Hubbry Logo
SwattingSwattingMain
Open search
Swatting
Community hub
Swatting
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Swatting
Swatting
Swatting
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

An FBI SWAT team during training

Swatting is a form of criminal harassment that involves deceiving an emergency service (via such means as hoaxing an emergency services dispatcher) into sending a police or emergency response team to another person's location. This is achieved by false reporting of a serious law enforcement emergency, such as a bomb threat, mass shooting, domestic violence, murder, hostage situation, or a false report of a mental health emergency, such as that a person is suicidal or homicidal and armed, among other things.[1]

The term is derived from the law enforcement unit SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics), a specialized type of police unit in the United States. It is not related to the verb "to swat".[2] SWAT teams are equipped with tactical gear and weapons that differ from patrol units, and are called to situations that are deemed high-risk. A threat may result in evacuations of schools and businesses. Advocates have called for swatting to be considered terrorism due to its use to intimidate and create the risk of injury or death.[3][4]

Making false reports to emergency services is a criminal offense in many jurisdictions, often punishable by fine or imprisonment.[5] In March 2019, a California man was sentenced to 20 years in prison for carrying out a fatal 2017 swatting.[6] Swatting carries a high risk of violence, and causes resources of about US$10,000 per incident to be wasted by a city or county that responds to a false report of a serious law enforcement emergency, as well as police or municipal liability in cases of violence or use of force.[7]: 1 [8][9][10] In California, swatters bear the "full cost" of the response, which can lead to fines of up to $10,000 if great bodily injury or death occur as a result of the swatting.[11][12]

History

[edit]

Bomb threats were a concern to police in the 1970s, with public buildings such as airports being evacuated in response to hoax calls designed to cause mass panic and public disruption,[13][14] or to delay exams at educational institutions.[15][16] In recent decades, hoax callers sometimes use techniques to disguise their identity or country of origin.[17]

Swatting has origins in prank calls to emergency services. Over the years, callers used increasingly sophisticated techniques to direct response units of particular types. In particular, attempts to have SWAT teams be dispatched to particular locations spawned the term swatting. The term was used by the FBI as early as 2008,[18] and entered Oxford Dictionaries Online in 2015.[19]

In 2019 the Anti-Defamation League estimated that there were about 1,000 swatting incidents nationwide, each costing about $10,000 of police time.[10]

Techniques

[edit]

Caller ID spoofing, social engineering, prank calls, and phone phreaking techniques may be variously combined by swatting perpetrators, along with TTY systems meant for the use of those with hearing disabilities. 911 systems (including computer telephony systems and human operators) have been tricked by calls placed from cities hundreds of miles away from the location of the purported call, or even from other countries.[20] The caller typically places a 911 call using a spoofed phone number, hiding the caller's real location.

Swatting is linked to the action of doxing, which is obtaining and broadcasting, often via the Internet, the address and details of an individual with an intent to harass or endanger them.[21]

Countermeasures

[edit]

In October 2018, the Seattle Police Department instituted a three-part approach to combating swatting: educating 911 dispatchers to identify fraudulent calls; ensuring that responding officers were aware of the potential for a hoax; and creating an opt-in registry for people who feared that they might become victims of swatting, such as journalists, celebrities, and live streamers. Using the registry, these people can provide cautionary information to the police, to inform officers responding to potential swatting attempts that target the victim's address.[7][22]

Security reporter Brian Krebs recommends that police departments take extra care when responding to calls received at their non-emergency numbers, or through speech synthesis systems, since these methods are often employed by out-of-area swatters who cannot connect to regional 911 centers.[23]

In September 2019, the Seattle Police Department formed the Swatting Mitigation Advisory Committee, composed of expert community and police representatives. Its purpose is to better understand swatting by collecting and analyzing data, formalizing protocols, and advocating broader awareness and prevention. It is currently co-chaired by Naveed Jamali and Sean Whitcomb, creator of the anti-swatting registry.[24]

In June 2023, the FBI announced that it would create a database to track swattings and improve information-sharing among local police agencies.[10]

Laws

[edit]

United States

[edit]
Representative Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, sponsor of the Interstate Swatting Hoax Act of 2015

In the United States, swatting can be prosecuted through federal criminal statutes:

  • "Threatening interstate communications"[25]
  • "Conspiracy to retaliate against a witness, victim, or informant"[26][27]
  • "Conspiracy to commit access device fraud and unauthorized access of a protected computer"[26][28]
  • An accomplice may be found guilty of "conspiring to obstruct justice"[29][30]
  • In California, callers bear the "full cost" of the response which can range up to $10,000[11]

In 2011, California State Senator Ted Lieu authored a bill to increase penalties for swatting. His own family became a victim of swatting when the bill was proposed.[31] A dozen police officers, along with firefighters and paramedics surrounded his family home.

In 2015, New Jersey State Assemblyman Paul D. Moriarty announced a bill[32] to increase sentences for hoax emergency calls, and was targeted by a hoax.[33][34] The bill proposed prison sentences up to ten years and fines up to $150,000.

A 2015 bipartisan bill in Congress sponsored by Katherine Clark and Patrick Meehan made swatting a federal crime with increased penalties.[35][36] Congresswoman Clark wrote an op-ed in The Hill saying that 2.5 million cases of cyberstalking between 2010 and 2013 had only resulted in 10 cases prosecuted, although a source for this was not provided.[37][38] As revenge for the bill, an anonymous caller fraudulently called police to Rep. Clark's house on January 31, 2016.[39]

United Kingdom

[edit]

In the United Kingdom, swatting is not recognized as an offence under UK laws unlike the US but may be prosecuted as perverting the course of justice where false complaints or allegations were made.[40]

In 2015, 28-year-old Robert Walker-McDaid pleaded guilty at Warwick Crown Court to perverting the course of justice, and was given a 20 month suspended sentence. Walker-McDaid was also required to complete 200 hours of community service and provide £1000 compensation to Tyran Dobbs, who was the victim of Walker-McDaid's hoax call.[41]

Injuries or deaths due to swatting

[edit]

2015 incident

[edit]

On January 15, 2015, in Sentinel, Washita County, Oklahoma, dispatchers received 911 calls from someone who identified himself as Dallas Horton and told dispatchers he had placed a bomb in a local preschool. Washita County sheriff's deputies and Sentinel police chief Louis Ross made forced entry into Horton's residence. Ross, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, was shot several times by Horton. Further investigation revealed that the calls did not originate from the residence, and led Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation agents to believe Horton was unaware that it was law enforcement officers making entry. James Edward Holly confessed to investigators that he made the calls with two "nonfunctioning" phones because he was angry with Horton.[42] Ross, who was shot multiple times in the chest and arm, was injured, but was treated for his wounds, and released from a local hospital.[43]

2017 incident

[edit]

On December 28, 2017, a fatal swatting incident occurred in Wichita, Kansas, United States. During an online dispute between Casey Viner and Shane Gaskill regarding the video game Call of Duty: WWII, Viner threatened to have Gaskill swatted. Gaskill responded by giving him a false address for his residence, one that was occupied by an uninvolved person, Andrew Finch. Viner then asked Tyler Barriss, an anonymous online swatter, to make the required fraudulent call to initiate the swatting. Wichita Police responded to the address, and as Finch was exiting his house, police officer Justin Rapp fatally shot him.

