This is the correct response. Yeah, sure, tactics could change to “analysis before action” but then you lose responsiveness when you need it most. Maybe there’s a balance, but I don’t think it’s worth it. The real answer is to litigate the fuck out of any dipshit who commits the act of “swatting.” It really is like starting a fire, the potential damage is immense.

And analysis before action killed a ton of kids at Columbine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre...

No, the shooter killed a ton of kids at Columbine.

So we’re talking about ’The boy who cried wolf’ here. There’s a reason it’s a timeless fable, dating back thousands of years.

It’s a common dilemma that we might not ever solve. It seems to me ‘swatting’ is one of the most modern iterations of it.

It's not boy cry wolf because the victim made no claim. Someone committed fraud making a false claim and attributed it to him.