[Boats]

In spring 1997, in the town of Dinuba, California, (pop. 15,000), the local police created a SWAT team. In summer 1997, with half of the city’s force on the SWAT unit, the officers shot Ramon Gallardo fifteen times during a 7:00AM raid, one featuring masks and MP5 subguns obtained with the assistance of the federal government. The officers were raiding the house looking for one of Gallardo’s sons, who allegedly, according to a tipster, was in possession of a sawed-off double barreled shotgun used in a murder in another town. The informant later recanted the account. In any event, the “person of interest” wasn’t even home that morning.

What was Ramon Gallardo killed for? Living in Dinuba. A knife was planted on Gallardo to “justify” the shoot. An eventual jury didn’t buy it and a $12.5 million verdict was slapped on the city, twice its annual budget. The case eventually settled for the city’s $9 million insurance policy limit. The SWAT team was disbanded.

As illustrated in a recent mistaken no-knock entry in NYC, in which a woman died of a heart attack initiated on the word of a junkie, Gallardo’s fate is hardly unique. The larger question is why we tolerate these tactics when the police are supposed to be theoretically and tactically distinct from the military, who are traditionally employed against foreigners. Allegedly, the citizens of the United States of America have nominal rights against military style assault tactics, and “run-out” search and seizures such as are performed by four man car teams of Fresno SWAT officers.

A professional police force is supposedly organized as citizens, who are designated by other citizens, to police the public in accord with a social contract. The contract, in short, is a bargain between the officer, who is granted authority that most people cannot wield by law, in exchange for the delegators of that power being treated as proper citizens, i.e., the law will be followed in the course of investigation and arrest of suspected citizens. Arguably, the development of SWAT teams since the late 60s abrogates that contract.

Paramilitarism is a hallmark of Third World police forces and should have no home here. It is eerie that elsewhere paramilitaries are not used to investigate suspected lawbreakers, but to annihilate them. When one examines the outcomes of the most heavy-handed paramilitary tactics of the past 15 years, it rapidly becomes apparent that a course that doesn’t escalate a situation has been dismissed out of hand. It is readily discernable that had the local Sheriff served Randy Weaver a summons for a firearms violation, the tragic stand-off there would have never happened. Had the ATF tapped local authorities to pick up David Koresh on his next visit to Waco rather than launch a secrecy compromised strike on his compound, that incident would never have happened. Had the NYC simply knocked at the door politely or required corroboration of their “trustworthy” source, a grandmother would be alive and Johnny Cochran wouldn’t have visited town to file a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

This post is not to say that SWAT tactics have no place in American policing. What I am saying is that these forces should be much rarer than they are. According to Eastern Kentucky University professors Peter Kraska and Victor Kappeler, nearly 90 percent of police departments surveyed in communities of over 50,000 people had SWAT type forces, but so did 70 percent of all departments in cities smaller than that. Such a figure is preposterous. Let’s visit some of these paramilitary units.

Here is a picture of the Fond-du-Lac Wisconsin SWAT team. Population 42,203

http://www.fdlpolice.com/images/venneswat.jpg

Here is the Baldwin Township Pennsylvania Tactical Squad. Population 2,477

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Acres/6215/tac1.gif

Here is the elite of the Hyattsville Maryland police department. Population 14,733

http://members.aol.com/Mski3/tpic2.jpg

Here is the SWAT team of Eufaula Alabama. Population 13,908

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/EufaulaPolice/images/swat11.jpg

All of these teams do not predate the 1990s. There can be little doubt that they are a byproduct of the War on Drugs and funded through a mix of asset forfeitures and federal aid. What is common to all SWAT teams is that their missions have largely crept to include all manner of things. Once upon a time, these teams were only carted out to take care of barricaded gunmen or other such obvious situations where higher levels of armor, stealth, or weaponry, had an apparent use. Over time, many of these units have turned to going on drug raids, serving search warrants, and yes, even doing investigations and crowd control. Does anyone remember the SWAT dragnets on Maryland’s and Virginia’s highways during the Washington sniper spree? I do.

The danger to the proliferation of these teams and their growing use for mundane policing duties is mostly one of perception. The higher profile of these units in the press and in shows like COPS serve to create a more imposing barrier of relationship between these types of units and the communities in which they serve. No part of town, no matter how seedy, should be referred to as a “war zone,” or “enemy territory,” or other such deprecatory remarks. How “politically correct!” one might say. However, and it cannot be denied, the language used to demarcate the line between “us” and the “other” serves to craft the perception of the “other.” It is not a far step from viewing everyone in an area as a potential threat to treating everyone in a given area as a threat.

It is my opinion that reactionary policing units should be disbanded in most places and turned into the mission portfolio of a small state police unit or a regional intergovernmental force who is not merely beholden to a local commander who uses the teams weapons and tactics as he sees fit.

Why should these teams be reined in? It is simply human nature that people want to use what they have. Nobody here would buy a common deer rifle without any intent to ever fire it at a deer or at least a piece of metal or cardboard. By the same token, the creation of a SWAT unit, especially in smaller locales where there can scarce said to be ample opportunities for bank robberies or hostage crises, the temptation to use such a team inappropriately or ill-advisedly, as in Dinuba, must be present. Tactical policing units, who should be made up of elite personnel who are highly trained and kept honed by constant practice, are simply not an option in tiny communities with limited budgets. All such ad hoc tactical units should be ended and the sole model of policing returned to one where the law enforcement officer is a part of the community and not a masked force striking in the middle of the night just because they received some cool toys from the Feds.

Those departments might lose their artificial "coolness quotient" but they might be more respected by the communities they are supposed to be serving--not practicing to assault.

[edited for spelling & punctuation]

[CZ-75]

When they get tax dollars, they're supposed to spend'em.

Besides, BDUs, body armor, and SMGs just look so COOOOOOOL. :rolleyes:

Oh, and they make the public feel safe and make terrorists wet themselves - uh huh. :scrutiny:

[SkunkApe]

Boats,

I compliment you on wonderfully-written opinion. I envy your communication skills. I am in full agreemnt with your post.

[TallPine]

SWAT - a solution in search of a problem

[Edward429451]

Excellant post. We have no need for a standing army. We were warned against it in our national documents.

Now here's where the resident LEO's come on and quote where only 1 in a million no knock raids go wrong and its the internet that spreads the news so rapidly that it's us citizens misperception and exageration of the situation that is wrong.

"We're the good guys, we're here to help" BANGBANGBANG, sorry serf, we were acting in good faith and in the course of our lawful duties, so STAND DOWN!":rolleyes:

What a crock.

[BigG]

Ninjas, plain and simple. :barf:

[Hkmp5sd]

1. In every instance of a LEO shootout, the agency & media always claim the police were outgunned by the bad guys (most recently in North Hollywood Shootout).

2. Based on #1, heavily armed SWAT teams make the sheeple feel safe.

[Sergeant Bob]

Great article Boats! Real eye opener. You should submit that to somebody! Maybe WND, Newsmax or something.

I wonder how much we pay for all those Jack Boots?

[jato]

Now here's where the resident LEO's come on and quote where only 1 in a million no knock raids go wrong and its the internet that spreads the news so rapidly that it's us citizens misperception and exageration of the situation that is wrong.

I agree with BOATS' post.

[Triad]

http://www.opelousaspd.com/

There was a thread here on THR about the above department buying a SAW. They also have an armored car...

Nice post Boats.

[Boats]

If I submitted it I would have to credit the Fresno Bee, the NYT, the Cato Institute, and the Albuquerque New Mexico local paper I cannot remember the name of. I only went in search of some of these small-time operations that are of the type that led to Mr. Gallardo's death and condensed a lot of what I found out on the subject.

I wouldn't call it journalism, though that profession seemingly has no standards at all.

[Boats]

There was a thread here on THR about the above department buying a SAW. They also have an armored car...

That is a funny site. Chief Caillier seems to have a sense of uniform fashion that even Saddam Hussein or Yassar Arafat would envy.

[Edited to add Opelousas, Louisiana population 18,984]

[Edward429451]

Sorry if I'm not as well versed as Boats.:D

[Art Eatman]

Part of the deal is that most LEOs AREN'T involved with SWAT stuff. Unless something does go wrong, most citizens don't realize the militarization is indeed occurring.

IMO, it's mayors and upper LEO administrators who create the problems. They go ga-ga over acquiring the freebie toys from the feds or from impounded drug money/property, but don't spend the money for proper training. To me, proper training includes testosterone control. :)

The other part of the problem stems from not doing proper police work: Not investigating the "real" evidence, as opposed to just relying on a snitch. I've read that many of the "Oops, wrong address!" events come from not verifying a snitch's info.

Always remember that the decision to use a SWAT unit comes from on high, not from the rank and file or the SWAT team members themselves.

Art

[Sergeant Bob]

I wouldn't call it journalism, though that profession seemingly has no standards at all.

It's better journalism than at least half the drivel we're used to reading in the mainstream media. Most so called "journalists" simply regurgitate stories they've read on the wire, with their own spin.

Your article is perfectly suited as an Op-Ed piece which is even backed up with facts (unlike many we see).

[Baba Louie]

All of those "no-knock" raid warrants are signed off by a judge, I believe.

Cops are cops.

Bad things can and do happen. Everywhere... not just big cities.

The old Boy Scout motto "Be Prepared" is still a good thing.

Special weapons and tactics are a good thing, but I'm not so sure about masked face men in black... I prefer the typical uniform tho I suppose rolling around on the floor or kicking in doors of meth labs (they must not have such things in small towns, eh?) would be kinda hard on the old uniform cleaning bill.

Easier to throw the BDU's in the washer and dryer, doncha think? At least the one set I have (khaki) for hunting and field wear is good for wear and tear.

Armored cars? Sheesh. I want one too.

But I'm not a Cop, so what do I know? And I do like reading Richard Marcinko stories as well as the next weirdo.

Adios

[Solinvictus70]

God, that police chief in Opolousas is a character! He DOES look like one of Saddam's boys, doesn't he? I remember a picture of Atlanta's police chief and she was wearing a uniform reminiscent of a South American military dictator.

[Art Eatman]

Several points to my Devil's Advocate package here, so sorta look at all of it, okay?

We know that a lot of the drug-dealers are readily violent, against most anybody and at any time. We know that when there is any sort of "fire fight" between Bad Guys and LEOs, there is commonly a howl of protest against the evil cops for doing Bad Things to "those innocent children they gunned down without mercy". Put on leave, maybe called up before a review board, lawsuits, etc. All this can be inhibitory to an officer's properly using his weapon to defend himself quickly enough to survive some encounter.

I think it is reasonable to believe that the issue of LEO safety has become more important, as the danger to LEOs has increased. So, it seems reasonable to believe that the SWAT team tactics make things safer for the LEOs involved. IOW, all this militarization does not happen in a vacuum. From the standpoint of officer safety, the equipment and tactics of a SWAT team are better than past styles of two guys in suits with snubby .38s attempting a peaceful arrest out on the street where the BG's friends are around.

Which brings me back to my earlier comments about the administrators and decision-making. And, of course, proper investigation before calling out the SWAT guys...

And that gets us to who is a candidate for city hall and voting and all that civic responsibility stuff...You're gonna have the police behavior that the Mayor and City Council folks provide.

Art

[MrAcheson]

Wow what a den of hypocrisy this is. This board's mantra is to be prepared. Everyone here has either developed or read someone elses plan for if SHTF. How likely is that? Not very, but we have them none the less because you don't want to be stuck simply reacting if it happens.

Now for whatever reason the police have decided to be prepared. Are they likely to need those toys? Nope but they're hundreds if not thousands of times more likely to need them than we are. Why? Because if SHTF they will be called. We will likely be sitting comfortably in our living rooms while they go out to do battle and restore the peace. It is far far far more reasonable for them to possess these weapons that for us to feel that we require them. Yet for some reason they are the bad guys for having them.

Is it any wonder why lots of folks see us as a pack of raving paranoids when we exhibit this kind of behavior?

[rage]

Boats...you're close.:uhoh:

[jato]

It is far far far more reasonable for them to possess these weapons that for us to feel that we require them. Yet for some reason they are the bad guys for having them.