Barriss pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter and many other charges from unrelated incidents for which he was wanted. In March 2019, Barriss was sentenced to 20 years in federal prison. Viner was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and two years supervised release for his involvement, while Gaskill was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. Rapp was not charged for Finch's death. (Full article...)

2020 incident

[edit]
Main article: 2020 Tennessee swatting

On April 27, 2020, Mark Herring, a sixty-year-old man from Bethpage, Tennessee, died of a heart attack after police responded to false reports of a woman being killed at his house. The swatting was organized in an attempt to force him to give up his Twitter handle "@tennessee". Shane Sonderman was sentenced to five years in prison for the swatting, and ordered to pay a $250,000 fine. A 16-year-old in the United Kingdom was also involved, but they could not be extradited or identified due to their age as a juvenile.[44][45]

Other notable cases

[edit]

Video game streamers

[edit]

Due to the popularity of streaming services, many broadcasters have been victim of swatting. Two weeks after the Fortnite World Cup Finals, where 16-year-old Kyle "Bugha" Giersdorf won $3 million and the title of best solo Fortnite player, he was swatted while streaming live on Twitch.[46] Ben "DrLupo" Lupo stated he was swatted three times in one month.[47] Other popular gaming broadcasters have been victims of swatting, including Tyler "Ninja" Blevins.[48]

2013

[edit]

In 2013, a number of U.S. celebrities were victims of swatting, including Sean Combs (P. Diddy).[49] There were also swatting incidents at the residences of Ashton Kutcher, Tom Cruise, Chris Brown, Miley Cyrus, Iggy Azalea, Jason Derulo, Snoop Dogg, Justin Bieber and Clint Eastwood.[11]

In April 2013 California State Senator Ted Lieu, who was arguing at the time for anti-swatting laws in the state, was himself swatted.[50]

In 2013, a network of fraudsters involved in carding and doxing of public officials using stolen credit reports targeted computer security expert Brian Krebs with malicious police reports.[51][52] Mir Islam, the group's leader, had also used swatting hoaxes against prosecutor Stephen P. Heymann, congressman Mike Rogers, and a woman he was cyberstalking after she declined his romantic proposals. Islam was convicted of doxing and swatting over 50 public figures, including Michelle Obama, Robert Mueller, John Brennan as well as Krebs, and sentenced to two years in prison.[53] Ukrainian computer hacker Sergey Vovnenko was convicted of trafficking in stolen credit cards, as well as planning to purchase heroin, ship it to Krebs, then swat him.[54] He was sentenced to 15 months in prison in Italy, and 41 months in prison in New Jersey.[55]

2014

[edit]

Hal Finney, a paralyzed computer scientist with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), was swatted in 2014 after refusing to pay a $400,000 ransom. He faced cold, unsafe conditions on his lawn for half an hour while police checked his house. He continued receiving threats until his death in August 2014.[56]

2022

[edit]

In July 2022, Emmet G. Sullivan, a U.S. federal judge presiding over cases pertaining to the January 6 United States Capitol attack, was the victim of a swatting incident.[57]

On August 5, 2022, Canadian transgender streamer and political commentator Clara "Keffals" Sorrenti was swatted at her home by unknown individuals who also, posing as Sorrenti, sent a threatening email and a photo of an illegal firearm to London city councillors, presumably part of a harassment campaign carried out by Kiwi Farms that began on March 21, 2022.[58] Sorrenti claimed she was repeatedly misgendered and deadnamed by London Police officers, and placed into custody for 11 hours before being released without charges. She stated that she considered the incident a hate crime, an example of harassment towards transgender people by anti-LGBTQ groups in the United States.[59] The London Police Service responded with a statement from Chief of Police Steve Williams, who said that while he could not confirm any language used before Sorrenti's arrest, she was not addressed by her deadname or previous gender while in the agency's holding cells. He also said that any references to Sorrenti's deadname during the investigation seemed to stem from the existence of prior police reports she had accumulated before the event.[60] Three other streamers, Adin Ross, Nadia Amine, and IShowSpeed were also swatted the same week as Sorrenti.[61]

In August 2022, U.S. representative Marjorie Taylor Greene was swatted in Georgia by a caller who allegedly opposed her stances on transgender rights.[62]

2023

[edit]
Main article: Swatting of American politicians (2023–2024)

In November 2023, Ned Luke, a voice and performance artist for the fictional character Michael De Santa in the video game Grand Theft Auto V, was swatted in his home during a Thanksgiving live-stream of himself playing the game. He took a phone call warning him of the pending police action before he prematurely ended his stream.[63][64]

There have been widespread doxing, swatting and violent threats against American politicians since early December 2023, predominately members of the Republican Party and conservatives.[65] Beginning in late December 2023, members of the Democratic Party also began to be increasingly targeted.[66] It is unknown if the hoaxes were perpetrated by one or more individuals, or what their motivations were.[65]

Maine Sec. of State Shenna Bellows was targeted with a fake emergency call to police that caused officers to respond to her home the day after she removed former President Donald Trump from Maine's Presidential Primary Ballot under the Constitution's insurrection clause.[67]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Swatting

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Swatting is a criminal tactic involving calls to 911 or other services, falsely reporting imminent threats such as shootings, bombings, or crises at a specific address to elicit a heavily armed police response, typically from a team. The practice endangers targets, bystanders, and responding officers through the inherent risks of tactical entries, including potential misfires or health shocks from surprise confrontations. Emerging in the early amid disputes in online gaming and hacker circles, swatting initially served as revenge in virtual feuds but has since proliferated to broader targets including public officials, journalists, and private citizens, often amplified by doxxing to reveal addresses. An estimated 20,000 incidents have occurred since its , with recent surges targeting schools and figures, straining resources and diverting attention from genuine crises. Perpetrators exploit , voice modulation, and scripted details mimicking real emergencies to deceive dispatchers, underscoring vulnerabilities in verification protocols despite technological countermeasures. While no standalone federal statute criminalizes swatting, it violates laws against false statements to authorities, threats, and interstate communications of threats, punishable by convictions carrying multi-year prison terms and fines, with enhanced penalties if injuries or deaths result. Documented fatalities, such as heart attacks during responses, highlight its lethal potential beyond mere disruption, prompting federal task forces and databases to track perpetrators and mitigate recurrence.

