Why did they waste time verifying? The police should have eliminated the threat before any harm could be done. Seconds count when you're keeping people safe.
I get that you're being sarcastic and find the police response appalling, but the sad reality of Poe's Law is that there are a lot of people who would unironically say this and would have cheered if the cops had shot this kid, either because they hate black people or because they get off on violence and police shootings are a social sanctioned way to indulge that taste.
* Even hundreds of cops in full body armor and armed with automatic guns will not dare to engage a single "lone wolf" shooter doing a killing spree in a school; the heartless cowards may even prevent the parents from going inside to rescue their kids: Uvalde school shooting incident
* Cop on a ego trip, will shoot down a clearly harmless kid calmly eating a burger in his own car (not a stolen car): Erik Cantu incident
All of your examples are well known not because its normal and accepted but because they are exceptions. For every one bad example there are thousand good ones, that's humans for you.
Doesn't mean they are perfect or shouldn't criticised but claiming that's all they are doing isn't reasonable either.
If you look at actual per capita statistics you will easily see this.
In the United States, law enforcement officers shoot and kill more than 1,100 civilians each year, with a significant number of these incidents involving unarmed individuals, particularly among Black Americans who are disproportionately affected. The FBI has begun collecting data on these use-of-force incidents to provide better insights into the circumstances surrounding police shootings.
Police killed more than 1,300 people in the U.S. last year, an estimated 0.3% increase in police killings per million people. The increase makes 2024 the deadliest year for police violence by a slim margin since Mapping Police Violence began tracking civilian deaths more than a decade ago.
There is no national database that documents police killings in the U.S., and the report comes days after the Justice Department removed a database tracking misconduct by federal law enforcement. Researchers spent thousands of hours analyzing more than 100,000 media reports to compile the Mapping Police Violence database.
In 2025, the U.S. has experienced significant gun violence, with 11,197 shooting deaths reported through September 30, along with 20,425 nonfatal injuries. The year has seen a total of 341 mass shootings, resulting in 331 fatalities and 1,499 injuries.
Shootings have happened in all 50 states, at all times of day, and in locations as varied as schools, gas stations, gyms, Walmarts, and homes. Some involved handguns, others rifles or shotguns.
10.3 million guns have been sold across the U.S. in 2025 through September 30.
Mass shootings in the United States are incidents where one or more individuals use firearms to kill or injure multiple people, typically in public settings. The frequency and definitions of these events can vary, but they have been a significant concern in recent years, with the U.S. experiencing more mass shootings than any other country.
GVA has recorded 325 mass shootings in the U.S. this year through three quarters. Those have resulted in 309 deaths and 1,490 injuries.
Mass shootings in the last quarter included the high-profile shooting at a New York skyscraper, as well as the shooting of 29 people, 26 of them children, at a church in Minneapolis. Two children, aged 8 and 10, were killed in that incident.
Someone being unarmed doesn't mean they can't be deadly. They could be driving a vehicle or otherwise physically assault somebody which would justify deadly force.
Otherwise 1100 is actually quite low compared to the total gun death and per capita in which blacks are over represented compared to all other groups. That includes black on black and black on cops.
The dispatch relayer and responding officers should at least have ready access to a screen where they can see a video/image of the raw footage that triggered the AI alert. If it is a false alarm, they will better see it and react accordingly, and if it is a real threat they will better understand the initial context and who may have been involved.
According to a news article[1], a human did review the video/image and flagged it as a false positive. It was the principal who told the school cop, who then called other cops:
> The Department of School Safety and Security quickly reviewed and canceled the initial alert after confirming there was no weapon. I contacted our school resource officer (SRO) and reported the matter to him, and he contacted the local precinct for additional support. Police officers responded to the school, searched the individual and quickly confirmed that they were not in possession of any weapons.
What's unclear to me is the information flow. If the Department of School Safety and Security recognized it as a false positive, why did the principal alert the school resource officer? And what sort of telephone game happened to cause local police to believe the student was likely armed?