I don't think Boats was talking about the weapons. You may have missed his point. As a Deputy Sheriff, I want access to effective weapons. I also think every law abiding person should have access to them as well.

Why won't SWAT wear their particular agency's uniform?

[Telperion]

MrAcheson, I would answer your points individually but instead for brevity I would direct you to re-read the original post. Nothing in Boats' essay is in opposition to your argument.

[Hkmp5sd]

One of the problems I perceive, although not being an LEO, I may be wrong, is that there some officer safety is lost because of the SWAT teams. While creating these elite units (and there are valid reasons to have them), I get the impression that training and equipment that average patrol officers require are being skipped.

By creating, mantaining and improving SWAT units, I feel some agencies get the impression the patrol officer doesn't need as much firearms training or doesn't need certain pieces of equipment available to them. If it comes down to it, the SWAT team can handle it.

In my un-LEO educated opinion, that is what happened in the LA shootout. Patrol officers were confronted with two BGs that starting spraying bullets. Yes, the officers were brave and charged into the fight. But at the distances the fight occured, the officers should have been able to get a clear headshot at some point in the 20 minute firefight.

Thanks to the politicians, the patrol cars were not stocked with carbines/rifles. That would cost extra, buying the guns, training the officers and it would also provide more liability if the officers hit a bystander.

Wow what a den of hypocrisy this is.
It is not a question of being prepared or parania at the cops. You will not find anyone on this board that does not support giving LEOs the training and tools they need.

The problem many have is the tactics being used and the increasing frequency these tactics are implemented without a clear need. No-knock warrants should not be the prefered method of arrest. Staging raids like Waco to justify your budget should not occur.

[Triad]

MrAcheson, I have no problem with the LEOs having this equipment. My problem is the way it's being used. If they have a convicted murderer who has escaped from prison and is now barricaded in a building and holding hostages, they need to send in SWAT and ASAP. OTOH if they have some snitch who says somebody MIGHT have some drugs in his house, they need to investigate and find out if the guy does have them and try to capture him peacefully before they send in the door kickers.

[Jeff White]

Boats my friend, you are a little bit guilty of using the same arguments that the antis use against gunowners, against your employees. Yes, the police are your employees. There are plenty of ways to influence what they do. In fact, I doubt that you will find another government agency more responsive to your needs and wants then your local PD. Need them, pick up the phone and call, guess what, they'll come....Tired of speeders on your street, call the chief, city manager, councilman, alderman etc. and say stop the speeders on my street. Guess what, you'll most likely find a squad assigned to run radar there.

Now keeping this in mind, think about what you are implying. The mere possession of BDUs, level IV body armor, evil black rifles is turning Barn and Andy into the Waffen SS. I suppose possession of evil black rifles, semiautomatic pistols, knifes, axes and assorted other weapons turns ordinary citizens into serial killers.

Of course not. We both know that it's how these things are used that makes them good or evil.

While somewhere in the nation, I'm sure there is a one or two man rural PD that has someone with fantasies of forming a rival to LAPDs D platoon, I assure you that for the most part, police departments don't jump headlong into forming tactical units just because they can. For the most part, they are formed in response to a bad incident that has convinced the administrators that they are needed.

Police tactical units are expensive (not as much is avaiable from fed.gov as you think), manpower intensive and one heck of a liability (as you pointed out in your article). Money doesn't grow on trees.

If you are the cief of police or the city manager of a small to medium sized community you have the sword of damoclies hanging right over your head with this issue. On one hand, you can't afford to have a tactical team. There is a lot of things you can do with that money that will pay better divdends. On the other hand, you can't afford not to. Because if there is an active shooter scenario at the local school or plant, or if some really bad people get off the interstate expecting to rob the local Bank of America and they get trapped in the building with hostages, you have to be able to deal with it. The public, your employer will demand it from you then. Then there is the obligation you have to your officers, to provide them with the safest work environment you can. So your choice is, wait for the State Police or FBI to get a tactical team to you (90 minutes to 8 or more hours) or have some kind of capability to handle things on your own. So waht do you do?

Now I'd like to address what you know about the no-knock raid in NYC where the woman had a heart attack? What are the facts as you know them to be?

Do you really think that if ESU expected to find a middle aged woman with a heart condition behind the door, they would have handled it the way they did?

Now tell me how the development of SWAT Teams abrogates the contract between the police and the citizens they serve. If your wife is in the Bank of America Branch when the bad guys jump off the interstate to take it down, who do you want handling the police end of the contract, especially the clause about rescuing your wife and taking the bad guys into custody with as little loss of life or property as possible, Andy and Barney, or LAPD D platoon?

Perhaps you'd rather see the more violent criminals in our society taken down the way the feds and local police worked in the 30s, little training and a lot of firepower? Of course there were a lot of innocent bystanders hurt in those days, but what the heck, it was just the cost of doing business, no body really sued for millions in those days. :rolleyes:

Did you ever think that the proliferation of tactical units might be because it's the safest and most efficient way (for everyone, including the bad guys) to deal with certain situations and that these agencies might have no option but to use the lot of firepower, little training method to deal with these situations?

I work for a small town with a population of around 8000. A full time tactical unit from the State Police would take anywhere from 2 to 6 hours to arrive and deploy if we needed them, if they weren't already tied up doing another mission. But by your standards, the 8000 people in my town and the 25000 in the county should wait for those 2 to 6 hours if there is ever a critical incident. Why?

We have a big problem with the production of meth in this county and all the counties around here. A week ago, a man who was to be sentenced to a long term in prison for the prodution of meth, walked out of the courthouse and escaped. Three nights ago, an informant told one of the other PDs he was staying in their town. A high speed chase through the county ensued and ended with a standoff with the suspect holding a gun to his own head. He was talked down and arrested without further incident. Perhaps he should have waited for the State to show up, it only would have taken a few hours and he might not have killed himself or someone else in the meantime. :uhoh:

Sorry my friend, SWAT, Tac Teams, whatever you want to call them have saved more lives (both innocent and criminal) then they have taken.

Have there been mistakes? Yes. Has there been abuse? Yes. Is it the norm? No!

Jeff

[Preacherman]

Let me give a "Yes, but..." response to this.

Firstly, I agree that the militarization of civilian police forces is a very troubling issue indeed. I'm LE myself (Federal), and have seen how LEO's of many Federal agencies refer to ordinary folks as "civilians". When I (always!) point out that we're civilians as well, and that the only ones who are not civilians are wearing a military uniform, I get lots of opposition. It worries me because LEO's are civilians protecting civilians. If the mind-set that "we're different" becomes too established, I think this can have very negative consequences - not least of all for Constitutional principles like the Second Amendment, which can be seen as a threat to "us" in the hands of "them", if you know what I mean. I suspect this is why so many top cops oppose things like concealed carry - they're more politicians than they are policemen, but they've absorbed the "us vs. them", "LE versus civilian" mentality over the years, and it's carrying over into their interaction with the political establishment. NOT healthy, IMHO...

Secondly, I have to say that I fully support the concept of having a backup squad of highly-trained, well-equipped cops available to handle the out-of-the-ordinary cases. The average LEO is equipped and trained to handle the average crime - breaking and entering, domestic violence, that sort of thing. He/she is NOT equipped or trained to handle a gang of heavily-armed bank robbers or drug dealers, or a homicidal maniac in a tower armed with a long-range weapon. It would be financially and practically impossible to train and equip all LEO's to handle these sorts of situations. This is where any LEO worth his/her pay will recognize that something really bad is going down and call for backup, then pull back and observe if at all possible, keeping the reinforcements informed of developments so that they arrive with as much information as possible. This is not always an option, and that's when the LEO learns the hard way that a badge can get you killed... :(

Thirdly, we come to the "break-and-enter" service of warrants, which has resulted in the death and/or injury of innocent victims in the past. This is absolutely, totally and completely unacceptable: but it's a direct consequence of the militarization of police units. The US Army, in taking over a town, might end up killing some civilians in addition to its armed defenders. They would be genuinely sorry about this, I'm sure, but would say that it's inevitable, it's "collateral damage", and it's an unavoidable part of warfare. Unfortunately, too many of our police take the same attitude to work. They're involved in a "war" (on drugs, on crime, etc.): they have to get their job done: this involves taking on heavily-armed and desperate criminals, who won't hesitate to kill LEO's: and a few innocent victims or casualties in this struggle are simply "collateral damage", that can't be helped, and is part of the price they ("we") have to pay to obtain victory in this "war".

I don't know the answer to this, except to ban "break-and-enter" service of warrants altogether. Instead of this practice, perhaps we could institute a system of isolating a location (removing the neighbors, etc.) and starving out the folks inside? This may not always be possible, and might result in the destruction of evidence that might subsequently prevent any conviction being obtained: but I don't see any alternative. Of course, if one is after a suspected terrorist armed with a suspected weapon of mass destruction, who might use that weapon if given time to do so... well, under those circumstances, a forced entry and immediate neutralizing of everyone and anyone inside may be the only option. I don't have an answer for such situations.

There's more to this than meets the eye. Scale back the militarization of LE functions, most certainly: but still, there are real and very dangerous threats out there, and we need some form of SWAT to handle them.

Anyone got any better answers? :confused:

[Edward429451]

Everyone here has either developed or read someone elses plan for if SHTF.

Would that be Swat Hits The Fan?:D



The problem many have is the tactics being used and the increasing frequency these tactics are implemented without a clear need. No-knock warrants should not be the prefered method of arrest. Staging raids like Waco to justify your budget should not occur.

Yes, agreed. If this kind of stuff continues to happen, how could any good citizen be thought wrong of for seeing more of a threat from the police/swat than robbers. The po po operate under color of law and so the frequency of their actions (and mistakes) continue to rise faster than the crime rate. (seems so anyway, not quoteing numbers or anything.) At this rate it isnt unreasonable to fear the po po more than the infrequent criminals. Sad but true.

[Mr. James]

Boats,

Outstanding. I had assumed this was a published piece. It's definitely a keeper.

Hi, Mr. White,

No quarrel with your comment on the local PDs. You bet we call them first, and can't wait to see them arrive. They are, by and large, good men trying to do an impossibly difficult job.

But you steer wide of Boats' main point. I don't believe Boats was arguing SWAT units were evil in se. His quarrel was in the increasing, and undeniable, increase in the military armaments, military-style training, and deploying of SWAT units, often in situations and in locations where they are not really needed. You know, when your only [read: best, newest, federally funded] tool is a hammer, the world is a nail.

Do you really think that if ESU expected to find a middle aged woman with a heart condition behind the door, they would have handled it the way they did?

That is, I believe, part of Boats' complaint. WHY DIDN'T THEY KNOW? HOW DARE THEY USE THESE TACTICS IF THEY DON'T KNOW? If it's that dicey, pull back, establish a perimiter and THEN call in the 8th Marines.

Is the risk of having some cocaine flushed down a toilet really worth what we're paying?

"Ooops, our bad" is, truly, an unsatisfactory response to this sort of thing. But, until the civil judgement comes in, that's all we ever get.

Respectfully submitted.

[Orthonym]

Sovereign immunity is the yummiest of all drugs, except maybe power.

[Boats]

Mr. White---

Allow me to quote myself:

It is my opinion that reactionary policing units should be disbanded in most places and turned into the mission portfolio of a small state police unit or a regional intergovernmental force who is not merely beholden to a local commander who uses the teams weapons and tactics as he sees fit.

"or a regional intergovernmental force."

Allow me to introduce a team I half approve of.

Marion County, Oregon, Special Response Team (http://sheriff.co.marion.or.us/srt.asp)

http://sheriff.co.marion.or.us/images/srt%20group.jpg

I do not approve of their standard fashion sense. I do approve of their organization. The county I reside in has well in excess of 200,000 residents. It has at least three police agencies, a Sheriff's department, and a State Police unit, all of adequate size, if some of the SWAT teams in my opening post are any indicator, capable of fielding independent SWAT teams.

The Marion County SRT is multiagency, it is multidisciplined, as it includes paramedics. It has defined missions of barricade, hostage, high risk arrest, and VIP details--AND NOTHING ELSE. Combating drugs, investigating drugs, doing search warrants, all of that, falls to a different interagency team that has no tactical team at its beck and call.