Definition and Overview

Core Characteristics

Swatting constitutes a criminal act of harassment wherein an individual falsely reports an emergency to public safety authorities, such as 911 dispatchers, with the deliberate intent to provoke a heavily armed law enforcement response, typically involving a SWAT team, at a targeted location where no genuine threat exists. The hoax generally alleges imminent violence, including scenarios like active shootings, hostage situations, or bomb threats, designed to escalate the perceived urgency and compel immediate tactical intervention. Central to swatting is the exploitation of emergency response protocols, where perpetrators leverage anonymous communication methods—such as voice-over-IP services or —to mask their identity while providing precise details about the victim's , often obtained through doxxing. This specificity distinguishes swatting from generic false alarms, enabling responders to arrive prepared for high-risk confrontations, which heightens the potential for confusion and misjudgment upon encountering uninvolved occupants. The inherent dangers of swatting arise from the mismatch between the fabricated narrative and reality, endangering residents through risks of accidental discharge, shootings, or physiological stress during forcible entries, while also diverting critical resources from legitimate emergencies and exposing to unnecessary hazards. Incidents frequently occur in clusters, reflecting coordinated or opportunistic patterns aimed at or retaliation, underscoring swatting's role as a tool for targeted disruption rather than mere mischief.

Motivations and Perpetrator Profiles

Swatting perpetrators are primarily driven by intentions to harass, intimidate, or retaliate against targets, often exploiting response systems to induce and disruption. Early documented cases, investigated by the FBI in , originated in online environments such as telephone party chat lines and gaming platforms, where disputes escalated into false reports designed to provoke deployments against perceived rivals or their associates. These acts frequently involved fabricated claims of severe crimes, including situations or shootings, to maximize the scale of the response. Over time, motivations have broadened to include thrill-seeking and ideological grievances, particularly in targeting officials, schools, and institutions amid heightened political tensions. For instance, in January 2024, more than 100 threats—many qualifying as swatting—affected over 1,000 institutions across 42 states and the District of Columbia, often delivered via anonymous emails or calls alleging active shooters or bombs to sow chaos and retaliation. Some analyses link certain incidents to nihilistic , where perpetrators derive satisfaction from weaponizing state authority against vulnerable or high-profile victims, though such interpretations rely on case-specific attributions rather than broad empirical patterns. Identified perpetrators in prosecuted cases are predominantly young males, with early FBI investigations revealing arrestees aged 17 to 25 who possessed basic technical skills for anonymous calling. These individuals often emerge from subcultures, including gaming communities, where swatting serves as an extension of virtual conflicts into physical threats. Comprehensive are limited due to the crime's reliance on evasion tactics like voice spoofing and IP masking, which complicate tracing and profiling. reports emphasize that actors are typically tech-literate opportunists rather than organized groups, enabling solo operations with minimal resources.

Historical Development

Origins and Pre-Internet Precursors

The practice of deceiving services to provoke a response predates the era, with roots in telephone-based calls and threats that diverted police resources. These early incidents typically involved false reports of fires, crimes, or explosives via telephones, aiming for disruption or amusement rather than the targeted, high-stakes tactical interventions characteristic of modern swatting. The FBI has drawn parallels between swatting and the phone phreaking subculture of the , where individuals exploited telephone switching systems to make unauthorized calls, including pranks that occasionally targeted lines or public services. Hoax bomb threats emerged as a notable precursor in the mid-20th century, surging during periods of social unrest and leading to evacuations of schools, airlines, and public buildings, which sometimes necessitated armed police presence. The formation of (SWAT) teams, beginning with the in 1967 in response to escalating urban violence, provided the operational framework for escalated reactions to credible-sounding threats. However, pre-internet were constrained by the relative ease of tracing calls through telephone company records, limiting their scale and specificity compared to digital-era equivalents. While documented cases of intentionally summoning SWAT-like teams via hoaxes remain scarce before the , these analog tactics established patterns of resource misallocation and risk to responders that swatting later amplified. Experts have compared modern swatting surges to earlier waves of bomb threats, underscoring a continuity in malicious false reporting despite technological differences.

Rise in Online Gaming Culture

Swatting proliferated within online gaming communities during the mid-2000s, as broadband internet and multiplayer games with integrated voice chat—such as early titles in the Call of Duty series—enabled real-time rivalries and the sharing of personal identifiers. Perpetrators, often young gamers seeking revenge for in-game disputes or to assert dominance, began doxxing opponents and using (VoIP) services to make hoax emergency calls, prompting team deployments to victims' residences. The documented early cases targeting users of online telephone party chat lines as far back as 2007, with incidents spanning multiple states and highlighting the tactic's roots in digital harassment among tech-savvy youth. By the late and into the , the rise of live-streaming platforms like Twitch amplified swatting's visibility and frequency, as streamers inadvertently revealed locations during broadcasts, making them prime targets for envious or aggrieved viewers. Competitive gaming environments fostered a culture where swatting evolved from isolated pranks into a perverse , with perpetrators boasting about successful hoaxes in forums and chats. The FBI characterized this as a "new phenomenon" in 2008, linking it to and subcultures that exploited spoofing technologies for . Incidents escalated alongside the gaming industry's growth, with reports of swatting tied to rivalries and clan conflicts becoming commonplace by 2010. Technological advancements, including accessible and virtual phone numbers, reduced execution barriers, while the of online pseudonyms shielded swatters from immediate accountability. Gaming communities' tolerance for aggressive "trash talk" often normalized escalating threats, though platforms like Twitch issued warnings against the practice without robust prevention measures. This period marked swatting's transition from fringe deviance to a recurrent hazard, with early instances laying groundwork for broader adoption amid surging multiplayer participation.