Good lord, what an idiot principal. If the principal saw how un-gun-like it looked, he could have been brave enough to walk his lazy ass down to where the student was and said "Hey (Name), check this out. (show AI detection picture) The AI camera thought this was a gun in your pocket. I think it's wrong, but they like to have a staff member sign off on these since keeping everyone safe from violence is a huge deal. Can I take a picture of what it actually is in your pocket?"
Sounds like a "better safe than sorry" approach. If you ignore the alert on the basis that it's a false positive, then it turns out it really was a gun and the person shoots somebody, you're going to get sued into the ground, fired, name plastered all over the media, etc. On the other hand, if you call in the cops and there wasn't a gun, you're fine.
> "On the other hand, if you call in the cops and there wasn't a gun, you're fine."
Yeah, cause cops have never shot somebody unarmed. And you can bet your ass that the possible follow-up lawsuit to such a debacle's got "your" name on it.
It might be, depending on the integrity of "the system".
I can make a system that flags stuff, too. That doesn't mean it's any good. If they can show there was no reasonable cause then they've got a leg to stand on.
It’s the literal truth. How can that be a false report? A false report means you reported something you know to be untrue, not that you relayed bad information.
It would only be negligence if the police were considered like some sort of dangerous wild animal that people need to avoid provoking, and can't be held responsible on its own.
Which may very well be accurate, but I can't imagine the law ever punishing someone on that basis.
Reports on child welfare, it is often illegal to release the name of the tipster. Commonly taken advantage of by disgruntled exes or in custody dusputes.
Why did they waste time verifying? The police should have eliminated the threat before any harm could be done. Seconds count when you're keeping people safe.
I get that you're being sarcastic and find the police response appalling, but the sad reality of Poe's Law is that there are a lot of people who would unironically say this and would have cheered if the cops had shot this kid, either because they hate black people or because they get off on violence and police shootings are a social sanctioned way to indulge that taste.
We all know the cops will go for the easy prey:
* Even hundreds of cops in full body armor and armed with automatic guns will not dare to engage a single "lone wolf" shooter doing a killing spree in a school; the heartless cowards may even prevent the parents from going inside to rescue their kids: Uvalde school shooting incident
* Cop on a ego trip, will shoot down a clearly harmless kid calmly eating a burger in his own car (not a stolen car): Erik Cantu incident
* Cops are not there to serve the society, they are not there to ensure safety and peace for the neighborhood, they are merely armed militia to protect the rich and powerful elites: https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/supreme-court-cops-protect-...
All of your examples are well known not because its normal and accepted but because they are exceptions. For every one bad example there are thousand good ones, that's humans for you.
Doesn't mean they are perfect or shouldn't criticised but claiming that's all they are doing isn't reasonable either.
If you look at actual per capita statistics you will easily see this.
The statistics are indeed quite telling.. and chilling!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enfor...
In the United States, law enforcement officers shoot and kill more than 1,100 civilians each year, with a significant number of these incidents involving unarmed individuals, particularly among Black Americans who are disproportionately affected. The FBI has begun collecting data on these use-of-force incidents to provide better insights into the circumstances surrounding police shootings.
Police killed more than 1,300 people in the U.S. last year, an estimated 0.3% increase in police killings per million people. The increase makes 2024 the deadliest year for police violence by a slim margin since Mapping Police Violence began tracking civilian deaths more than a decade ago.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/02/26/police...
There is no national database that documents police killings in the U.S., and the report comes days after the Justice Department removed a database tracking misconduct by federal law enforcement. Researchers spent thousands of hours analyzing more than 100,000 media reports to compile the Mapping Police Violence database.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...
In 2025, the U.S. has experienced significant gun violence, with 11,197 shooting deaths reported through September 30, along with 20,425 nonfatal injuries. The year has seen a total of 341 mass shootings, resulting in 331 fatalities and 1,499 injuries.
Shootings have happened in all 50 states, at all times of day, and in locations as varied as schools, gas stations, gyms, Walmarts, and homes. Some involved handguns, others rifles or shotguns.
10.3 million guns have been sold across the U.S. in 2025 through September 30.
https://www.thetrace.org/2025/10/shooting-gun-violence-data-...