Guess what? Our SRT unit only gets called for the actual emergencies it was intended to address, ones where the situation is defined, ones where the suspect is known, one where the informant has been independently checked. It works and it is not driven by ego or headlines. My only valid criticism of them is the camo, which I have been writing the powers that be to disallow. As they are interagency, I concede that they need some unit identifier, but I cannot see why that cannot be addressed through SRT on their armored duds.

My local SRT, except for their over the top taste in clothing, more closely mirrors what I, and many others, believe is an appropriate level of paramilitarization for our police forces. Small and not unnecessarily duplicative, limited in mission profile, not endlessly acquisitive of armored vehicles and other claptrap, and commanded by only the top LEO with county-wide jurisdiction, who consults with the local police commander. They are deployable most anywhere in the county inside of 45 minutes.

[Jeff White]

Mr. James,
Please call me Jeff, Mr. White was my dad ;).

His quarrel was in the increasing, and undeniable, increase in the military armaments, military-style training, and deploying of SWAT units, often in situations and in locations where they are not really needed. You know, when your only [read: best, newest, federally funded] tool is a hammer, the world is a nail.

Could you please provide me with spme examples of this? Besides the obvious abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. For the most part in the rural areas SWAT type units aren't deployed as much as they should be because of the costs involved in overtime and stripping of manpower from other duties.

Do you really think that if ESU expected to find a middle aged woman with a heart condition behind the door, they would have handled it the way they did?

That is, I believe, part of Boats' complaint. WHY DIDN'T THEY KNOW? HOW DARE THEY USE THESE TACTICS IF THEY DON'T KNOW? If it's that dicey, pull back, establish a perimiter and THEN call in the 8th Marines.

Unless the bureaucrats running NYPD have changed their minds, the ESU is now prohibited from using distraction devices. So now the officers who still have to take down barricaded suspects have lost the use of an important tool that not only keeps them safe, but the suspects. Why, because the press, just like Boats and yourself, are focusing on the wrong thing. It wasn't ESU that made the mistake. They acted within department guidlines based on the information they were given. They were told there was a suspect who was amred and dangerous and would fight in that apartment. The fault lies with the nacotics unit who worked the CI (confidential informant) and didnt verify the address. I don't know what their policy is, but I know that around here, you don't get search warrants that easily. ESU was the bullet that killed that woman, but the war on some drugs was the gun, and the narcotics unit pulled the trigger. Now ESU is taking the blame. And the people of New York, both good and bad are less safe then they were a few weeks ago.

I hear a lot of condemnation of ESU, but none for the narcotics unit that ran the CI, got the warrant and then turned it over to ESU to serve. Why?

Is the risk of having some cocaine flushed down a toilet really worth what we're paying?

Nope, the war on some drugs and the war on some guns and the war on whatever else the politicians decide to make the cause of the week is the problem. Check my posts on TFL for a couple long threads I started on ending the war on some drugs back in about 1998 for my opinions on this.

I'm going to go against popular thought here and maintain that SWAT type units make everyone, peace officer, private citizen and criminal safer. Think of how many criminals and emotionally disturbed persons who would be dead now if police departments didn't have trained and disciplined SWAT units to handle these situations without having to fire shots.



"Ooops, our bad" is, truly, an unsatisfactory response to this sort of thing. But, until the civil judgement comes in, that's all we ever get.

Agreed. But that isn't all you get. By the time this shakes out, hopefully, the nacotics unit will have some better procedures for evaluating information from CIs, and perhaps even judges will look at the information on the warrant applications more carefully. ESU didn't do this on it's own. The checks and balances that are built into the system failed. It's not SWAT it's the war on some drugs.

Jeff

[jato]

The average LEO is equipped and trained to handle the average crime - breaking and entering, domestic violence, that sort of thing. He/she is NOT equipped or trained to handle a gang of heavily-armed bank robbers or drug dealers, or a homicidal maniac in a tower armed with a long-range weapon.

Hey Preacherman, the problem is (at least in Southern Ca.) the patrol officers do have to deal with the heavy stuff. SWAT takes over an hour or more to respond, assemble, brief and execute.

Patrol is the front line. In my opinion, patrol should get the best weapons / training. Of course, it is usually quite the opposite.

[Boats]

Here you go Jeff, some WOD/SWAT abuses:

The Leftists are sometimes useful to me (http://www.libertocracy.com/Webessays/police/drugwar/listabuses.htm)

I would have you note that "no knocks" were a distasteful exception that have become the rule. Who do you think has been pressuring for that change over the past 40 years?

[Jeff White]

Boats,
Your SRT could easily have the same thing happen to it, as happened to NYPD ESU in the example you cited in your original post.

Multi jurisdictional agencies are very common. There is nothing wrong with them. I am happy that all the agencies involved have such a good working relationship and they have worked out all the command and liability issues. This isn't possible everywhere.

Where is there a SWAT team that operates at the beck and call of a local official that is running roughshod over the population? I challenge you to provide some documentation.

Also I would bet that if your narcotics unit isn't supported by SRT, they have officers with similar training who execute the high risk search warrants. So you probably have a SWAT unit that is just less visible.

How would placing all SWAT type units under a higher authority then local control end the abuses? It seems to me, the most deadly and flagrant abuses of power come from the agencies under control of the highest authority, the federal government. In my experience, the more central contol you have of a function, the less responsive it is. Think about this; Your neighbor Joe, down the street, has been growing a little dope in his basement. Joe is a pretty good guy, smokes a little weed now and then, sells some to his old high school buddies, but he's always there to loan you his mower, or help you paint your fence. Who do you want deciding what tactics to use to arrest him? A police administrator in the state capitol or Washington DC, or the guys at the local police station, who know Joe and know that he's pretty harmless?

Jeff

[Intune]

I see Jeff’s point and agree with it for the most part. My contention is that the WOD provides both the funds and the opportunity to utilize paramilitary forces. Every podunk town has them thru seizures & forfeitures. If the LEO’s only had to go after murderers, rapists and crazies they would be BORED! I’m gonna do a little study for you guys. I’m going to find out:

A. How much money comes from the local gov of my town to fund the police force.

B. How much comes from federal funding.

C. How much comes from the WOD.

D. Any guesses?

Erosion, erosion, erosion of our rights as free citizens of this republic.

One word about Jeff's previous post. WACO

[Jeff White]

I would have you note that "no knocks" were a distasteful exception that have become the rule. Who do you think has been pressuring for that change over the past 40 years?

In 18 years, I have never seen a no knock warrant. They are very hard to get, at least around here. So hard that most agencies don't even bother applying for them.

As for your examples:
They are all little snippets of the story. There are usually as many versions of the story as there are participants.

Esequiel Hernandez, a teenage goat herder, was murdered by U.S. Marines in 1997 near his home in Texas because they falsely thought that he might be a drug courier.

From what I read at the time, the boy fired in the direction of the Marines. It is debatable what he was shooting at, but he was not gunned down because the Marines thought he was a drug courier. The facts were he did possess a weapon and fire it in the direction of the hide the Marines were in.

SWAT Team Kills 11-Year-Old Boy in a drug raid (Sep. 13, 2000)
In Modesto, Calif., Alberto Sepulveda, an 11 year-old seventh-grader, was fatally shot in the back by a shotgun blast from David Hawn, a 21 year veteran cop. The boy's father, was arrested on drug trafficking charges, which were later dropped because of lack of evidence. The boy's mother and two siblings, ages 8 and 14, were also home during the raid.

Where is the rest of the story? What were the circumstances ? Was it a negligent discharge, a case of mistaken identity? Why were the charges dropped for lack of evidence? Was the evidence there and suppressed?

Many of the other examples are from editorials, not news articles. I agree that mistakes have been made. I never said the system was perfect. But we have to get the rest of the story on all these incidents. And you neglect to point out what action (if any)was taken after these incidents.

As I said in earlier posts, it's not SWAT or tactically trained officers that is the problem, it's things like the war on some drugs.

Jeff

[Sergeant Bob]

How would placing all SWAT type units under a higher authority then local control end the abuses?

Your neighbor Joe, down the street, has been growing a little dope in his basement.

Who do you want deciding what tactics to use to arrest him? A police administrator in the state capitol or Washington DC, or the guys at the local police station, who know Joe and know that he's pretty harmless?

Why would you even think about calling for a SWAT team for this? I hope I'm just misunderstanding your point or there's really nothing more to talk about. It should not go any farther than the local PD or Sheriff patrol officers (though I'm of the opinion it shouldn't even go there).

I think you may be missing Boats' point here:The Marion County SRT is multiagency, it is multidisciplined, as it includes paramedics. It has defined missions of barricade, hostage, high risk arrest, and VIP details--AND NOTHING ELSE.

It's a county agency, with members from different agencies within the county. Janet Reno would not be running the show.

[Jeff White]

Why would you even think about calling for a SWAT team for this? I hope I'm just misunderstanding your point or there's really nothing more to talk about. It should not go any farther than the local PD or Sheriff patrol officers (though I'm of the opinion it shouldn't even go there).

No, I would probably walk up to the door in uniform early in the morning, knock and present them with the warrant. My point was, the higher you centralize decision making like this, the more likely it would be a knock and announce at 0330 with black clad officers with Surefire lights mounted on their weapons. Bureaucrats always err on the side of caution.

It's a county agency, with members from different agencies within the county. Janet Reno would not be running the show.

I am aware of that. The county directly to the South of me does the same thing. The point I'm making is that centralized control isn't always the answer. I'm glad that it works in Marion County Oregon. It doesn't work everywhere. They have been unable to make it work here, despite the best efforts of a lot of good people.

You guys are attacking the symptoms. You need to treat the underlying disease which is the war on some drugs, the war on some guns, the war on terror and who knows what's next.

Work through the sytem to change the laws. Legalize or decriminalize drugs. Do away with gun laws.....Then you'll see this stuff come to a halt.

Jeff

[Tamara]

In 18 years, I have never seen a no knock warrant. They are very hard to get, at least around here. So hard that most agencies don't even bother applying for them.

Unfortunately, they're easier to get elsewhere. :( In an investigative report on the Denver PD, it was revealed that they carried out 146 no-knock drug raids in 1999. Out of all those raids, only two suspects were actually sent to prison, and in two-thirds of the raids, no felony arrests were even made. Culminating what we hope was an unusually bad year vis a vis the norm, was the disastrous Ismael Mena incident.

I think that the problem is frequently that A) SWAT is the big trendy thing. B) SWAT teams are expensive. C) Drug seizures pay money. D) "I know, we can make the SWAT team pay for itself!". This seems to cause a self-reinforcing feedback loop. Pretty soon, an idea hatched in urban megalopolises to deal with barricaded shooters and hostage situations has trickled down to the point where Andy and Barn are doing a break'n'rake on Aunt Bea's parlor window and lobbing in flash-bangs 'cause Otis told 'em he saw Opie in there smoking a joint, and, well, auctioning off Aunt Bea's house would pay for that new computer system down at the jail that the mayor won't pony up for...

Granted, I'm being a little hyperbolic, but to deny something's a little out of whack would be wrong. There's gotta be a happy medium someplace.

[Sergeant Bob]

You guys are attacking the symptoms. You need to treat the underlying disease which is the war on some drugs, the war on some guns, the war on terror and who knows what's next.

I agree with the basic premise of your arguement but, I equate it to using chemotherapy to treat the common cold. It would be much easier to switch to sudaphed than to beat the cold. That will take a bit more work.

[BigG]

MrAcheson: It's the Halloween/Mr. Dress Up aspect of this I object to most strenuously.

[spartacus2002]

Now keeping this in mind, think about what you are implying. The mere possession of BDUs, level IV body armor, evil black rifles is turning Barn and Andy into the Waffen SS. I suppose possession of evil black rifles, semiautomatic pistols, knifes, axes and assorted other weapons turns ordinary citizens into serial killers.

There is a difference between the police and the citizens. That difference is that the police have a legal monopoly on the use of force, including deadly force, against the citizens (except of course limited cases where a citizen can self-defend).