Political and Institutional Escalation Post-2010

After 2010, swatting incidents increasingly targeted political figures and public institutions, evolving from primarily intra-community gaming disputes to a tool for broader amid rising online anonymity and partisan divisions. This shift was evident in sporadic early cases involving public officials, but escalated markedly during periods of heightened political tension, such as the 2016 U.S. presidential election aftermath and subsequent years. Perpetrators exploited and detailed personal information obtained via doxxing to direct armed responses to homes of lawmakers, judges, and candidates, amplifying risks of unintended violence. A significant surge occurred in late 2023 and early 2024, with dozens of calls reported against members of and judicial officials, often coinciding with election cycles and high-profile legal cases. Republican targets included Representative , who faced multiple incidents including on Christmas Day 2023; Senator ; and Representative Brandon Williams, whose family home was raided on December 25, 2023, prompting a 60-second evacuation. Democratic figures such as Secretary of State and others were also victimized, indicating non-partisan application though concentrated among conservatives in some reports. These events, totaling over a dozen against public officials in early 2024, heightened fears of swatting as political intimidation, though analyses caution it reflects longstanding prank traditions rather than a novel trend in extremism. Institutionally, responses intensified with federal agencies prioritizing coordination and tracking. In June 2023, the FBI launched a national database to aggregate swatting data from local , aiming to identify patterns, perpetrators, and cross-jurisdictional links. The Department of Homeland Security issued guidance on hoax threats, emphasizing risks to and civilians from unwarranted deployments. Congressional briefings and calls for enhanced penalties under existing hoax and threat statutes followed, though no major new federal legislation specifically targeting political swatting emerged by 2024; enforcement relied on statutes like 18 U.S.C. § 1001 for false statements. These measures addressed the tactic's weaponization against democratic processes, where even failed attempts impose and resource diversion on officials.

Methods and Techniques

Execution Tactics

Swatting perpetrators initiate attacks by placing hoax emergency calls to 911 services or local dispatchers, fabricating high-stakes scenarios designed to provoke a team deployment, including reports of active shooters, crises, threats, imminent mass shootings, or chemical/biological hazards at the target's residence. These false narratives emphasize immediate life-threatening dangers to compel rapid, armed intervention, often with fabricated details like the number of suspects, weapons involved, or victim conditions to heighten urgency and credibility. Anonymity is central to execution, with callers utilizing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services, caller ID spoofing software, and IP address masking to disguise their originating location and phone number, making traceability difficult without advanced forensic analysis. Additional techniques include TTY relay systems for text-to-voice conversion to evade voice recognition or social engineering to impersonate the victim during the call, simulating distress from the target's line. In some cases, perpetrators hack into victims' smart home devices—such as cameras, doorbells, or voice assistants—either to surveil the property for realistic details or to remotely trigger alarms and audio simulating threats, amplifying the hoax's persuasiveness. Preparation typically involves obtaining the victim's precise address through doxxing—publicly exposing personal information via online searches, data breaches, or —or social engineering ploys, such as posing as utility workers, delivery personnel, or officials to extract location data. Perpetrators may also collaborate with accomplices or hire "swatting-as-a-service" operators advertised on forums and black markets, where fees are exchanged for executing the call, sometimes boasting past successes to attract clients. These coordinated efforts enable remote execution from jurisdictions with lax enforcement, complicating international investigations.

Technological Enablers and Evasion Methods

Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services constitute the primary technological enabler for swatting, allowing perpetrators to place anonymous calls to emergency services like 911 while spoofing information to disguise their identity and location. These internet-based systems transmit voice data over IP networks, bypassing traditional landline tracing mechanisms and enabling the falsification of originating numbers to appear as if the call originates from the target's vicinity or a legitimate source. VoIP providers often permit registration via anonymous or prepaid accounts, requiring minimal personal verification, which lowers barriers to entry for malicious actors. Perpetrators evade detection by leveraging disposable or temporary VoIP numbers, which can be created and discarded rapidly without linking back to a persistent identity. International VoIP services further complicate traceback efforts, as calls routed through foreign servers fall outside immediate U.S. , delaying subpoenas and forensic analysis by agencies like the FBI. Additionally, some swatters exploit compromised smart devices—accessed via stolen credentials—to initiate calls or provide fabricated audio/video , blending the hoax with seemingly authentic environmental from the target's location. Evasion is enhanced by the decentralized nature of VoIP infrastructure, where traffic may traverse multiple anonymizing proxies or encrypted tunnels, rendering real-time carrier-level tracing ineffective without advanced network forensics. Law enforcement reports indicate that perpetrators often script detailed, convincing emergencies—such as bomb threats or hostage scenarios—delivered via VoIP to overwhelm dispatchers and prompt rapid SWAT deployment before discrepancies are identified. Despite regulatory efforts like the FCC's spoofing rules, the proliferation of unregulated VoIP apps and services continues to outpace mitigation technologies.

United States Laws and Enforcement

Swatting in the lacks a dedicated federal but is prosecuted under existing federal criminal laws, primarily 18 U.S.C. § 1038 (false information and hoaxes), which penalizes conveying false or misleading information about attempts to commit certain crimes if it provokes an response, with penalties up to five years and fines scaling with harm caused. Additional statutes include 18 U.S.C. § 875 for interstate threats and 18 U.S.C. § 1513 for conspiracy to retaliate against witnesses or victims, often applied when swatting involves interstate communications or targeted . These provisions treat swatting as a when it endangers lives or , though enforcement relies on proving intent and foreseeability of harm. Legislative efforts to create specific federal penalties have intensified amid rising incidents targeting public figures and schools. In January 2025, the Preserving Safe Communities by Ending Swatting Act (S. 38 and H.R. 286, 119th Congress) was introduced to criminalize knowingly false reports prompting armed responses, with up to 20 years imprisonment if serious injury or death results, mandatory restitution, and civil liability for victims. Similar prior bills, such as the 2024 version (S. 3602), advanced but did not pass, highlighting bipartisan recognition of swatting's dangers yet persistent hurdles in codifying it distinctly from hoax statutes. At the state level, laws vary but generally classify swatting as a under false reporting or emergency misuse statutes, with penalties escalating based on response scale and outcomes. Florida's HB 279, signed May 21, 2025, imposes charges for false 911 calls causing significant harm or large deployments, including up to 15 years if injury occurs. Ohio's HB 462 (2023) explicitly bans swatting, mandating offender restitution to emergency providers. States like and have broadened false reporting laws to cover swatting explicitly since 2023-2024, treating it as a wobbler offense ( or ) with sentences up to three years. In jurisdictions without enhancements, such as pre-2025 New York, it remains a under aggravated , prompting ongoing reform pushes. Enforcement involves coordination between local police, state attorneys, and federal agencies like the FBI and DOJ, with the FBI maintaining a national swatting database since June 2023 to track patterns and perpetrators. Prosecutions have increased, exemplified by the February 2025 sentencing of teenager Alan W. Filion to 48 months in prison under 18 U.S.C. § 875 for a nationwide swatting campaign involving bomb and shooting hoaxes. The reported heightened swatting in 2025, urging reports for federal investigation, while DHS issued guidance emphasizing verification to mitigate risks during responses. Challenges persist in tracing anonymous calls via VoIP or spoofing, though successful cases often hinge on linking perpetrators to IP addresses or gaming platforms.

