On Christmas Day, police in Georgia were called and told by a man that he had just killed his girlfriend and that he was about to turn the gun on himself. He gave his address as that of Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. According to the congresswoman, this was perhaps the eighth time that law enforcement had been called to her family home with a similar hoax story. The practice is termed “swatting,” but such a catchy name distorts what heinous practice is truly taking place. This is clearly a method of targeted harassment, but could there also be a more nefarious motivation? It would not be going too far to suggest swatting could be a means of attempted murder by proxy.
Swatting is the act of sending police officers to a location while they are under the impression that a killing or extreme violence is taking place. The purpose is to make the officers be on guard and more likely to lead with their firearms in the hopes that the homeowner will be shot and killed. Those making the anonymous hoax calls are often people who disagree with the target’s politics. And yet, somehow, such incidents are often dismissed as minor crimes.
On December 25, the caller who provided Greene’s address contacted the Georgia suicide hotline shortly before 11 a.m., saying that he had killed his girlfriend and that he was about to kill himself. The call was transferred to the police, who recognized the address. As this was apparently not the first time such a target has been drawn on the Georgia politician’s back, the matter was resolved on this occasion without police visiting her home.
Also, on Christmas Day, New York Rep. Brandon Williams became the target of a swatting. There was a report of a shooting at his family home, to which officers responded. Deputies called in advance as this was again recognized as a potential swat, and the situation was resolved without any serious danger. And yet, that doesn’t mean that the intent behind the call was not nefarious.
The intention behind sending SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) to someone’s home is – at the very least – to create a dangerous situation and, at worst, the hope that someone is killed during the event.
Swatting is quickly becoming a tactic of the political left. Right-leaning podcast hosts, presenters, politicians, and pundits are targeted in their studios and at their homes. And remember, according to the narrative of the far left, any engagement with law enforcement can be seen as potentially fatal. Such tactics have become so ubiquitous that in May 2023, the FBI formed a national database to “facilitate information sharing between hundreds of police departments and law enforcement agencies across the country pertaining to swatting incidents.”
Fatalities may be rare in such situations, but they do happen.
As the availability of technology increases, so too does the ability of hoax callers to mask their identities. Such anonymity has led to a massive increase in people being swatted. According to Professor Lauren R. Shapiro, an associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, hoaxers are all too often not punished. “Without a statute in place, there’s no designated resources or training for investigating swatting incidents,” Shapiro told NBC News in June. She explained that the “False Information and Hoaxes statute” is most commonly used in these prosecutions but that “Too often, perpetrators are getting a slap on the wrist compared to the consequences suffered by their victims.”
One of the more high-profile swattings, however, was not for political purposes but rather in the name of cold hard cash.
In April 2020, armed police turned up at the Tennessee home of 60-year-old Mark Herring, responding to calls of a murder and pipe bombs on the premises. Confronted by the drawn weapons, Mr. Herring suffered a heart attack and died. The fatal call was made by Shane Sonderman, who did not have a political disagreement with Herring and, in fact, did not know him personally. His target was Mr. Herring’s Twitter account name “@Tennessee” which he intended to sell on the open market.
Sonderman engaged in a campaign of harassment against at least five individuals with the purpose of having them abandon their online handles in his favor. He hunted out their addresses and began targeting his victims with messages, threats, random deliveries, and any number of other nuisances. When the targets refused, he sent in the police to terrorize them.
Sonderman was sentenced to just five years in prison for conspiracy after initially being charged with wire fraud/conspiracy, interstate communication of threats, false information and hoaxes, and conspiracy. The observant reader may note that none of these charges relate to the death of Mr. Herring.
What would it take for Swatters to stop targeting politicians like Taylor Greene? Presumably, if she were to step down from office and withdraw from the public eye, these attempted attacks would cease. So what is it that we call people or groups that insist on silence or compliance under fear of potential death? For all the talk of “civility” and “unity” in modern politics and the halls of media, it seems that swatting is neither regarded as terrorism nor attempted murder.
One might wonder what moral malaise is infecting the nation when people consider murder by proxy a legitimate form of political protest. It seems that the “by any means necessary” mantra has become the guiding light for sick individuals intent on harm; calling it “swatting” instead of what it really is provides a thin veneer to those who put innocent lives at risk and yet still consider themselves on the side of right.