The police can use deadly force to uphold the law, even laws of dubious constitutionality. You and I cannot.

So, you combine power+ability+will+mission = opportunity and capability to abuse that power.

There is one other elephant in the room that everyone is dancing around, and I will go on record even if it gets me flamed. I am a soldier. My job is to apply violence when I am called upon to perform my duty. Other than law of war issues regarding noncombatants and captured enemy, I am not trained to protect rights or prevent violence, nor is it my mission. Application of deadly force is my first instinct and only option. Therefore, I am used only in very infrequent occasions and only for good reason.

A policeman has the opposite mission. They are used constantly, and they exist to protect rights and prevent violence. Violence and deadly force are their last resort, not the first.

Now, here is the kicker: some, NOT ALL, police wish they had the soldier's freedom of action. I've met enough police who thought they were Rambo Junior to scare me. You non-Rambo LEOs know who I'm talking about. Many of those Rambo Jrs never had the balls to join the military, and secretly regret it. Being a cop gives them power and a gun, and they like it.

I've also met honest cops who put their community first. I sincerely believe the Rambo Juniors are by far the minority. HOWEVER, SWAT teams can give those Rambo Juniors an excuse to play soldier, an excuse to breed an us v. them mentality, and a mindset that application of deadly force is their primary option, not a last resort.

If you're gonna have a SWAT team, you gotta make sure those guys get lots of dad-to-son talks from their boss that they are still cops, not soldiers.

PS if you don't believe any of the above, look at the posts where LEOs admit their fellow LEOs refer to their fellow citizens as "civilians."

[Oracle]

Boats,

Very nice article. I agree with what you've said, there is an appropriate use for special weapons and tactics, but it isn't in every podunk county or city in the world. Were you going to publish this article, I would suggest adding the part about the SRT team that you think is proper, sort of a "point, counterpoint" arguement. Very nice, regardless.

[Boats]

Now keeping this in mind, think about what you are implying. The mere possession of BDUs, level IV body armor, evil black rifles is turning Barn and Andy into the Waffen SS. I suppose possession of evil black rifles, semiautomatic pistols, knifes, axes and assorted other weapons turns ordinary citizens into serial killers.


I don't think weapons or equipment gnaw on a man until he has to use it on someone, anyone. That was not the point I was trying to make.

However, no matter how many cool guns I buy or equipment I purchase, I never have to justify their ownership, my practice budget, their mission, utility, or whatever, except to my wife.:D She is way more indulgent than a city council or a board of commissioners and the like, who demand results when expenditures are made.

I rarely face the temptation to go out and use my guns simply to avoid having my ammo budget slashed by my wife or justify my continued retention of my cooler weapons to myself.

There are different pressures on a team or a SWAT commander who gets hooked on asset forfeiture, writing grant requests to Washington DC or annually competing for a share of a limited budget with other LEO or publicly funded priorities.

I do not think it is any accident that most of the SWAT teams in America statistically were formed in the 1990s. It seemed that departments in many smaller burgs figured out how they could imitate the big boys. All it takes is to convince one's supervisors of the "increased threat" posed by drug dealers and the other scourges of society and demand help in mounting a response.

"But there is good news Mayor, with your backing, I can get just about everything we need from the US Department of Justice. They'll give most of the stuff to us, we just have to feed and maintain it after we demonstrate a need for the equipment. As you know, we are all outgunned, which is why we transitioned from revolvers to Glock semi-autos fifteen years ago. Yes, I know there hasn't been an officer involved shooting here in 35 years or so, but we have to be ready for when some meth-amped bikers roll through town someday and decide to blast our fair city like some latter day version of Rebel Without a Cause."

The proverbial white elephant anyone?

:rolleyes:

[toro]

Great Post:)


I have been reading Ruby Ridge written by Rany Weaver and his daughter Sara. Here is a quote:

A "snitch" is usually someone, who has committed a crime, but when apprehended is given a chance to avoid arrest or prosecution by agreeing to become an informent. Whether a first time offender, or someone with an extensive criminal history, these people are essentially put on the payroll (your tax dollars at work). They work as undercover informants, in theory, providing the controlling agency with information on crimes and criminals.


The problem, in most cases, is the informant's prime motivations: money and staying out of jail. Informants are pressured to produce, to provide infromation that will lead to arrest and ultimately enhance the agency's image. Many times, the information is invalid or an outright lie. The potential for abuse is great. In the past few years an alarming number of innocent people have been killed or imprisoned by overly zealous law enforcement officers acting on bad tips provided by snitches
-- Randy Weaver --

Mrs. Toro


----------------------------------------------
1 Kings 22: 20-22
And the Lord said, who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on manner, and another said on that manner. And there came a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said unto him, wherewith? And he said, I will go forth and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

[brownie0486]

Paramilitary defintion:

"Of, relating to, or being a group of civilians organized in a military fashion, especially to operate in place of or assist regular army troops."

Are US swat units military types as is suggested here?

Lets see, swat tactics were developed for domestic urban environs where special training was required to gain entry into an urban setting to effect the rescue of hostages, take downs of heavily fortified drug dens in the inner cities, and where tactics unique to those environs were not taught to uniformed line officers.

Tactics and equipment were developed which would enable a so taught group of police officers to perform these functions as the regular line officers were lacking in training/tactics/equipment to safely carry out their assigned duties.

The military has only recently developed swat type tactics for urban warfare based on their civilian counterparts experiences in urban settings in the last 12 years or so.

Several active mil types were seen at the HK training facility in the classes I attended back in the early 90's. They were there for urban tactics training, to develop their skills at door to door house clearing. Prior to the gulf war they had no such training in an urban environment.

They discovered in desert storm they had a need to be able to operate in urban environs safely and they suffered many casualties in the gulf war due to their lack of knowledge about how to effect safe house to house searches.

They developed their tactics from this and other swat type training facilities who had already developed same years before out of need.

The tactics being deployed in house to house searches in Baghdad, Tikrit, and other urban settings were brought forth from their superiors who trained in the urban tactics presented and developed by swat types domestically, then passed the same onto their troops who were then trained enmasse in these same tactics to be used during the next war they found themselves in which required this type of tactics.

I happened to have trained along side some of the mil types in urban tactics and got to pick their brains some while on breaks and evenings out after the days training. What they told me was that they were woefully lacking in urban tactics during the gulf war and believed their missions in the future would be more and more urban house to house type warfare. Hence their training alongside their domestic counterparts at HK.

Knowing this, and the definition of paramilitary given above, I see no paramilitarism in our domestically trained swat types. They did not take any tactics from the military when being trained in swat house clearings/entries. Just the opposite, the military ramped their own tactics up for their soldiers based on swat tactics developed domestically.

So to answer the threads header,

We haven't allowed our police agencies to be organized in a military fashion at all. Nor to to operate in place of or assist regular army troops.

Brownie

[Hkmp5sd]

The origins of the tactics used by SWAT originated following the 1972 Olympic massacre of Israeli athletes. It started by the creation of counterterror forces in the German military (GSG9). The British SAS then added counterterror to their tasks and with reluctance at all things new, the US Army created Delta around 1978.

The tactics and equipment are/were developed by military units (civilian LE agencies do not have the R&D budgets to experiment with new toys). Given the prohibition on using US military forces in the US against US citizens, cross-training was initiated with LE agencies and local LE agencies started forming their own SWAT units across the country. IIRC, it was Chief Gates of LAPD that created the first civilian LE SWAT team.

Following the screwups in the early 90's of sending US troops into areas as peacekeepers and watching them get killed on the nightly news, the military incorporated urban warfare training to the basic infantry troops instead of restricting it to elite units.

[Boats]

Brownie--to accept your argument would be to accept that the United States armed forces never developed urban assault strategies to deal with the urban environments of the ETO in WW2, the retaking of Seoul and Inchon in the Korean War, or figured out how to assault the enemy in the battle of Hue in Vietnam without input from American cops.

The Army and the Marine Corps may have forgotten a lot about MOUT before Gulf War 1, but it can hardly be said that Darryl Gates and the other pioneers of SWAT, many of whom were veterans of the armed services, created urban assault tactics out of whole cloth and then transmitted them back to the US military. That is counter-factual and ahistorical.

[brownie0486]

The military leaders were sending the American military units coordinators and instructors to HK to learn urban assault/entry tactics in the 90's which were then passed to the troops who would be doing the work oversees.

Hkmp5sd: You are right on, but the US military did not take the training from israelis or the german gsg9 units which they could have. They developed their tactics through civilian sources here in this country who had been training police in urban warfare/swat tactics for many years.

I do like how the isrealis operate though. Did you catch the story about the vehicle operator who didn't follow their instructions at the checkpoint recently? A few got shot [ non killed from memory of the story ]and they didn't have to ask 4-5 times for them to do as they were instructed.

Boats: I didn't say house clearing wasn't performed in Europe in ww2 or wars past, they just never had any formal training in it and kinda "winged" it as best they could. After desert storm they set in motion the formal training they have today in the urban settings, taken from the swat tactics developed for the most part domestically, which suggests the cops are not paramilitary and following some form of training developed by the armed forces. It was the other way around here in the US. To say American police are paramilitary speaks to their taking tactics from the mil types when actually the mil types discovered their inadequacy in an urban setting and got their present tactics from the domestic boys.

While at HK they always wore their military uniforms and not civilan clothes. I was fortunate to have trained with a few Ft. Benning army sniper instructors at HK one year during counter-sniper training in an urban environ. One of the spec force instructors was able to show me a certain variation hold on the long guns, prone, which reduced the groups almost in half immediately. They could shoot very well [ better than any of us civilians ] but were there for the urban tactics primarily.

I was more than a little surprised to see military trainers in the classes for domestic LE training myself, but in talking to them I learned they did not have the tactics for house to house and building enrties and were seeking civilan training in that venue. Surprised but pleasantly so by all who worked with them during the weeks of training. This was early 90's mind you, and swat tactics had alreay been being used domestically for years when they came to learn the tactics.

As those are the facts, it becomes a question of who came first, the chicken or the egg? To deem the police as paramilitary they would have to be using military tactics, it is the other way around however.


Brownie

[Ian]

Which is really the worse situation - that the police adopt military tactics, or that the preexisting police tactics are so well-honed for warfare that the military adopts them?

[Tamara]

It started by the creation of counterterror forces in the German military (GSG9).

To be persnickety, GSG-9 is part of the German BGS (equivalent to our Border Patrol). They are a civilian paramilitary force. :cool:

[Hkmp5sd]

Yes, Ma'am. :)

[brownie0486]

Ian:
Swat training domestically has evolved and been tweeked over the years as any tactics are. The learning curve is high with many scenarios played out which had not been thought of initially or were then considered for change based on outcomes on the streets of the US during raids/rescues.

It's everchanging and fluid. The dynamics encountered under duress of these events on the streets of the US requires honing the skills as well as possibly changing their requirements and tactics as something is deemed unacceptable through practical applications on the streets.

What was thought to work and has failed has been changed, always with the officers safety as the foremost consideration while performing these functions in the real world.

When you use a handgun for your personal defensive needs and discover the technique is flawed through practical application where one used it before you and it got them killed, you restructure your own thinking and adjust accordingly based on the preceived reason it failed. You have learned through others mistakes and changed your tactics/armament/and support equipment.

This is a logical progression on the swat types training and it will continue to be tweeked until such time as technology takes the threat of injury or death from the equation. Until then, the swat boys have to learn by doing, and die by their mistakes. When one is involved in life and death encounters and sees something has not worked [ for whatever reason ]they quickly react to the errors and tweek their tactics further.

It is a natural progression in the development of something better, based on the actual events, which can lead to better and safer tactics and equipment. Hence, with the years rolling by it stands to reason they would hone their skills, share this knowledge with others in the same capacity and continue to educate each other based on their collective knowledge base across the US.

Though I don't like the term "war" where it concerns the streets of the US, there is nevertheless a major problem for LE's on the streets realtive their safety. The causes of the war are numerous and diverse but in certain areas of the country the LE swat types are the only line against total chaos and uncontrolled violence.