International Responses and Extraterritorial Cases

Swatting incidents originating from or targeting locations outside the have prompted prosecutions under both domestic and extraterritorial legal frameworks, often involving international cooperation between agencies. In the , swatting is not codified as a distinct offense but is typically addressed through charges of or making false reports, with penalties escalating based on harm caused. For instance, in April 2024, Robert Walker-McDaid, 28, from , received the UK's first dedicated swatting sentence—a 20-month term—for a 2015 hoax call to police that falsely claimed a situation with a , leading to officers shooting an innocent man in the face; Walker-McDaid was extradited to the for trial before returning to face UK charges. Canada has seen domestic swatting cases prosecuted under its Criminal Code provisions against mischief, false alarms, and public endangerment, with incidents often linked to online gaming disputes or organized groups. In November 2024, a 15-year-old from Kitchener, Ontario, was charged with 29 counts related to 13 hoax calls threatening schools and businesses in the Waterloo region, prompting evacuations and emergency responses. Cross-border cases include a 14-year-old from Halifax, Nova Scotia, arrested in October 2024 for swatting Bethlehem High School in New York, highlighting Canadian perpetrators targeting US institutions via anonymous online tools. Extraterritorial prosecutions by authorities against foreign nationals underscore swatting's transnational nature, often leveraging federal statutes like 18 U.S.C. § 1038 for false information and hoaxes. In June 2025, Romanian citizen Thomasz Szabo, 26, pleaded guilty to leading a conspiracy that swatted over 100 targets, including members of , synagogues, and a plot falsely reporting an assassination attempt on the president; Szabo, operating under aliases like "Plank," coordinated with accomplices in and elsewhere. Similarly, in August 2024, indictments charged Szabo alongside Serbian Nemanja Radovanovic, 21, with 30 counts for swatting lawmakers and issuing bomb threats to the Capitol, demonstrating FBI-led international task forces tracking perpetrators via IP tracing and . authorities charged three men in April 2025 for hoax calls prompting responses in the and , reflecting joint FBI-Crown Prosecution Service investigations. In and , responses remain fragmented, relying on general anti- laws amid rising incidents. A 2024 analysis noted swatting's spread to continental , with potential prosecutions under member states' public safety statutes, though specific cases are underreported compared to . In , a 2014 Sydney —where hackers remotely accessed a teenager's computer to fake a shooting and kidnapping—led to local investigations but no dedicated swatting legislation, treated instead as computer misuse and false reporting. These cases illustrate challenges in attributing anonymous, VPN-obscured calls across jurisdictions, prompting calls for harmonized international standards to deter perpetrators exploiting jurisdictional gaps.

Consequences and Impacts

Human Toll: Injuries, Deaths, and Trauma

Swatting has resulted in at least one confirmed death: on December 28, 2017, Andrew Finch, a 28-year-old resident of , was fatally shot by police outside his home after officers responded to a call reporting a situation with gunfire and a killing. The caller, Tyler Barriss, who had no connection to Finch but used his address obtained through doxxing during an online gaming dispute, pleaded guilty to 51 federal charges, including making a false report resulting in death, and was sentenced to 20 years in prison in March 2019. Finch's family later received a $5 million settlement from the city of Wichita in 2023. While documented injuries from swatting responses remain rare in , the tactic inherently risks physical harm to targets and bystanders due to the aggressive nature of deployments, which often involve armed entry, flashbangs, and no-knock procedures based on fabricated threats of violence. Victims may face wrongful detention or escalation during these raids, exacerbating potential for injury even absent gunfire. The psychological toll on swatting victims is profound and enduring, frequently manifesting as intense fear, stress, terror, and symptoms akin to (PTSD), including , depression, and a pervasive sense of vulnerability. In school-targeted incidents, students, staff, and parents endure mental trauma comparable to that of actual mass shooting survivors, with lockdowns triggering hypervigilance and emotional distress that disrupts daily life and . Victims have reported feelings of unreality and drowning-like helplessness during and after events, with recovery often protracted or incomplete. Bystanders and communities face from resource diversion and eroded trust in emergency systems.

Broader Societal and Economic Effects

Swatting imposes substantial economic burdens on taxpayers and public institutions, primarily through the mobilization of specialized units, responders, and ancillary services. Individual incidents typically cost between $10,000 and $100,000, encompassing personnel deployment, equipment usage, overtime pay, and logistical expenses such as fuel and tactical gear. Aggregate estimates suggest annual nationwide costs exceeding $500 million, driven by the diversion of resources from routine policing to responses. In educational settings, swatting disrupts operations further, with single school incidents generating up to $1.4 million in losses from instructional downtime, heightened , and subsequent interventions. These resource strains extend to opportunity costs, as responding teams are unavailable for genuine emergencies, potentially delaying aid to actual victims and exacerbating public safety risks. Economically, repeated swattings amplify fiscal pressures on underfunded agencies, prompting calls for legislative enhancements to recovery mechanisms, though remains inconsistent. Societally, swatting fosters widespread anxiety, particularly in online communities and among public figures, by normalizing high-stakes digital harassment as a tool for . It erodes confidence in systems, as hoax prevalence—evident in surges targeting schools, with over 20 U.S. colleges affected since early 2025—undermines the credibility of threat reports and heightens community vigilance. This dynamic contributes to a on online discourse and , disproportionately impacting , streamers, and officials who face escalated doxxing-swatting chains, thereby deterring participation in public-facing roles. Over-reliance on militarized responses, while protocol-driven, risks amplifying perceptions of excessive in non-threat scenarios, indirectly straining police-community relations amid broader debates on tactical deployments.