Mass shootings in the United States are incidents where one or more individuals use firearms to kill or injure multiple people, typically in public settings. The frequency and definitions of these events can vary, but they have been a significant concern in recent years, with the U.S. experiencing more mass shootings than any other country.
GVA has recorded 325 mass shootings in the U.S. this year through three quarters. Those have resulted in 309 deaths and 1,490 injuries.
Mass shootings in the last quarter included the high-profile shooting at a New York skyscraper, as well as the shooting of 29 people, 26 of them children, at a church in Minneapolis. Two children, aged 8 and 10, were killed in that incident.
>incidents involving unarmed individuals,
Someone being unarmed doesn't mean they can't be deadly. They could be driving a vehicle or otherwise physically assault somebody which would justify deadly force.
Otherwise 1100 is actually quite low compared to the total gun death and per capita in which blacks are over represented compared to all other groups. That includes black on black and black on cops.
The dispatch relayer and responding officers should at least have ready access to a screen where they can see a video/image of the raw footage that triggered the AI alert. If it is a false alarm, they will better see it and react accordingly, and if it is a real threat they will better understand the initial context and who may have been involved.
According to a news article[1], a human did review the video/image and flagged it as a false positive. It was the principal who told the school cop, who then called other cops:
> The Department of School Safety and Security quickly reviewed and canceled the initial alert after confirming there was no weapon. I contacted our school resource officer (SRO) and reported the matter to him, and he contacted the local precinct for additional support. Police officers responded to the school, searched the individual and quickly confirmed that they were not in possession of any weapons.
What's unclear to me is the information flow. If the Department of School Safety and Security recognized it as a false positive, why did the principal alert the school resource officer? And what sort of telephone game happened to cause local police to believe the student was likely armed?
1. https://www.wbaltv.com/article/student-handcuffed-ai-system-...
Good lord, what an idiot principal. If the principal saw how un-gun-like it looked, he could have been brave enough to walk his lazy ass down to where the student was and said "Hey (Name), check this out. (show AI detection picture) The AI camera thought this was a gun in your pocket. I think it's wrong, but they like to have a staff member sign off on these since keeping everyone safe from violence is a huge deal. Can I take a picture of what it actually is in your pocket?"
Sounds like a "better safe than sorry" approach. If you ignore the alert on the basis that it's a false positive, then it turns out it really was a gun and the person shoots somebody, you're going to get sued into the ground, fired, name plastered all over the media, etc. On the other hand, if you call in the cops and there wasn't a gun, you're fine.
> "On the other hand, if you call in the cops and there wasn't a gun, you're fine."
Yeah, cause cops have never shot somebody unarmed. And you can bet your ass that the possible follow-up lawsuit to such a debacle's got "your" name on it.
Good luck suing somebody for calling the police.
In Texas filing a false report is a crime and can result in fines and/or imprisonment. Details:
https://legalclarity.org/false-report-under-the-texas-penal-...
Furthermore, anyone who files a false report can be sued in civil court.
“The system flagged a gun, please check it out” is not a false report.
It might be, depending on the integrity of "the system".
I can make a system that flags stuff, too. That doesn't mean it's any good. If they can show there was no reasonable cause then they've got a leg to stand on.
It’s the literal truth. How can that be a false report? A false report means you reported something you know to be untrue, not that you relayed bad information.
relay bad information, that suggests negligence, rather than willful omission or deception
It would only be negligence if the police were considered like some sort of dangerous wild animal that people need to avoid provoking, and can't be held responsible on its own.
Which may very well be accurate, but I can't imagine the law ever punishing someone on that basis.
Reports on child welfare, it is often illegal to release the name of the tipster. Commonly taken advantage of by disgruntled exes or in custody dusputes.
Ask a black teenager about being fine.
Well, you could ask this kid, he is black and wasn't harmed. It's not the cops' fault someone told them he had a gun.
You and I define "harm" differently.
Next up, a captcha that verifies you're not a robot by swatting you and checking at gunpoint.