I don't believe we can let the inner city gangs control turf through violence nor allow the drug dens to operate with impunity. It takes a dedicated, highly trained team to deal with these problems which the regular line officers are not equipped to deal with either in tactics or equipment they are issued for their road duties.

Swat is constantly tweeking their tactics in an attempt to outwit, outman, and outgun the BG's who act with impunity where regular patrol units are concerned. The dangers faced by swat types in urban warfare against the BG's are seldom considered by many here who only see them as JBT's or worse.

I get the impression some here believe they [ the cops ]actually want to risk their lives entering a dangerous situation and enjoy taking bullets going through the door. Imagine if you will the thoughts of a father with two sons and wife waiting for him to come home at the end of the day. In a few minutes he knows he will be part of an assault on a drug lab and has been staged and is "good to go". He isn't in the lineup because he enjoys putting himself at risk of death everytime he is called out. He is in the lineup because he believes he can do some good for his community and has taken the responsibility of his profession to the far ends of the spectrum where life and death are in the balance for him and others everytime he suits up at the staging area before going into harms way.

He is called JBT and other names by those who oppose his position and call to duty. Most LE's that work in that venue also are line officers first. Swat is usually all volunteer, no one is made to work that venue, they take on the role knowing full well the dangers they will face due to their mission statements. It's when all else has failed he is called upon. When the situation dictates someone has to charge forward into the lions den and nobody in their right mind would do so willingly without a death wish.

It's my opnion that some here who bandy between them the JBT theories of the swat types would be the first ones to say "no" to actually suiting up and heading into the melee that awaits them. They would leave that to others and not move forward, yet take issue with the ones who do go in harms way and how they perform their function within society.

It's pretty easy to paint the swat types as JBT's when they sit in armchairs and monday morning quarterback the units every mistake. I would profer that these same people experience a pucker factor 10 ocassionally where when they make a mistake they will likely die. Then they may just have a renewed respect for the hard job the swat teams have and how easy it is to make mistakes while under the threat of immediate death in a dynamic scenario that will last no more than 2 minutes usually.

Are there offciers in that venue who should not be part of the team? Sure there are. For the most part they are honest men and women who are holding the line against the BG's controlling the streets.

"I once complained because I had no shoes, then I saw a man who had no feet."

Brownie

[Tamara]

With all due respect, brownie, I see very little "Monday morning quarterbacking" of the tactics or officers, and more questioning why those officers have to be put in harm's way in the first place. (Much less in a situation that predisposes everyone involved to be in a "shoot-first-ask-questions-later" mindset that frequently has disastrous results.)

You've read enough on this board to know that Boats is no wild-eyed anarchist, and also has spent his time serving his country...

[brownie0486]

I agree with that. We should question the "why for" more. No question.

I have all the respect for Boats for many reasons from reading his posts. I merely explained that the mil types have taken the urban lessons/tactics from the civilan venue after gulf1.

Boats, if I have offended you in any way, it certainly wasn't intentional.

Edited to add: I was responding to a thought process brought about by Ian. Boats, nor anyone else specifically was on my mind when I wrote about monday morning quaterbacking. It ws used in a general sense about how swat is looked at by some here.

Brownie

[Art Eatman]

brownie, whoa up a minute and do some comparing.

The traditional U.S. LEO wears some sort of relatively casual uniform and carries a handgun. Plus, maybe a nightstick. Think "Bumper Morgan", if you will.

The change in even street cops in some areas (Austin, Texas, e.g.) to a BDU-type of dress, with combat boots, certainly appears more military to me. Carrying an AR15 or M16 is military looking. The mere possession of "Sniper Rifles" by a police department is within the traditional realm of the military. The anti-riot gear and other equipment looks very much like that used in so many other countries' more military-style police forces.

Note I'm not saying these aren't useful, aren't needed, at certain times, in certain situations. They certainly are. But if all this stuff ain't militarization, what is?

I think most folks are worried about an increase in an "us vs. them" attitude. I am; I've seen a bit more of it in recent years than in past decades. I see it a bit more in the younger officers than in the old hands. Most folks are worried about the relative lack of accountability in the upper administrative echelons when there is a misuse or a tragedy in the use of SWAT units.

And I note there is a lot more to the word "militarization" than just the gear or just the SWAT teams...

Art

[Boats]

Brownie--

Do some time boarding ships from motorboats in a war zone and get back to me on the pucker factor. Breaking a door is easy compared to the feeling of having to scramble up rightdamnnow! 35-60 feet of unknown ladder on a Third World freighter with no cover available.

I have not ever, to my recollection, employed the term JBT. I have the utmost respect for true SWAT professionals but little for those that took a long weekend at the shooting course and decided to gear up to go to war on pot growers in the trailers outside of Mayberry.

The real chicken and egg question posed by the proliferation of questionably qualified SWAT units across the nation is this one: Did the criminals really become more dangerous or did they simply gain the impression from the media that they needed to be ready for the ninja-clad assault tactics of their opponents as glamorized in magazines, local newscasts, TV and movies? Offense drives defense drives offense in a vicious cycle.

My own opinion is that a certain segment of law enforcement has basically gone and overdosed on the "war talk" of the War on Drugs and played a hand in terrifying the populace into supporting their partial transformation into quasi-militaristic units.

And please spare me any more of the "sainthood" speech about volunteering to make a difference. That is only one side of the coin. The darker one is to be the "best" and to "test" one's self in "battle" by forming or joining a SWAT unit. Of course the "battle" is sometimes claiming the lives and property of innocent civilians without so much as a decently executed cover-up attempt, let alone a decent apology or promise to reform.

I digress, as they are obviously above reproach in a republic such as ours.

[cpileri]

1. all cops want the most effective equipment available
2. all effective equipment costs money
3. all departments are badly underfunded without help
4. help comes from the federal government
5. cops get their equipment
6. cops are happy
7. happy people don't complain
8. happy people have gratitude towards their benefactor
9. the benefactor is the federal government, not the people in the community they directly serve

in other words, they become beholden to their new unholy master, the federal moneylenders.

So even if the whole community cries: "we want out old peace officers back" they dont care. Without the means to hit 'em in the budget pocketbook its all impotent whining.

"We demand our old friendly cops return or we'll... uh... hmm, gee whizz stopping our monetary support won't work anymore... ummmmm. or we'll... we'll yell some more! Yeah, that'll fix em."

We 'tolerate' it because it happens before we notice it happened. What to do then?
C-

[brownie0486]

Art Eatman:

I don't agree that line officers should be in BDU as well. I see no need for it and their issued gear. Thats are great issue you brought up. One I don;t see here in my area but am aware it is happening more and more across the coutnry. I don't like it, it sends the wrong message and stand n the same side as you on this issue. I look at it as escalation of the us vs them mentality.

Though I don't believe the gear they wear is militarism, it certainly can be said the BDU came from that venue. A lot of gear has been designed around the swat needs and the mil types have picked up the pace in the same venue. I'd have to think some gear is mil in origin and some in the private sector developed to fill a perceived need.

Yes, I believe the younger officers are, for the most part, in it for two reasons. The first thing drawing them is the pay [ at least here in my area ], then they badge [ and all the expected privledges that go with it ].

Sad to say but that is a very real problem in my area and has gotten worse in the last 10 years as the ranks have swelled and the older officers have retired.

The admins are indeed the immediate target, but they can be controlled through votes. Don't think these incidents in recents years of screwups by swat ops isn't putting some heat on them. It's just not an issue that stays surfaced long enough to affect a change.

You see, having been one and now out, I know of what you folks speak, having lived it. Though I defend there existance and responsibilities to perform in helping others and believe in their principles and tactics there are legitimate issues spoken here about this.

I believe the system is out of control from where I personaly would like to see it be. I also realize that swat does more good than harm, though harm will always ocurr in the two minutes it takes to perform their normal dynamic entry.

There will be mistakes, high risk warrants need to be effected sooner rather than later as the information gets stale quickly, these guys are always on the move.

What they wear while performing the swat assignments is not an issue, they need what they have and more at times. The regualar line officers have no need [ in my opnion ] to be dressing that way.

Hey Art,
I think I just agreed with you 100% on this one.

Brownie

[toro]

We live about 25 miles from a big city. These police officers are as a rule very rude. I guess dealing with the BGs gets to them. They have killed many black people who have not been armed. They have had the justice department on their backs. They have so many law suits against them the city has to borrow money to pay the millions of dollars to the families of these black folks who lost their sons. Some of these people have been good hard working people. Mistakes happen, but when you have to pay millions above what you are insured for something must be wrong.

The police in our community are great. It's yes sir. Thank you sir or madam. The Chief and the city council say they want their police to be polite. It has been since 1928 that any officer has been killed by a BG in our community.

I think the SWAT people look just like the German storm troopers. Have you noticed their head gear? Those helments are exactly like the old German helments. That's what I think of when I see the SWAT teams on TV.

Mrs. Toro


-------------------------------------------------------------
Jude 1: 9-11
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Korah.

[erem]

I was amazed to see swat teams for those tiny towns in the original post. I grew up in small rural communities, before moving to LA, PRK a while back. It bothers me when I go home and see that there are more cops in my hometown (pop. ~13,000) than in irvine, CA (pop. ~140,000).

Just for fun, I looked up the crime rates for those small towns.

Eufaula (http://eufaula.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm)
Hyattsville (http://hyattsville.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm) Fond-du-Lac (http://fonddulac.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm)

And here's LA, just for the hell of it.
Los Angeles (http://losangeles.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm)

-erem

[Orthonym]

and should look the part(s). I believe that both qualities are necessary for a peace officer, with neither one by itself being sufficient. Two examples: When I was a kid in Coral Gables, FL, the policemen dressed as gentlemen, yet were still unmistakably cops,i.e., dark blue traditional policeman's cap, short-sleeved white shirt, dark blue trousers. I think they had dark blue jackets for cold weather or necessary sneakiness. The G-man is famous for saying something like "When I was an FBI agent we went everywhere and did anything in our three-piece suits and wingtips!" My idea of a (close to ) perfect peace officer is Lamar Potts, sheriff, long ago , of Coweta County, GA. When he died, I believe the mourners included people he'd sent to prison, who wept like babies along with everyone else. I think he was one of those guys with such tremendous moral authority they're capable of invoking a guilty conscience in people who claim to have NO conscience! You don't need to believe me , read the book: "Murder in Coweta County". I'm sorry, I don't remember the author's name right now, but it should be in most public libraries. I just wish our local policemens' uniforms didn't make them look quite so much like security guards for a coal mine.

[Erik]

I like to see "traditionally" dressed LEOs.

I like to see shotguns up front.

I like to know there is an AR in the trunk.

Re SWAT:

I like to see them as intimidating looking as possible. It saves lives.

I like them as well armed as possible. They want it? Fine with me, so long as they can articulate a reasonable need.

However... I like to see well trained street cops. Their training and equipment budget should not suffer to ramp up a SWAT program.

Re LEO chacks and balances:

The respective executive and the judiciary branches involved must adopt strict guidlines and, importantly, foster a culture wherin the deployment of SWAT is seen as a closely gaurded last resort.

[spartacus2002]

I like to see shotguns up front.

I like to know there is an AR in the trunk.


Well, many of us DON'T, because other than a situation that needs a SWAT team, regular police shouldn't need a shotgun or AR-15.

They are supposed to be of the people and for the people, to serve and protect, not to be highly armed badasses striking fear in the hearts of the citizens.

[Edward429451]

The respective executive and the judiciary branches involved must adopt strict guidlines and, importantly, foster a culture wherin the deployment of SWAT is seen as a closely gaurded last resort.

Thats just wishful thinking.:(

'closely guarded last resort' Bwahaha. I needed a good laugh this morning.

[Art Eatman]

Well, Edward, it's wishful thinking for sure, if all one does is sit on one's butt and accept TPTB's doings without any complaint.

Art

[mercedesrules]

Why do we tolerate paramilitarism in our policing forces?
1) Theoretically, I am against it and say so every chance I get.
2) Locally, I lay low out of fear of retaliation.