Notable Incidents

Early High-Profile Cases (Pre-2015)

One of the earliest documented high-profile swatting incidents occurred in 2005, when Matthew Weigman, a then-15-year-old blind phone phreaker from , spoofed a 911 call to dispatch a team to the home of a woman in after she refused his advances for . Weigman exploited vulnerabilities in telecommunication systems to impersonate victims and fabricate emergencies, including claims of homicides and barricades, leading to armed responses. He was federally investigated starting that year, pleaded guilty in 2009 to conspiracy to obstruct justice and other charges, and received a sentence of over 11 years in prison. Swatting gained federal attention by , when the FBI highlighted a conspiracy involving five perpetrators who, between 2002 and 2006, made calls to 911 centers in over 60 U.S. cities, affecting more than 100 victims primarily from lines. These calls often alleged shootings or kidnappings, prompting deployments and diverting significant law enforcement resources. The scheme, which included , resulted in multiple convictions, such as that of Stuart Rosoff in for leading a group responsible for over 250 swatting attempts. In May 2012, conservative commentator was targeted at his home by a call reporting that he had murdered his wife, leading to a heavy police response. The incident underscored swatting's expansion to public figures, with no injuries but heightened awareness of the tactic's dangers. Erickson later noted the responders' professionalism in de-escalating the situation. By June 2013, swatting escalated against celebrities, with incidents targeting and , among others, prompting Governor to sign legislation increasing penalties for such es. These cases involved false reports of violence at high-profile residences, drawing media scrutiny and contributing to broader legislative efforts. In August 2014, Jordan Mathewson was swatted live during a gaming stream in the suburbs, where a caller claimed an armed man was holding family members inside his home. The event was captured on video, showing teams surrounding the property, and highlighted the tactic's use against online personalities. No harm occurred, but it amplified public discourse on swatting's risks in the digital age.

Gaming and Streaming Targets

Swatting has disproportionately affected individuals in online gaming and communities, often stemming from interpersonal disputes during competitive matches or broadcasts. Perpetrators, typically other gamers or viewers, exploit publicly available information such as IP addresses obtained through voice chat software or doxxing to target victims with hoax emergency calls. This tactic gained notoriety in the mid-2010s amid rising popularity of platforms like Twitch and games such as , where heated rivalries escalated from virtual taunts to real-world threats. One of the earliest high-profile cases involved Twitch streamer Joshua Peters, an veteran, on February 5, 2015. While live-streaming to approximately 60,000 viewers, Peters was targeted by anonymous callers who reported a situation with bombs at his residence, prompting a raid that interrupted his broadcast and terrified his family. No injuries occurred, but the incident highlighted the vulnerability of live streamers to griefing that crosses into physical danger. Peters later described the event as a prank gone awry from online harassment. The deadliest swatting linked to gaming unfolded on December 28, 2017, in , during a dispute over a Call of Duty: WWII online wager match. teenager Casey Viner, angered after losing money in the game, provided a false address to serial swatter Tyler Barriss in , who called police claiming a , , and bombs at the location. Responding officers confronted 28-year-old Andrew Finch, an innocent resident who emerged from the home; Finch was fatally shot by a Wichita police sergeant when he reached toward his waistband, as officers believed the hoax report of an armed suspect. Viner pleaded guilty to and served 15 months in prison, while Barriss, admitting to over 50 swattings, received 20 years for involuntary and related charges. The case prompted a $5 million civil settlement with Finch's family in 2023 and underscored how gaming trash-talk can cascade into lethal errors by law enforcement treating calls as credible. Subsequent incidents have plagued prominent streamers, amplifying risks during live broadcasts. In August 2022, Twitch personalities like Félix "xQc" Lengyel and Kaitlyn "Amouranth" Siragusa reported enduring multiple swattings weekly, often tied to viewer interactions or rivalries, with raids disrupting streams and causing emotional distress. Similarly, on June 30, 2022, streamer Nick Frags was swatted mid-broadcast while preparing tacos, as police responded to a false report of at his home, alerted by his dog's unusual behavior. These cases illustrate a persistent pattern where streaming visibility invites targeted , though most resolve without casualties due to improved protocols.

Political and Official Targets

Swatting incidents targeting political figures and officials have surged in the United States, particularly during periods of heightened political tension, such as cycles and judicial decisions on high-profile cases. These attacks often involve hoax calls reporting shootings, hostages, or bombs at residences, prompting heavily armed responses that endanger targets and responders. One early notable case occurred on January 31, 2016, when U.S. Representative (D-MA), who had advocated for federal legislation against swatting, became a victim herself; police responded to a false report of an at her Melrose home, where her family was present. No injuries resulted, but the incident underscored the personal risks to lawmakers pushing for reforms. A broader wave hit in December 2023 amid holiday tensions, with at least eight U.S. lawmakers targeted, including Republican Senator of on December 27, whose home prompted a response to a fake murder-suicide report, and Representative (R-GA), whose residence was swatted on Day with a involving a supposed shooting. These attacks affected members of both parties, with no arrests immediately reported, though a Georgian man later pleaded guilty in June 2025 to federal charges for swatting Greene and other officials via interstate threats. Incidents continued into 2024, targeting election officials and judges; for instance, in March, homes of state election administrators in Georgia and were swatted following ballot disputes. Presidential candidates like faced hoax calls during her campaign. Post-November 2024 election, U.S. Capitol Police reported over 50 swatting attempts on members in the ensuing weeks, alongside bomb threats. In November 2024, Trump administration nominees also received swatting threats amid rising . Such cases highlight vulnerabilities in public service, with noting the challenges of tracing anonymous, often international calls.

School and Institutional Swattings

Swatting incidents targeting schools have proliferated in the United States, often involving reports of s, threats, or other emergencies designed to provoke lockdowns and armed responses. Between January 2023 and June 2024, the K-12 School Shooting Database recorded 853 such hoaxes against elementary, middle, and high schools, contributing to widespread disruptions and resource strain. In the 2023-2024 academic year alone, at least 158 false reports were made to K-12 institutions, with each incident costing an average of $100,000 in and emergency responses, totaling over $82.3 million nationwide. These attacks frequently originate from anonymous online actors, including organized groups, exploiting and automated systems to amplify fear without accountability. Notable waves of school swattings illustrate the tactic's escalation. In September 2022, over 90 false shooter reports struck schools across 16 states in just three weeks, leading to evacuations and heightened parental anxiety amid real mass shooting concerns. Similar clusters occurred in October 2022, affecting multiple districts in Connecticut, including Windsor Locks Middle School, Stamford High School, and Enfield High School, prompting lockdowns and investigations into coordinated harassment. By September 2024, Bethlehem Central School District in New York endured 12 hoax threats over two weeks, resulting in the arrest of a suspect in Canada linked to international dialing services. More recently, on October 1, 2025, Ganesha High School in Pomona, California, faced a hoax threat that locked down the campus for hours, diverting police resources from genuine emergencies. Institutions beyond K-12, particularly universities, have faced analogous threats, often tied to online collectives. In August 2025, the group "" claimed responsibility for swatting at least a dozen U.S. universities, including and the , with hoaxes mimicking mass shootings or hostage crises to trigger deployments. This spree, starting August 21, 2025, affected over 16 campuses in a week, sowing panic and exposing vulnerabilities in campus alert systems. By early September 2025, the academic year's toll reached at least 45 colleges, underscoring a pattern of targeting educational hubs for disruption. have also been hit sporadically, though less documented in aggregates, with swatters aiming to overload public safety infrastructure. Federal indictments, such as those against three "" members in 2024 for related swattings, highlight efforts to trace perpetrators via IP logs and international cooperation, yet the low barrier to entry—often free apps—sustains the threat.

