurring and that it is hard to apprehend the perpetrator. I also liked how you included that a 19 year old was arrested and sentenced to 11 years in jail. This shows how serious of a crime it is. I would have liked though if you put some of your opinion in on it and if you talked a little more about the man that committed the crime. This article is something I find interesting because I have seen a lot of swatting in movies yet never researched what the consequences were for this crime
-Sean Ryan
NJ.com, Kevin. "Swatting in N.J.: Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate." 8 June 2015. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.
I read the article called “Swatting in N.J. : Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate”. I think Eric summarized the article well by giving concise explanation of swatting, which is to "fake call to 911 or the FBI using a disguised voice and a fake number and claiming to have a hostage," and its disservice to many law enforcements, especially in New Jersey. The review not only referenced the victims and the damages caused by the "prank", but also gave an example of a case that casts light on the possible outcome/punishment the criminal awaits if they were caught; "Matthew Weigman was tried and sentenced to 11 years in a federalprison, at the age of 19". Those three aspects made it a particularly informative review for the readers. However, if it had more information on how troublesome the process is to trace the "prankers"; that most enforcements don't have the financial and time capacity to do, and the possibility of swatting developing into cyber terrorism, it would have become more compelling. The review also left the ultimate concern the article was questioning: how to prosecute those cyber attackers?
At last, I chose this piece thinking it would be educational since I wasn't familiar with the term "swatting" nor the damage it causes. I was made aware of how this "prank" could become the new element of terrorism.
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2015/06/swatting_easy_to_do_harder_to_investigate.html?
The subject of this article captured my attention and Eric did a good job explaining to the reader what swatting is and how it is affecting states, such as New Jersey. I enjoyed both the article and the review. I like how the author of this review makes it easy to understand what swatting is and explains the consequences of this crime. I also like how Eric gave examples of places that were victims to these crimes, such as Wood Johnson University Hospital, schools in Princeton, Cresskill, and West Milford. It gave the reader an idea of how close these crimes are occurring to us. Lastly, I like how the writer gave an example of an incident involving this type of crime saying how the perpetrator was sentenced eleven years in prison for this so- called “prank.” The writer could have made this review better by adding some more examples of this kind of crime. If he added more examples, the reader would have gotten a better understanding of how dangerous this crime is. Also, the writer could have explained the idea of swatting and the government a little more. The quantity of this review is little and the quality does not really make up for it. Finally, I learned some interesting facts by reading this article. Firstly, I learned what swatting is and how serious it is. Then, I learned what it can result in: the evacuation of schools, hospitals and malls. Learning what swatting is has expanded my knowledge on types of crimes and its consequences.
I read the review of “Swatting in New Jersey” by Eric, and thought that he did a good job explaining the background of the story with details that gives us a sense of what exactly was going on during the “prank” calls to 911. Eric did a good job of presenting the conclusions of the prank of who the callers were, and what their possible punishments would be for this crime. Also, Eric did a nice job of using an example of hoax calls in the Dallas, Texas case where Matthew Weigman was sentenced to 11 years in prison.
I think that Eric could’ve added more information to this, adding onto the affects of 911 prank calls and why people are pranking the police. There are also some grammatical errors that could be worked on. Overall, it was very interesting, and I learned that there are many cases of hoax calls to the police and that there are serious consequences for those actions.
Shea, Kevin. "Swatting in N.J.: Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate." NJ.com. NJ.com, 8 June 2015. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.
I read the article called “Swatting in N.J. : Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate” and Eric did a good job of getting the general point of the article across. By reading Eric’s summary one could grasp the idea of swatting and what it entails. He properly showed the problems associated with this trend and the dangers involved. He talked about the huge costs to law enforcement agencies in having to check out these false security threats. He also cited the consequences that come with carrying out this "prank" by talking about the 19 year old Matthew Weigman who "was tried and sentenced to 11 years in a federal prison, at the age of 19".
The article did talk about how the calls were in large part not to 911, however, and therefore Eric could have given some more details about how these calls were actually coming in and why they're so hard to trace rather than simply stating that they were 911 calls. He could also have expanded upon what are the suggested punishments by law enforcement that want steeper penalties. After all an eleven year sentence for a nineteen year old kid already seems like a substantial punishment.
Overall Eric did a great job of getting the point of the article across in a clear and concise way without losing to much depth. It was appalling to hear about this trend of "swatting" which demonstrates a clear disregard for the consequences of an individual's actions. I am unsure how to deal with this problem and can only hope people stop carrying out this irresponsible act. It was an interesting article and it brought up a problem that I was unaware of.
I think you did a very good job summarizing the article you read, as well as defining what swatting is. In all honesty, I was surprised when I read about swatting. I agree with the FBI in that that they should increase the severity of the punishment for swatting, because when a fake call is made to the police, they send the SWAT team and the entire rescue team, and it this just causes a lot of hassle and it's a waste of time. Since they can go and help someone else who might really be in serious trouble. It's sad to hear that it is difficult for investigators to catch who is behind every fake prank call. One way to improve this article is including more details on why these people make these fake calls and why is it that the police can't trace their calls. However, overall you did a great job summarizing this article and making it an easy read.