MR

[riverdog]

When bureaucrats pay a bunch of money to have a SWAT team, they expect to see results from the money they spend. It’s a very normal response from a bureaucrat. Unless the SWAT leadership is strong enough to limit their involvement to specific actions where they are needed, inflation will take over and they will eventually be brought into every action where someone might “possibly” pose a threat.

How many LEOs are shot during traffic stops? One way to stop LEOs being hurt or killed during traffic stops would be to send in SWAT, you never know… I digress.

When was the last time you had a pleasant conversation with a LEO about something other than law enforcement? Do any of the non-LEOs on the board know a LEO socially? How many LEOs routinely socialize with non-LEOs or their families? The last time I had a beer with a cop was in ’97 and the cop was retired. I don’t know any where I currently live. A LEO lives just up the street and I’ve never had even a short “hi” conversation with him. He had a party once and everybody who was invited arrived in identical white Crown Vics; hmmm, there’s a pattern emerging. Is there a sense of “Us vs. Them” here?

The last time I had a conversation with a LEO was when I was detained for resembling (actually, my truck did the resembling) someone who allegedly shot up a rest stop men’s room. Five cruisers (CHP and county) responded, I was detained and searched, my truck was also searched … there had been no shooting in the men’s room. No damage at all was evident. Still, while they had me detained at 10 PM in the middle of 35F nowhere, they kept me outside a nice warm truck and ran me through the computer just to make sure. This was a real pleasant (and eye opening) experience for a good guy. Now I’m really digressing.

There is a chasm between LE and citizens in this country. People don’t like to speak with LEOs because they associate cops with “not good”, nothing good ever came out of just talking to a cop. Likewise, other than cops, I imagine that most LEOs spend most of their day conversing with bad guys (writing tickets for speeders, arresting drunks); I’m sure those are fairly pleasant conversations, but it leads them to think of us non-LEOs as “Them”. So why are we shocked when they shoot a homeowner in his living room with a TV remote in his hand? “I thought it was a gun.” Well that makes it okay.

My personal feeling is that law enforcement needs the trust of the community to function well. “Us vs. Them” is a big negative and I believe it causes many of the headlines about bad shootings. Cops are good guys and then there’s “Them”. There is no trust between them and us. When a cop engages in a search of someone’s home it’s because they did something wrong; they’re a collar waiting to happen and a bad guy. Why else would a LEO be searching a house. Why else would a LEO be serving a warrant, why else… Then there’s SWAT: Take a LEO who normally doesn’t socialize with “civilians”, dress him like a ninja, arm him with an M-16, stun grenades and lots of paramilitary training and have him serve a search warrant.

SWAT has a function, but it is a stick that should rarely be used. Bureaucrats need to know that they are responsible for the improper application of force. But what do I know? I’m just a retired Naval officer who doesn’t like to socialize with cops because nothing good ever came out of it.

[Coltdriver]

Boats,

Well written and I could not agree with you more.

The police have absolutely no business being paramilitary terrorists. They scare me far more than any threat they allegedly protect me from.

[Edward429451]

Well, Edward, it's wishful thinking for sure, if all one does is sit on one's butt and accept TPTB's doings without any complaint.

Art, you got a real no nonsense way of cutting through to the chase and your statement did give me pause. Problem is, I do vote and have wrote a few letters, yet dont see where it made one whit of difference.

Writing E-mails & letters only ever gets me typical form type responses which address none of the issues, and thank me for my time. I do not have faith in the voting system anymore, yet continue to vote just in case. I probably could/should do more but what else can I do without having a bankroll, to make em sit up and listen?

I agree (with my perception of your implication) that my morning cynicism/sarcasm does not help. I wish I could do more.

[Art Eatman]

riverdog, I guess I'm lucky. I've known a fair number of LEOs through the years, on a casual-social basis.

I've known our resident deputy since he was a pup. I've known the two previous resident deputies as well. Our present constable retired early as an LEO from back near Dallas; I sorta "housebroke" him to an understanding of our local folks when he first came to our area. I've been at least casually friendly with two previous sheriffs, and have briefly visited with our present sheriff.

I'm no local rabble-rouser on any issue, but I'm known for speaking my mind and "callin' 'em as I sees 'em".

Edward, I've always thought that making a point of some sort of involvement in the lower levels of electoral politics (city and county level) did more than worrying about national stuff. But, as far as letters and suchlike, the thing there is to get your friends and acquaintances also joining in the "paper flood" of snail-mail to Congressfolks. It ain't easy, though...

:), Art

[riverdog]

Art,
I'd guess that smaller departments have less of the Them and Us mentality than larger organizations. There's probably a lot more community in Terlingua, Texas than in San Diego. We've just got more people.

I've known a number of folks who would either become cops or were retired from LE. I just never knew any while they were on the job.

[El Tejon]

[Disclaimer: El Tejon is a former LEO--the desk sitting kind, but LEO none the same]

SWAT is scary looking by design. The more scary the less they may have to shoot.

However, it's all about software. The more they train, the less they shoot. The problem is, and may always be, that the brass gives them the hardware, but no training. You can count the HK54s and report to the city council about them being in inventory, however just go ahead and justify training costs!:D But, they're cops, they're already trained.:rolleyes:

The SWAT guys who understand their role are wonderful. They understand that they are not "going to war."

What I object to the SWATification of the patrol officer who may not understand that he is not "going to war." For example, the outrageous conduct of the Virginny mall ninjas wearing masks and pointing carbines at motorists during the alleged mad dog snipers in East Coast Eloi land. That was an outrage over which I still shudder.

The purpose of the police is to gather evidence and report to the prosecutor. Nothing more, nothing less. They are not around to "protect" anyone. They are not to make war on anyone.

However, I believe this problem is tied to the Welfare State. People sit on the couch and demand the government "do something." Until we address this, we will have problems with police, intentionally or unintentionally, threatening our liberty.

[spartacus2002]

A month ago I heard a news report that Virginia state troopers will be issued AR-15s to carry in the trunk.

I don't like that. God bless the 90% of folks who would never think of using it, but it's the other ?% that are wannabe-soldiers with a war mentality that scare me.

[Edward429451]

However, I believe this problem is tied to the Welfare State. People sit on the couch and demand the government "do something." Until we address this, we will have problems with police, intentionally or unintentionally, threatening our liberty.

This rings true as a bell.:( But how you make people get off their butt to be responsible? I was reading that the average IQ in the US is 106. Again,:(

You can't make friends with a swat team though. Too bad. It'd be cool to invite em' over for a barbeque so they knew who you was and be friends!:cool:

I think I fell asleep at the board.

[Orthonym]

is to direct traffic, keep order in public places, and keep a watch when other folks are asleep. How _EVER_, due to the large number of us craven slackers in the populace these days, someone had to fill that vacuum so abhorred by nature, to wit, the absence of the old Hue and Cry and the immediate, ferocious response thereto. I just love the idea of a criminal running for his life TOWARD the police station, begging to be arrested so that he may be tried and hanged in good order, with due ceremony, instead of being torn to pieces by the outraged victim and his neighbors. Ain't gonna happen around here.(sigh) Please see my post on that locked thread about the SC Lieutenant-Governor getting stopped in traffic. I guess what I'm trying to say here is something like, "Well, we're not very good citizens, so I suppose we have to have cops. Since we have to have cops, they must be PERFECT".:D

[Combat-wombat]

the government can't use the military on us, so they arm the police like the military.
In our town of 25,000 there are AR-15s and shotguns, both up front in the CHP-style patrol cars with the lights inside the car and not on top.

[brownie0486]

spartacus2002 :

With all the talk here in this section about citizens crying foul at restrictions to arms because somebody MIGHT screw up and their rights being denied based on others possible actions,

I see you hold to the same theory by wanting to restrict cops from carrying AR's as a few might be wanting for judgement in their use.

Would you be saying that it isn't right for citizens to be denied something based on others possible actions which you don't think is right and then post that the police should be painted with the same brush you give so much disdain to?

Double standard? The irony is overwhelming me.

Brownie

[spartacus2002]

Would you be saying that it isn't right for citizens to be denied something based on others possible actions which you don't think is right and then post that the police should be painted with the same brush you give so much disdain to?

Double standard? The irony is overwhelming me.

Double standard? OF COURSE there is a double standard! Due to the nature of their role, the police are the only citizens authorized to use force for other than self-defense. We authorize them to use force in situations where non-police are not.

And giving them deadlier and deadlier tools raises the fear that they might use them inappropriately.

Am I saying that all police should never have ARs? No. What I am saying is that something is seriously wrong when every patrolman is so armed.

[brownie0486]

spartacus2002 :

So you would have no problem with the government deciding the same thing about every civilian carrying one as well?

"Restricting them" based on the premise that it's seriously wrong when every one of them has one?

Your statement that "And giving them deadlier and deadlier tools raises the fear that they might use them inappropriately."

Could that not be the same theory used to restrict them from civilians?

If you feel the LE types may "use them inappropriately" [ and there are 500,000 LE's in the country ] wouldn't that negate all the hubbub here from others about having them restricted to civilians for the same fears?

After all, there are, what?, 250,000,000+ people in the country and only 500,000 or so cops? Would the same theory of possible inappropriate use and subsequently restricting them for the 500,000 LE not be that much more aggravated by the 250,000,000 civilians who many here feel all should have the right to carry?

Brownie

[Steve in PA]

"Am I saying that all police should never have ARs? No. What I am saying is that something is seriously wrong when every patrolman is so armed."

Theres an old saying........better to have something and not need it.......than to need it and not have it. ;)

I'm sure every cop involved in the North Hollywood shootout wished they had an AR in their vehicle.

And yes....the department I work for here in PA has both a shotgun and a rifle in the vehicle.

[Kharn]

My po-dunk, back-water county sheriff's office bought an armored car about 5-6 months ago. Complete with pintel mount and shield to protect the gunner (ala Vietnam-era M113). No one has ever seen it move from its designated parking spot in front of the building. I want to know what type of weapon they have to go in that pintel mount, I doubt its very crowd-friendly...

Kharn

[MrAcheson]

I believe that brownie and steve have hit the nail on the head for me.

This forum has a very hypocritical viewpoint on firearms when it relates to LEOs. If its an AR for you and me is commendable and praised, but somehow when the normal LEO gets one its a problem? A non-hypocritical position would be, "LEOs and civilians should have access to these as desired." Granted thats not the usual outlook of an LEO, but thats doesn't give us leave to make the same mistake.

I think Boats initial article could use some rebalancing before you start sending it to mainstream press. The growth of an LEO capabilities is not a bad thing. So what if small towns have SWAT? Chances are if they didn't, then the response times from a neighboring town who did would be unacceptable.

Its the overuse of those capabilities in a way that damages individual freedoms that is the problem. Likewise the use of military dress, behavior, and tactics in domestic situations is simply driving larger wedge between LEOs and the populace. You might want to make sure you make that point tactfully when your talking to the general populace.

[MrAcheson]

Kharn, considering the riots UD had a few years ago (that spring/summer where every uni had a riot) it wouldn't be a bad place to mount a good water cannon or tear gas grenade launcher.

[toro]

Reference -- http://www.journal-news.com/


Fairfield police rehearse stopping a killer
Fairfield, Ohio
Fairfield police trained hard for something they hope never happens. Inside a school, a gunman has fired shots and is holding hostages. A team of four Fairfield Police Officers weapons drawn, rush to the second floor of the school, where the gunman is holed up with a hostage in a classroom. The officers on the outer left and right of the "quad" formation check each doorway before passing as the group cautiously but swiftly heads to the classroom, where they hear shoots and cries for help. One officer darts into the classroom, with "second close behind." A third and fourth flank the door for 360-degree coverage. The officers pepper the suspect -- who is standing over the victim, holding a gun to his head -- with nonlethal "simmunition" paint bullets. In another scenario, the shooting suspect holds his hands up in the air to surrender as officers shout at him to drop the weapon until he complies

Though the quad training concept of immediate rapid deployment has been around since the late 1970s, the 1999 Columbine school shooting sparked an increased interest in quad training said Lt. Scott Scrimizzi.

He first trained Fairfield officers in the tactic a couple of years ago, which thrust's regular patrol officers into the fray. The first officers to arrive on the scene where someone is shooting or stabbing hostages must act first, he said. "It's really so you can deal with an active shooter incident where SWAT isn't really able to respond."