Prevention and Countermeasures

Law Enforcement and Investigative Approaches

agencies treat swatting incidents as serious criminal es, often escalating to federal investigations due to their potential to endanger lives and strain resources. The FBI has led efforts since at least , classifying swatting as a phenomenon involving false 911 calls designed to provoke responses, and coordinates with local and to probe origins through phone company records and digital traces. Investigations prioritize rapid verification during the response phase—such as cross-checking caller details against known patterns—while post-incident forensics focus on attributing the to perpetrators. Core investigative techniques include to correlate call logs, IP addresses, and ancillary data like verifications or linked service accounts; for example, a VoIP number used for spoofing may tie back to a real-world identifier if overlooked during setup, such as a delivery app registration. Federal involvement often invokes statutes prohibiting false reports to emergency services, with the FBI's (IC3) urging victims to report for aggregation into national databases that reveal patterns in serial offending. Fusion Centers facilitate inter-agency intelligence sharing, enabling pattern tracking across jurisdictions and referrals to specialized units for cyber-linked swats. Significant hurdles persist, including via VoIP apps, VPNs, Tor networks, AI-synthesized voices, and ephemeral emails, which demand advanced tools and international cooperation to overcome. Jurisdictional fragmentation and varying policies among providers exacerbate delays, though prosecutorial successes—such as convictions for threats causing evacuations—underscore the value of persistent multi-agency pursuit. Proactive measures, like FBI announcements, emphasize victim notifications to preempt repeats and bolster evidence collection.

Technological and Community-Based Defenses

Individuals at risk of swatting can employ technological measures to secure personal information and devices, such as using complex, unique passwords and enabling (MFA) on email accounts linked to smart devices like cameras and speakers, which attackers often exploit via stolen credentials. Gamers and online users particularly benefit from virtual private networks (VPNs) to mask IP addresses, preventing location tracing from in-game or forum interactions. Organizations can deploy next-generation firewalls with and AI-driven threat intelligence to detect spoofing attempts and anomalous network activity associated with reports. For real-time verification during potential incidents, AI-powered video analytics integrated with surveillance systems analyze live feeds for indicators like weapon presence or unusual behavior, providing dispatchers with evidence to distinguish hoaxes from genuine threats and enabling a tactical pause before deploying response teams. In May 2023, the FBI launched a national database allowing agencies to share incident data, creating a centralized repository to identify patterns, track perpetrators across jurisdictions, and preempt repeated attacks through enhanced coordination. Community-based defenses emphasize proactive education and coordinated vigilance, with organizations like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) providing tailored guidance for schools, places of worship, and businesses on developing incident response plans, including pre-verification protocols for reports. Some municipalities, such as in 2018 and Wichita, have established voluntary registries for high-risk individuals like streamers, enabling police to cross-check reports against known profiles before mobilizing units. Grassroots efforts within gaming and online communities promote awareness campaigns, encouraging members to report suspicious doxxing attempts early and adhere to platform guidelines that limit sharing, thereby reducing the feasibility of targeted swats through collective accountability.

