News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by sandworm101 on Monday October 12, 2020 @10:53AM (#24754936)
Flashbangs. They are violent, but in a totally different class than actual hand grenades. No police in the US use hand grenades. The kid in the crib survived. Had it been an actual grenade ... not a survivable event.

https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2014/05/baby-in-coma-...

Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by saganus on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:35AM (#24755494)
According to Wikipedia

> On 28 May 2014, a 19-month-old baby boy's face was severely burned and mutilated when a stun grenade was thrown into his playpen by a SWAT team serving an arrest warrant for a suspected drug dealer in Cornelia, Georgia. The baby survived with facial disfigurement.[17] The family received $3.6 million in settlements in 2016.[18]

So yeah, the baby survived. That doesn't mean there was no harm done.

Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by opwieurposiu on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:48AM (#24755647)
Well, you see in this situation the baby was asleep, so the SWAT tactics manual only calls for a stun grenade. Had the baby been awake, of course a 120mm howitzer shell would have done a better job of ensuring the safety of the brave officers from this dangerous infant.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by whoknew1122 on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:38AM (#24755524)
A flash-bang is a grenade. It's not a fragmentation grenade (which you're referring to); or an incendiary grenade; or any number of other 'less than lethal' (which can be lethal) grenade types.

A 'hand' grenade is one thrown by hand as opposed to projected from a grenade launcher. So, yes, a flashbang is a hand grenade.

And it's a good thing those policemen used a concussive grenade to pacify that dangerous child. I'm sure that child was a threat that needed to be neutralized./s

Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by chacham15 on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:56AM (#24755745)
For justice, outcomes matter. This is why there is a difference between "attempted murder" and actual murder. Yes, both are punished, but the actual outcome does matter. Therefore, the distinction between a flashbang and an incendiary/fragmentation grenade (which what most people think when they read hand grenade) too does matter. When I read the initial statement, I thought that the child was killed and am happy to hear that thats not the case. Even though the child was definitely harmed, I am happy that it is still alive.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by meta4s on Monday October 12, 2020 @12:17PM (#24756020)
You're wrong. The differences between "attempted murder" and "actual murder" are just codified laws which were enacted by a legislature. People decided. And it's certainly okay in this situation to debate those decisions. If you're just arguing that definitions matter, don't hide it under something that it's not.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by meta4s on Monday October 12, 2020 @12:13PM (#24755968)
Did you just read what you wrote? The kid in the crib survived. How does that not stop you in your tracks? What prompts a SWAT team to do a night raid on a potential family home? Please tell me how any other point in the day where the potential of a family not being there, isn't a better option? Then if you could please explain if this was the case, that any other time is/was plausible, what you think the reason to throw the flash grenade is or was at the time? Actually interested how you divest your self from being human under the guise of being analytical and miss such an obvious analytical point.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by mcv on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:40AM (#24755553)
It's not a fragmentation grenade, but it's still a type of hand grenade. Not as deadly, but not exactly harmless either. And very irresponsible to use it in a situation that does not warrant it.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by jefurii on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:51AM (#24755679)
Survived yes but think of the effects on the kid and the family.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by 8fGTBjZxBcHq on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:07AM (#24755124)
Are you really defending the police grenading a baby.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by Fricken on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:26AM (#24755370)
No, he's defending flashbanging a baby.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by sandworm101 on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:52AM (#24755693)
No, I was pointing out the use of a term that, in common understanding of what "grenade" means, was confusing.
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by maxlybbert on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:43AM (#24755596)
No, the comment pointed out that it wasn’t a grenade. A not-grenade cannot be used to “grenade a baby.”
[dead]
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by jakelazaroff on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:22AM (#24755313)
Wikipedia redirects "flashbang" to "stun grenade" and describes it as a "less lethal explosive device", so I'd say they're using the vernacular correctly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashbang
Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by bigwavedave on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:37AM (#24755519)
Not the op, the gp, or even the parent, but I'd like to say that while I'm certainly not condoning flashbangs in cribs or saying that "grenade" is technically inaccurate in the original sentence, there is a very different mental picture when someone says "grenade" vs "stun grenade". I feel like in an era where it's easier and more prolific to crucify a person because of their words than in the known history of mankind, the distinction between "grenade" and "stun grenade" should be made.

Does that make this okay? No. Not even a little. But let's err on the side of clearer communication.

Re:Police killings more likely in agencies that get military... by sandworm101 on Monday October 12, 2020 @11:53AM (#24755714)
Exactly. It's akin to the difference between dropping "a bomb" and dropping "a nuke". The terms are sometimes interchangeable but should never be confused.