Mrs. Toro


--------------------------------------------------------------
1 Kings 17: 22,23
And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the child came into him again and he revived. And Elijah took the child, and brought him down out of the chamber into the house, and delivered him unto his mother: And Elijah said, see, thy son liveth.

[Kharn]

MrAcheson:
The armored car is in my home county, opposite side of the state from UD. I dont think UD has/needs an armored car (they definitely dont keep one in the cop lot, I could see the lot from my dorm room last year), since they always call Newark's Finest whenever they need to arrest someone more serious than two or three drunk fratboys.

Kharn

[CZ-75]

So what if small towns have SWAT? Chances are if they didn't, then the response times from a neighboring town who did would be unacceptable.

That's a big "what if." How many small towns are going to experience the kind of dangerous situation that requires SWAT more than once every 10 years? Meanwhile, there will be pressure to use what is considered an "underperforming" asset just so the PD can justify it's existence and budget expenditures. Considering the small budgets and the less-than-choice candidates that tend toward the low paying rural jobs in LE, it would seem that few departments could support these teams to an adequate level of equipment and training. Unless, of course, they employ them as revenue agents and privateers to expropriate the property of alleged drug dealers. This scenario becomes circular, as the "need" for a tactical team becomes "evident" and ever greater with each arrest, which leads to expansion and greater requirements for funding.

I was reading Jeff White's post a way back on the fact that the ISP or FBI would take hours to get to his town, so it is prudent that the SD or his PD have a SWAT type team available. This made me think that that isn't really the case and the ISP (or any state police agency) should be structured such that they have major posts equipped with SWAT such that they are no more than 2 hours drive from any location in their zone, as well as being able to requisition helos for even faster response.

I can't see the need for every small town to have SWAT and think that the LE in the area should pressure their state agency to provide enough resources in the area to meet the needs of smaller population centers.

[brownie0486]

CZ-75:

You find being held hostage for two hours with death imminent acceptable?

You find two hours to wait for swat to arrive acceptable at an LA scene type bank robbery? Two hours with local officers under attack by two heavily armed masked bandits with auto's?

Oh, maybe you think rural podunk USA doesn't have drug wars, bank robberies that can go bad, no house breaks where a burglar is surprised and holds a hostage?

I would rather have them 20 minutes out from staging and developing a plan of rescue.

I would also contend that if the locals had a felony warrant suspect barricaded that there could be many things going wrong before the feds were "on scene" as well.

It's not a big what if, it is realistic as any small town can have and does have the same issues with drugs and all the crime that goes with it as an aside.

Requisition helos? How much money would be spent on helo's? I was under the impression quite a few here had issues with the money spent on swat gear and training/tactics.

I think we could probably train 20 swat units, gear them up, give them those really expensive mp5sd's you think cost too much for a whole lot less than one Bell chopper on standby 24/7 and all the support that that entails as well.

Local depts don't have to spend the money as a rule, they get grants from the our federal tax dollars. Same place the MSP got those really expensive mp5sd's you think are overpriced.

Now you suggest spending 1-2 million on a chopper so they can get there in time? How many teams can be equipped for that money?

You state "I can't see the need for every small town to have SWAT and think that the LE in the area should pressure their state agency to provide enough resources in the area to meet the needs of smaller population centers."

I thought you vehemently disagreed that the state police need mp5sd's in another thread and could get by with something more like 500.00 rather than 2500.00 Are you now suggesting the state take over swat locally?

You do not know what "an adequate level of equipment and training" is to begin with from your other postings about their equipment and needs so I see no reason why you would then state

You: "that the LE in the area should pressure their state agency to provide enough resources"

Would you be talking mp5sd's by "provide enough resources"? The MSP were given the adequate resources recently and you took much offense to that in another thread. Am I hearing you correctly? Did you actually figure out that they do need the equipment or did you think I would forget your rantings about them spending the money elsewhere here.

You seem to contradict yourself here where other posts are concerned, care to explain the turn around? You are not turning objective on me now are you?

BTW--A Bell helicopter--$1.5 million roughly[ turbo ]
3 crews of 2 on 8 hour shifts = 6 men, two as alernates for vacations and sick time needs, all their gear, all the needs of the chopper and a maintenace crew [ minimum of three ]. Full maintenance crew to support it.

Oh ya, if that chopper needs fixin, better have another as standby if thats the only rescue personnel equipped to handle a swat mission.

Lets see
8 crew members--full time
3 support mechanics--full time
Gear for all
2 Bell helicopters

How much will this cost me the tax payer per year to keep this plan of yours viable [ and at that a 2 hour acceptable response time [ your number]?

I think the money is better spent training and equipping them locally. They know the area, they know the players [ for the most part ].

Did you actually just post this off the cuff or did you give this any consideration at all before posting? I remember, it was a money thing with you on the mp5's and now you want to buy them helicopters.

Okay now

Brownie

[Boats]

We could ask Mr. Gallardo's survivors about the danger of small-time SWAT units--if he were still breathing.

Can anyone seriously deny a change in temperment between before the Dinuba, CA SWAT team was formed, and after?

Without a SWAT unit what would they have done with the same information?

1. Pick up the son at school.
2. Pick up the son at work.
3. Pick up the son on the corner.
4. Call the parents and ask that they bring junior downtown.
5. Send two officers by and pick him up for questioning.
6. Call for really professional high risk assistance from a bigger nearby agency.

What they do? Bypass all of the low pressure methods and employ the ninja-assault on a family which outnumbered the person of interest about 13-to-1 three or four months after forming the unit. (BTW, they didn't even bother to confirm that the subject was actually home!) With that much potential for something to go wrong, it is pretty clear that they didn't know what they were doing. It wasn't like a crack house wherein everyone is a suspect.

It is entirely safe to say that without the SWAT tactics, (notice I am not even mentioning the weapons), Mr. Gallardo likely would have survived his encounter with the Dinuba police department because they'd have employed more sane tactics, by necessity, if they hadn't the temptation to go in "hot" and literally surprise the life right out of him.

[CZ-75]

You find being held hostage for two hours with death imminent acceptable?

You're overstating your case.

Hostage negotiaion is the first step, not storming the building w/ SWAT. This process would eat up enough time for SWAT to deploy. Again, I mentioned helos, should they need to get there sooner. Helos wouldn't cost more than keeping a SWAT team in every town 365 days a year until they need them and the state police have them anyway, so they may as well use them. Additionally, helos are good for search and rescue duties, unlike SWAT teams.

Personally, I don't care if the state police SWAT team has MP-5s, I just don't want every officer on airport security duty issued one. And what I really don't want is the issue of SMGs being pawned off as a panacea for terrorism. SMGs would've done nothing to stop 9/11 (unless the 19 hijackers watched too many Bruce Lee movies and decided to take on airport security head-on :rolleyes: ), since stealth was the order of the day. Assuming other hijackers/terrorists will employ similar methods, SMGs will be similarly useless. Stop insulting our intelligence. I hope HK isn't giving you a kick-back to suggest why SMGs are the solution for every security situation.

[brownie0486]

SMG's [ specifically the mp5's ] aren't the solution, they are the preferred equipment of the swat officer.

Hostage negotiating? I don't think you will find negotiators at every seen, just hostage rescue where the perp is in contact with them outside via landline, mobile or mega phone.

Were the lapd waiting for swat or a negotiator when the two were banging them hard before swat got there? Negotiators is not an answer to the question asked, please try again to defend the expected two hour delay in response.

Our SP have two choppers at their disposal that are used regularly in other missions at the present time. Are we to take them away from their looking for escaped felons? From arieal searches for lost individuals? I think you would have to have 2 on standby or at least purchase two more for your scenario, otherwise somebody is going to wait a long time [ 2 hours ] when a minute is an eternity. That is a quick answer that won't work as well. Please try again.

Every officer on duty at the airport does not have an mp5. Where did you glean that from? And yes, mp5s have a long history relative stopping terrorists. Remember the 72 Olympics? and then hundreds of cases since where they are used to defend us against the same threats posed by them.

SMG's don't stop terrorists ?, who's insulting whose intelligence here?

Brownie

[CZ-75]

Remember the 72 Olympics?

The one where all the hostages died? :rolleyes:

Just proves SMGs are useless against high explosives and terrorists with a death wish

SMG's don't stop terrorists ?, who's insulting whose intelligence here?

See above for the answer.

Hostage negotiating? I don't think you will find negotiators at every seen, just hostage rescue where the perp is in contact with them outside via landline, mobile or mega phone.

Seems like you've pointed out a deficiency with LE then. More towns and/or counties should focus on getting senior personnel trained as negotiators, rather than playing Rambo. The locals could even work as a fill-in until a dedicated negotiator can arrive on-scene. Nothing would prevent the locals from getting a negotiator on the phone from a larger metro area, either.

Our SP have two choppers at their disposal that are used regularly in other missions at the present time. Are we to take them away from their looking for escaped felons? From arieal searches for lost individuals? I think you would have to have 2 on standby or at least purchase two more for your scenario, otherwise somebody is going to wait a long time [ 2 hours ] when a minute is an eternity. That is a quick answer that won't work as well. Please try again.

Get real. How often do any of these things occur simultaneously? How useful is a helo in finding a fugitive out of the blue? Seems bloodhounds are more effective and a helo is only good when used as an aerial spotter to find a fugitive being driven from cover by search teams. National Guard choppers are often used for search and rescue, so allocating police resources wouldn't be too big a problem for an hour or two of flight time into a hostage situation, should a search and rescue scenario arise concurrent with the hostage scenario.

HK must love you, since you think SWAT is such a cure-all.

[El Tejon]

Nothing wrong with HK54s and ARs. They are just tools, whether in my hands or Officer Friendly of the West Lafayette Police Department. See nothing wrong with my police being prepared.

The weapons are inert mechanical devices. They exert no eeevil influence over the officer. Training is always the key.

I believe what people are upset about lies in the legislative branch where the silly laws originate. The police are merely the physical manifestation of the silly decisions made in our General Assemblies and Congress.:(

[brownie0486]

LA has quite a few negotiators, they were not used in LA as that scenario was not going to stopped by talking to them.

Dynamic being what they are, hostage negotiators have their place but they are not always used or needed as the LA situation confirms. It wasn't their deficiency in no negotiators there was it?

No, not all the hostages died in that altercation. Look it up.

National guard called in? Sure, they can be called in. Are you advocating using federal resources for state functions and problems?

Blood hounds and choppers sir. Not one or the other as you suggest.

It's not how often these things ocurr simultaneously, it's can they happen concurrently. The answer is yes, and to hope they don't in your scenario is to not believe in the 6P principle.

How do you extrapolate HK with swat? Thats only one of the many courses available through them to LE and certainly not the only company providing it.

El Tejon: Now we're talking, 54's indeed. I like that.

Brownie

[CZ-75]

No, not all the hostages died in that altercation. Look it up.

No, only the ones not released by the terrorists.

National guard called in? Sure, they can be called in. Are you advocating using federal resources for state functions and problems?

No, only that it is done and can be done again. I didn't know search and rescue was considered a "state" function, but even so, the governor has a legal right to access his state's National Guard resources.

How do you extrapolate HK with swat? Thats only one of the many courses available through them to LE and certainly not the only company providing it.


They are one of the biggest vendors of "toys" to SWAT teams. Hence, any advocacy of increased roles for SWAT translate to increased HK sales.

[brownie0486]

Search and rescue on and over state land/ state taxed lands is a state function with no jurisdiction by the feds. unless interstate flight has ocurred by the BG.

Sure it can be done and has been. Should we leave ourselves vulnerable to the availability of their equipment is the question?

I've seen NG called out, 3-5 hours to stage and another couple to get on scene. When you life is in the balance and every minute you have the gun to your head seems like a weeks time, do we want to wait to react is the question.

I don't feel waiting, unless it will not be a possible detriment to the outcome, is acceptable. If you were the hostage you may feel the same way.