NJ.com, Kevin Shea. "Swatting in N.J.: Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate." 8 June 2015. Web. 24 Sept. 2015.
http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/2015/06/swatting_easy_to_do_harder_to_investigate.html?
After reading the whole article "Swatting in NJ, Easy to Do, Harder to Investigate" I realized that Eric did a good job summarizing the article without making the review seem too vague or just a paraphrased version of the article. I thought that Eric summed up the seriousness of the situation, as these "pranks" are a huge waste of police resources and could very easily put people in danger. It also concerns me that it is very difficult to find out who called the police in the first place. I thought that Eric did a good job of portraying the main idea of the article and did a good job of quoting the more important parts of the article. I feel like this review could have been a little bit better if it were formatted in a way that it would be easier to read. I also thought that this review could be improved if the article provided more information about how they track down these prankers, as the article is supposed to relate to forensics after all. I was impressed by the fact that the police are not more pro-active about prosecuting people who make these prank phone calls. I would think that they would have taken measures against this by now, as this trend is fairly old.
Eric’s article review was well explained. To start, he explained what swatting was, a term I have never heard of before. Swatting is prank calling 911 and saying you have a hostage. Eric explains how this is happening in New Jersey and gives a very detailed summary of the prank including locations it has occurred in. He also writes how this isn't the only place to have occurred in. Texas was another victim of this back in 2008. I wish Eric would have included more information on how this connects to cyber terrorism. He also does not mention the incident that happened in Connecticut. It would have been interesting to hear about it from different locations in the country. I chose this article because it sounded like a social trend happening which it is but none the less still a bad thing. You explained the article very well and kept me interested.
Eric’s article review was well explained. To start, he explained what swatting was, a term I have never heard of before. Swatting is prank calling 911 and saying you have a hostage. Eric explains how this is happening in New Jersey and gives a very detailed summary of the prank including locations it has occurred in. He also writes how this isn't the only place to have occurred in. Texas was another victim of this back in 2008. I wish Eric would have included more information on how this connects to cyber terrorism. He also does not mention the incident that happened in Connecticut. It would have been interesting to hear about it from different locations in the country. I chose this article because it sounded like a social trend happening which it is but none the less still a bad thing. You explained the article very well and kept me interested.
I found Eric’s article to be particularly interesting, due to it being a completely new phenomenon. One thing that I really enjoyed while reading this article was the examples that you gave us on how “swatting” can be used. You said that people have used this to shut down malls, schools, and hospitals. Another thing that I like about your review was the topic that you chose, most article don’t give me great interest, but this article had me hooked the entire time. I really wanted to see what “swatting” was all about. Also I liked that you included the penalties that the criminal would have to serve if he or she was caught for sweeping. This was a great review, but there are somethings that could be improved such as your opinion. You truly didn’t express how you felt about the article and your views on the penalties for the criminals involved with the crime of sweeping. Another thing that you could improve upon is the detail that you gave us in the review. I wanted to know more about the topic, and it really was not show. I wish that there was more detail as to the procedure that law enforcements are now using when this happens. I am impressed that now the FBI is starting to track down these people who are using this as a prank. I also found it interesting because I had to read in the textbook the other day about specialist who try to match voices with certain suspects. Overall it was a very well written review.
This article was very interesting to read. Three aspects in particular were well presented that stood out to me. First, I like how Eric organized her thoughts. She made it very easy to understand and read. Second, I like that she included the thoughts of some experts. This allows reader to trust what she is writing about and at the same time, make it more interesting. Lastly, I like how Eric organized her paper in a cause and effect type of way. She stated what the problem was, why it was a problem, and what the result of the problem would be, which made it easier to follow along. It would have been helpful if Eric had further explained about the incident in Connecticut. This review was not formatted correctly into paragraphs, which made it harder to read. I was impressed with a lot from this article. I think it is very concerning that people are wasting the police's time and prank calling them. The police have a huge job in needed to keep people safe, and getting pranked is a complete waste of time. It is also very concerning that the person who did the prank cannot be identified as easily. I chose to read this article review, because it seemed like an interesting topic to read about. Eric did a great job in the way he presented his article!
Personally i found this article to be very interesting especially because its relevant to the present day with the school shootings that happened recently. Eric gave a detailed accurate description of ¨Swatting¨ and the effects it has on social security. People might think this kind of thing may be funny but in reality its a serious problem because once that call is made security turns red alert meaning there's no escaping the area so everyone in the general area of the call cannot leave until its completely secured. Something that could be done to make this Current Event better would be maybe eric could add a little personal criticism and a short summary of the penalties given to those who commit this kind of crime. I was especially impressed by the amount of instances this crime has taken place, you'd think in our society where the government listens into all of our phone calls that they'd be able to shut this down before it even happens.
Post a Comment