References

  1. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2008/february/swatting020408
  2. https://www.ic3.gov/PSA/2025/PSA250429
  3. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/the-crime-of-swatting-fake-9-1-1-calls-have-real-consequences1
  4. https://www.adl.org/resources/tools-and-strategies/swatting-whats-hate-got-do-it
  5. https://www.scylla.ai/swatting-roots-implications-and-ways-to-combat/
  6. https://www.isdglobal.org/digital_dispatches/is-swatting-the-latest-trend-in-political-violence-not-so-fast/
  7. https://www.omnilert.com/blog/what-is-swatting-and-why-is-swatting-schools-on-the-rise
  8. https://www.fortinet.com/resources/cyberglossary/swatting
  9. https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/the-crime-of-swatting-laws-and-penalties.html
  10. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11063
  11. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-formed-national-database-track-prevent-swatting-rcna91722
  12. https://www.911.gov/assets/National_911_Program_Public_Safety_Information_Swatting_2015.pdf
  13. https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/lasvegas/news/press-releases/fbi-las-vegas-federal-fact-friday-the-dangers-of-swatting
  14. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2025-04/25_0325_fps_swatting.pdf
  15. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/swatting-crime
  16. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/24_0930_opa_swatting-hoax-threats-final.pdf
  17. https://www.npr.org/2024/02/02/1228541386/growing-list-of-public-and-private-people-are-being-targeted-by-swatting-attempt
  18. https://www.justsecurity.org/121652/nihilistic-violent-extremism-swatting-attacks-primer/
  19. https://abcnews.go.com/US/amid-rise-swatting-calls-fabrication-fear-mass-shootings/story?id=98672825
  20. https://therecord.media/swatting-click-here-podcast
  21. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/21/technology/online-swatting-becomes-a-hazard-for-popular-video-gamers-and-police-responders.html
  22. https://www.wired.com/story/swatting-deadly-online-gaming-prank/
  23. https://www.naag.org/attorney-general-journal/the-escalating-threats-of-doxxing-and-swatting-an-analysis-of-recent-developments-and-legal-responses/
  24. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/dozens-of-swatting-calls-target-members-of-congress-and-candidates-on-campaign-trail
  25. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/spate-swatting-incidents-plagued-republican-193516083.html
  26. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68297349
  27. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/01/congress-members-swatting-branndon-williams
  28. https://thehill.com/homenews/4414357-swatting-targets-all-sides-raising-fears/
  29. https://rems.ed.gov/docs/WA_Swatting.pdf
  30. https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/portland/news/press-releases/fbi-oregon-tech-tuesday-building-a-digital-defense-against-smart-device-swatting
  31. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/spoofing
  32. https://www.lexipol.com/resources/blog/swatting-and-false-emergency-calls-more-than-just-a-nuisance/
  33. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/04/swatting-as-a-service.html
  34. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/38
  35. https://ezell.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=652
  36. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3602
  37. https://www.flgov.com/eog/news/press/2025/governor-ron-desantis-signs-anti-swatting-and-school-safety-bills
  38. https://www.csg.org/2025/10/20/swatting-state-efforts-to-prevent-political-violence/
  39. https://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/Scott-Gray/story/105627
  40. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/california-teenager-sentenced-48-months-prison-nationwide-swatting-spree
  41. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cle019e459xo
  42. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/first-ever-uk-swatting-sentence-125800944.html
  43. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/waterloo-regional-police-swatting-calls-teen-charged-kitchener-1.7380490
  44. https://www.bethlehemschools.org/important-swatting-suspect-in-custody-in-canada/
  45. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/romanian-citizen-pleads-guilty-swatting-numerous-members-congress-churches-and-former-us
  46. https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/two-foreign-nationals-charged-swatting-conspiracy-targeting-lawmakers-private-victims
  47. https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/three-charged-making-alleged-swatting-calls-usa-and-canada
  48. https://ctinsight.net/swatting-has-come-to-europe/
  49. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/04/hackers-trick-police-into-dawn-raid-with-elaborate-swatting-hoax
  50. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42523045
  51. https://www.npr.org/2018/11/14/667683248/man-who-made-fatal-swatting-hoax-call-pleads-guilty-to-51-charges
  52. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/serial-swatter-tyler-barriss-sentenced-20-years-death-kansas-man-n978291
  53. https://www.ksn.com/news/local/city-of-wichita-approves-5m-settlement-in-andrew-finchs-shooting-death/
  54. https://www.nasro.org/news/2022/12/08/in-the-media/school-swatting-calls-have-various-harmful-effects-nasro-in-atlanta-journal-constitution/
  55. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1578&context=crsj
  56. https://www.womenshealthmag.com/health/a43990708/school-shooting-swatting-hoax-increase-student-trauma-cptsd/
  57. https://ktla.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/764996026/swatting-costs-taxpayers-500-million-annually-becoming-the-weapon-of-choice-for-terrorizing-students-and-politicians
  58. https://volt.ai/blog/the-hidden-costs-of-swatting-threats-why-false-alarms-cost-schools-nearly-dollar1-million-per-incident
  59. http://kustoff.house.gov/media/press-releases/icymi-kustoff-op-ed-swatting-frightening-hoax-demanding-serious-attention
  60. https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/news/surge-in-swatting-incidents-u-s-colleges-continue-to-be-targeted-by-false-active-shooter-reports/173172/
  61. https://www.princeton.edu/news/2018/08/21/militarization-police-fails-enhance-safety-may-harm-police-reputation
  62. https://www.theregister.com/2009/02/02/phone_phreaker_plea/
  63. https://www.justice.gov/archive/usao/txn/PressRel09/weigman_swat_ple_pr.html
  64. https://www.justice.gov/archive/criminal/cybercrime/press-releases/2008/rosoffSent.htm
  65. http://newsroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/08/swatting-prank-could-be-deadly/
  66. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/10/20426666-california-governor-signs-bill-to-crack-down-on-celebrity-swatting
  67. https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/suburban-denver-swatting-incident-caught-gamer-camera-article-1.1919640
  68. https://www.vox.com/2016/3/11/11196282/what-is-swatting-video
  69. https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/gamer-raided-swat-team-front-60000-viewers/story?id=28775474
  70. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/05/gaming-streamer-gets-swatted-as-online-griefing-enters-real-world
  71. https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/us/swatting-sentence-casey-viner
  72. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ks/pr/california-man-sentenced-deadly-wichita-swatting-case
  73. https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2022/08/15/keffals-adin-ross-ishowspeed-swatting-twitch-youtube/
  74. https://www.businessinsider.com/swatting-livestream-twitch-nick-frags-heyitsmesalty-police-2022-6
  75. https://apnews.com/article/swatting-calls-marjorie-taylor-greene-rick-scott-d568818925c99c8cf17467f737b99e97
  76. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/congress-swatting-incidents-holiday-week/
  77. https://www.cbsnews.com/boston/news/rep-clark-victim-of-swatting-incident-in-melrose/
  78. https://katherineclark.house.gov/2016/2/congresswoman-katherine-clark-target-of-swatting-hoax
  79. https://www.npr.org/2018/01/02/575043357/latest-swatting-incident-keeps-rep-clark-pushing-for-legislation
  80. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67837637
  81. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/dec/26/politician-threats-protest-marjorie-taylor-greene-supreme-court-colorado
  82. https://www.ajc.com/politics/2025/06/man-who-swatted-us-elected-officials-pleads-guilty-in-federal-court/
  83. https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/13/politics/swatting-election-officials-invs
  84. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/congress-lawmakers-surge-swatting-calls-bomb-threats-following-november-election/
  85. https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/what-swatting-trump-cabinet-nominees-targeted-violent-unamerican-threats-before-thanksgiving-1729051
  86. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/spate-swatting-incidents-ensnare-high-profile-targets-politicians-pros-rcna133301
  87. https://www.thetrace.org/2025/09/swatting-school-shooting-hoax-trauma/
  88. https://ambient.ai/blog/what-is-school-swatting-insights-security-practitioners
  89. https://www.wired.com/story/swatting-schools-us-september-2022/
  90. https://www.everytown.org/press/multiple-school-swatting-incidents-in-connecticut-lead-to-lockdowns-moms-demand-action-students-demand-action-respond/
  91. https://abc7.com/post/high-school-pomona-locked-down-police-investigate-threat/17919037/
  92. https://www.wired.com/story/purgatory-gores-swatting-us-universities/
  93. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/30/us/school-shooting-hoax-universities-purgatory-swatting.html
  94. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kuq1Q7nzVYo
  95. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/investigators/swatting-target-schools-investigators/4284798/
  96. https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2008/february/swatting020408
  97. https://www.police1.com/patrol-issues/why-swatting-and-false-emergency-calls-are-more-than-just-a-nuisance
  98. https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-is-swatting/
  99. https://volt.ai/blog/beyond-the-panic-button-how-ai-technology-helps-verify-swatting-incidents-in-real-time
  100. https://www.dhs.gov/publication/resources-swatting-and-hoax-threats
  101. https://navigate360.com/blog/navigate360-on-swatting/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.