What is clear is that these are all potential options but they have flaws in their design and can't be relied upon to solve the situation with expediency which is most often a critical factor in the outcomes of these events. Expediant response has and will continue to save lives. The two hours you suggest is unacceptable at the very least and almost criminally negligent if in that two hours of waiting one more person dies as the cops had to wait two hours for a response team to stage and enter.

Brownie

[riverdog]

You guys are talking like there was no hostage rescue before SWAT was invented.

I would prefer to see fewer SWAT teams and more training for regular cops. Particularly in small towns where the LEOs probably fill both roles anyway, simply having better equipment in the trunk of their cruisers as normal issue makes more sense than having to redeploy as a SWAT unit.

As far as North Hollywood goes, any deer rifle would have done just fine. A head shot at 100 yds can be done with any rifle I own, including my Rem 700 ADL in 30-06 with iron sights. Even my 30-30 Marlin would do it.

IMHO, my $.02 and all that.

[brownie0486]

riverdog:

A valid point and one being instituted throughout the country fro over a decade.

Lee County Sheriffs Swat are regular patrolman with their gear in the trunk. They get a call, they are staged and gear up for the two minute war.

Others around the country are performing these same tactics with their regular line officers. I think it may even be the exception that there are full time swats around without actually being working street cops as well.

Good thought process there.

A good dear rifle would have been just the ticket as you mention, since the cops would look pretty weird extracting a hunting rifle [ can you imagine the people here who have a major general disdain for LE thinking "hunting" and cops in the same breath ?] from the trunk.

Brownie

[CZ-75]

Search and rescue on and over state land/ state taxed lands is a state function with no jurisdiction by the feds. unless interstate flight has ocurred by the BG.

There is no BG in search-and-rescue operations.

I'll defer to riverdog on the necessity of every one-horse town needing its own SWAT team.

[dav]

I'm appalled by the divisiveness this board shows on basic issues. This is why the anti's are winning. Even on the most basic 2nd amendment principles we do not agree.

The problem with SWAT is that it is a symptom of our society refusing to accept personal responsibility for our own and our communities mutual safety. We conferred that power to the police. Once it existed independent of any individual, it was no longer accountable and grew to excess.

This is the normal existence cycle of any political organization.

If the police feel the need for a shotgun in the front seat, there is absolutely no reason they should not have one... AS LONG AS I CAN HAVE ONE, TOO! Same for SMG. Same for any other weapon, armament or training.

I want the citizens in charge, and the government serving us. But you can't have that in a nanny state, and that is what the majority of current Americans seem to want.

As long as the mentality exists that "they should do something about that", or "the government owes me a living" then our country is in a death-spiral.

I hope this is vitriolic and extremist enough for all of you. :neener:

[cordex]

Brownie,
In '72, two Israeli athletes (Moshe Weinberg a coach, and Joseph Romano a weightlifter) were killed outright in the initial assault when they tried to stop the attackers. The nine Israeli's who didn't escape (with time bought by Weinberg and Romano) were held hostage. After a deal was reached with the Arab terrorists, the German authorities decided to have their snipers knock out all 8 goblins simultaneously while allowing them to think they would escape. Things didn't go as planned. When the shooters opened up, a terrorist set off a hand-grenade destroying a chopper, and the remaining hostages were gunned down.

The three surviving terrorists were imprisoned and later released in capitulation to another terrorist attack.

So, when CZ said:
The one where all the hostages died?
... he was correct.

Perhaps you would be advised to look it up. I did.

As I've said before, I've got no problem with cops carrying effective weapons, but just because an attacker might drive into a tank with an armored vehicle (or steal a tank, ala the San Diego incident) doesn't mean our police need AT-4 launchers to be in the trunk of every cruiser by the spike-strips.
Mere potential does not a likely scenario make.

And, hey ... I've got no problem with police buying their own keen weapons and even getting a nice fat budget to train with, but I dislike the idea of Smalltown Village spending umpteen thousand taxpayer dollars to outfit a SWAT team in case Aunt Hilda goes on a rampage.

Plus, I dislike paying out the nose to arm those who actively support disarming me.

[bjengs]

dav and cordex are right on.

I personally am not against LEO's being properly armed. AFTER the general populace is properly armed. I just get sick of hearing what the LEO's "need" and how they must have a "show of force" and all sorts of other stuff. Worrying about what improvements in armaments they ought to have is a stark example of putting the cart (the standing army and the privileges we grant them) before the horse (the RIGHTS of the people).

[sw442642]

Lots of talk when the key issue is the War on Drugs that caused the misuse of SWAT teams.

The laughable follies of some small town chiefs is not the real variance.

It would seem that many areas could use folks with special training to deal with terrorists, active shooters and the like.

Get rid of the drug war (a flame bait and one can seach on it) and the problems with no-knock warrants, mistaken identity, etc. go away.

Give the fiasco of Columbine, having some folks trained and equipped for that incident should be what SWAT is for. Same with the TX tower.

[Edward429451]

Get rid of the drug war

Yeah. Anybody catch COPS recently where the COPS were selling marijuana to people and then busting them and informed them that they were keeping their cars under the forfiture laws. (cept one lady who they told she could buy hers back b/c it wasn't nice enough for them):barf:

[Steve in PA]

Any non-police person want to try and guess how hard it is for a police department to try and convince the powers that be that they are in need of AR's....or MP5's, etc????????

I'm a LEO and pro-gun.......so I don't have a problem with "civilians" :neener: owning an AR, or anyting else. But when the street cop has to answer a call and all he is armed with is his duty sidearm.....I've got a problem with that.

Don't like the show of force??? Guess what.....that show of force is what stops a problem or quickly solves it before something tragic happens.

"I dislike the idea of Smalltown Village spending umpteen thousand taxpayer dollars to outfit a SWAT team in case Aunt Hilda goes on a rampage."

Yeah.......let some other agency handle the call.......why have trained officer to take care of the situation......should one arise.

[CZ-75]

Yeah. Anybody catch COPS recently where the COPS were selling marijuana to people and then busting them and informed them that they were keeping their cars under the forfiture laws. (cept one lady who they told she could buy hers back b/c it wasn't nice enough for them)

Best way to keep your car from the po-po is to owe money to the bank. Another COPS episode they were asking the so-called "perps" if they had any liens on their vehicles.

Protect and Serve, my @$$.

Profit and Skim seem more to the point.

:barf: :barf: :barf:

[Steve in PA]

Some people don't mind....or really care about getting busted for buying drugs, etc......but......find out that they could loose their vehicle and most will freak.......and stop.

I'm pretty sure the seizures only happen in the bigger towns with the heavy drug problems. I haven't heard of or read of any such seizures in this area.......unless the person busted was a major dealer.

[CZ-75]

Give the fiasco of Columbine, having some folks trained and equipped for that incident should be what SWAT is for.

But SWAT was there. That's why all those kids were rescued.

Oh, wait. Nevermind. The kids were murdered while the SWAT team was wringing its hands waiting outside the building. At least they didn't have to wait 2 hours to be murdered while SWAT was arriving.

[CZ-75]

find out that they could loose their vehicle and most will freak

Yeah, and your kid could be smoking a joint in the borrowed family car with his friends and the police can sieze it for the "public good."

A friend from your dorm can have a joint on him and drop it in your car during a traffic stop (happened to me, but he didn't drop his joint). Cop asks the somewhat antsy friend to get out and finds joint. You lose car.

Don't forget that finding wild hemp could be used to "prove" you cultivate marijuana on your property. You lose property and must prove that the hemp is wild.

Now, they've expanded the forfeitable crimes list to include solicitation.

:barf: :barf: :barf:

[Edward429451]

I'm pretty sure the seizures only happen in the bigger towns with the heavy drug problems. I haven't heard of or read of any such seizures in this area.......unless the person busted was a major dealer.

IIRC, it was Miami. They were teeny little bags of it, less than 1/8 oz by the looks of it. Thats what I thought was weird. No major dealers there. Just cousin Tony lookin people. I'm no druggie and I aint stickin up for them but dangit, it didnt look right. It was entrapment for peanuts just to get the vehicles and they pretty much said so! I have a hard time not seein it as highway robbery and organized crime by the police, state, whatever.:fire:

AmI missing something here? Cause I don't think so.

[Steve in PA]

Then you best be talking to your little Johnny or Susie shouldn't you........then find new friends to hang out with.

[CZ-75]

Then you best be talking to your little Johnny or Susie shouldn't you........then find new friends to hang out with.

:rolleyes:

Taking some family's car is such an effective solution. Same with taking people's property b/c of who their friends are.

Capital punishment is effective for preventing shoplifting too. :rolleyes:

Profit and Skim. Profit and Skim.

Anyone still wonder about the low opinion many folks have of the po-po?

[riverdog]

We had an incident in Santee, CA where one kid started shooting other kids. First LEO on scene was a PO from San Diego who was just a father dropping his own kid off at school. He asked what the commotion was about and with the school principal followed his nose, containing the situation. San Diego sheriff deputies arrived soon after and that's the team that apprehended the shooter. Nobody waited for SWAT or a supervisor or anybody else. Good cops are good cops. I would rather have more better-than-average LEOs on the street than just average LEOs and a SWAT team in the bullpen. More training for the street cop would go further than having a “team”, by whatever name. This brings me to my gripe.

I don't like "SWAT" as a description of these teams. Is weapons and tactics what they're about or do they have a real purpose? There's too much emphasis on what they carry and not enough emphasis on a real mission. Focus; keep your eye on the ball. The mission is to serve and protect, to rescue hostages, not to use special weapons. FBI's HRT is a good example – Hostage Rescue Team. They may use different weapons than normal everyday agents, and they may dress like ninja’s, but they have a mission. I won’t comment on how well they execute that mission, but it seems that every time they’re used it’s after another team blew it -- whatever. It’s just a gripe I’ve had. This seemed like a good thread to air it.

[toro]

I don't believe in drug seizures. What about the rest of the family. Someone's wife and children, who may need that vehicle to survive? I don't get it. I really don't believe in taking away something that belongs to someone else. As far as drugs go they never stop. Same as drinking if they are addicted they just don't stop, even if they loose their family over it.

Everytime I see a vehicle that says seized with drug money, it makes me angry. Our local sherrif seized a Corvette from a drug dealer and later got in trouble when his son was driving the Corvette for personal use. At any rate it is not just the criminal who suffers it's his whole family.

Mrs. Toro


_____________________________
1 Samuel 31: 5,6
And when the armorbearer saw that Saul was dead, he fell likewise upon his sword, and died with him. So Saul died, and his three sons, and his armorbearer, and all his men, that same day together.

[Steve in PA]

Wanna know my opinion of the people who can't control their kids?? :fire:

You want to hang out with a bunch of dopers......go right ahead. You hang around garbage long enough.....you'll start smelling like garbage. :rolleyes:

So the heat gets turned up to stop drug activity......don't like the heat......get the heck out of the kitchen!!! :evil:

[riverdog]

Then again, maybe it's because the only time you hear about SWAT is when something goes wrong and the wrong house is raided or the wrong guy gets shot. We never hear about good things because they're probably not going to sell papers.

[Steve in PA]

And yes.....the whole family suffers.......a drug user/dealers car gets seized......its the only vehicle......and now the family has no means of getting around. Maybe the driver of the vehicle should have thought of that before he/she decided to drive down to the local drug hotspot for a quick fix.

Same for a DUI driver who looses his license because of his DUI conviction. Yeah it stinks for the family........again.....guess the driver should have thought about his family. But......that doesn't seem to matter.

[CZ-75]

So the heat gets turned up to stop drug activity......don't like the heat......get the heck out of the kitchen!!!

Hasn't worked yet.

You want to hang out with a bunch of dopers......go right ahead. You hang around garbage long enough.....you'll start smelling like garbage.

Guilt by association. :rolleyes:

What's next? Trial by ordeal?


Oh I should add that last I saw the guy I mentioned, he was applying to law school and divinity school. So, I don't hang with "dopers." Moreover, when was pot considered "dope," or worse than alcohol? I'd be better served staying away from drinkers than tokers any day of the week.




Profit and Skim. Profit and Skim.

Good thing po-po wear badges, lest we be unable to tell them apart from the criminals.

[Marko Kloos]

Enough. :fire: