A thought on SWAT

Most SWAt teams are used only under strict protocols. Dangerous suspects, a robbery that goes bad hostages are taken type of thing. If you are ever held hostage I assume you would want a highly trained SWAT officer if entry has to be made instead of a regular patrol officer.

Like other members who have chimed in before, I too am in a SWAT team.......We don't do drug raids or other calls that can be handled by Patrol, we get called out on "heavy" traffic like barricaded subjects( who in my 13 years LEO experience have always been criminals, not your occassional non traffic ticket paying types), hostage situations, and robbery suspects. I forgot, we also have a lot of pseudocop gangs in our area that are as well armed or even better armed than we are so yeah, I do appreciate that my department has a SWAT team and it's used when SHTF to the 3 degree.

SWAT

are you missing the real issue here or what. sounds like your guilty of something. hobble hobble hobble, if your a pro law citizen,get over it, love your guns or bury em.isnt that what this is all about. go to politics . com if you feel the the need to b---h. the law IS WHAT IT IS. mabey we can try it with no law enforcement or SWAT.

step into reality people, get your minds out of the box for a second, please. dont you know,law enforcement and SWAT are on your side.The world sucks allready, with drug dealers,criminals and killers. but hey feel free protect your loved ones on your own.

dont you know,law enforcement and SWAT are on your side.

Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure that Donald Scott, Ismael Mena and a host of others who have been "helped" would agree without reservation.

Gee, Sindawe ... 1992, 1998, and a handful (not a "host") of other old cases involving bad information, bad entry tactics and local misuse of tactical teams hardly means SWAT is a bad thing.

It would seem that most of the high-profile SWAT bungling did not necessarily result from abuse of authority situations. Bad training, bad intel, bad decisions by on-scene personnel ... that's what I see. Local screw-ups, not a systemic fault throughout all law enforcement agencies.

Can't have it both ways, folks. You want to defend your right to own firearms even when the anti-gun folks talk about all the poor innocents who die in accidental shootings by lawful gun-owners or when shot by folks not eligible by law to own guns, or children who die as a result of gun accidents or "gun violence" ... don't make the argument that when cops shoot the wrong folks it's automatically an abuse of power, that it must mean SWAT is a bad bad thing, or it's a symptom of all our civil and Constitutional rights being taken away by the government ...

Y'all get your skivvies in a twist when the antis make stupid arguments, then you take isolated cases and make the same sort of stupid arguments.

Please indicate WHERE I stated that SWAT is as a whole a bad thing Old Dog. I stated that when they are incompetent (as in the Mena slaying at the wrong house) or corrupt (as in the Scott slaying motivated by Scott's refusal to sell his land, hence the fabricated marijuana farm => asset forfeiture) its a bad thing.

Of course, you may want to take a look at the crud that goes on in just YOUR state. http://www.badcopnews.com/bad_cop_news/colorado/ (link to Colorado page, since the main page is NSFW)

I do however hold that there is a problem with this nations police forces, one which former cops HERE have commented on, the increasing militarization of the agencies and the growing disrespect for the law and due processes exhibited by those agencies. For example:

Last year, Las Vegas police admitted that they’d planted illegal narcotics in a suspect’s car as a “training exercise” for a police dog. Officers claim they forgot to retrieve the drugs, charged the suspect with possession of the planted narcotics, fabricated police reports and then testified in court without mentioning that the drugs had been planted. Later, a citizen review board recommended that one officer be fired and another suspended without pay for four months for their misconduct. Orange County cops routinely say they don’t want civilian review boards because they adequately police themselves.

Source: http://www.ocweekly.com/news/news/training-day/26166/

Click to expand...

Sindawe, my apologies if it seemed as though I was putting words in your mouth ... however, with your post, and others' -- it seemed the implication was there ...

I understand the concern about militarization of local law enforcement agencies. Seems our society has found itself in a bit of bind, though ... what with extremely well-armed criminals and a very real terrorist threat ... how best to counter? Is a para-military police department or sheriff's office better or worse than having federal military troops or federal law enforcement agencies in one's town instead?

Yes, quasi-military operations conducted by local LE agencies against low-level drug dealers and users who've not been proven a violent threat are, in most cases, likely not at all necessary. Or using SWAT against the township's small-time bookie ... Or against a 20-year-old video-game thief ...

These days, however, if Joe Sixpack is gonna say he's packing his own handgun just to be prepared ... Let's not be hypocrites ... how critical should we be of our local PDs for wanting to be prepared themselves -- against very real threats that do in fact require local and specialized counter-units ...

My issue is with the increasing paramilitarization of police departments as a whole...

Now it seems like every Fife and Farva is wandering around dressed in tactical black, with enough impedimentia to stock a coupla gun show tables... And what's worse, it seems like "let's be safe out there" has morphed into "let's get them before they get us." They've got all the toys that the taxpayers will spring for, and by golly, they wanna try them out... City I live in recently got tasers... And suddenly traffic stops that would have gone like "Sir, would you please step out of the car - you have to use the door handle, sir..." started going like "Sir, would you please step out of.... ZAP! SOB wasn't moving fast enough!"

They're buying toys, and it seems like there's plenty of money for that, but try to suggest that they train a little? OMG... There's a surplus M-16 in a lot of trunks, but how much range time has the guy in the driver's seat had? What's gonna happen when, fueled by a serious adrenaline dump, he flips that magic switch?

Can't wait for this little burg to buy a bread truck... I'm sure that's probably on the wish list.

Personally, I think we oughta go back to the S&W Model 10 .38 Special, and teach cops to aim. And put 'em all in nicely fuel-efficient four-cylinder cars, and teach them how to use their radios and be observant. How to be proactive instead of reactive.

The average small town doesn't need a SWAT team. Look at the odds. Yeah, there _is_ a possiblity that someone is going to do something, but it's really, really low... That money would be better spent on raising the general level of training for the entire force.

The money's spent tho, so it's gotta be justified... So, instead of doing a "mailbox summons," suddenly it's normal for the boys in black to kick the door in at 3:00 ayem...

There's a LOT of attitude out there...

While we're at it - I remember when cops wore happy uniforms... Kkakis, etc... Now they're all in darkly disturbing garb, doubtlessly selected for it's psycological impact - Yeah, we respect your authoritay already, but you know something? We're now scared of you.

Cops, do you want civilians as your allies, or are we just "those people who you haven't arrested yet?"

Then again, if the ultimate goal is to have departments with an "us vs. them" mentality, it'll make it so much easier when the time comes for them to go door to door, following up on those 4473s...

I've been following this type of thread since I joined. We seem pretty good of bringing up isolatted examples which we all agree should not have happened. Just curious does anyone know the average number of raids that occur a day? Has anyone done the math of just how out of hand this has become? Or are we using the fuzzy math assumptions the anti's use and jumping to the conclusions. Seems to be alot of experts here on what shouldn't be done. There seems to a concensios to just do away with S.W.A.T. and put local LE in "friendly uniforms". Sound familur? This is the same emotional aurgument made by the anti's trying to take your weapons for our own good.

Actually JMusic, there are two main arguments. #1 is SWAT teams are necessary, they can have whatever gear they want...just make sure they are used for real bad guys with good intel. No mission creep where they are used for stuff patrol guys could do safely. This arument is very analagus to pro-gun and not hypocritical. Have what you want, use it responsibly.

The second argument is "the police are over-militarized, SWAT isn't needed and they scare us". This could be hypocritical when simplistically compared to gun rights because it just blames the tool (SWAT Team) not the use.

The problem is when dealing with guns (scary looking) you are talking about inanimate objects owned by individuals. SWAT teams are groups of people that cost a lot of money...not nearly as simple as a comparison to an "evil" firearm. There is pressure to use them for financial reasons and they do have a chilling effect (by design) on whomever they encounter. The more they get used, the more the populace will fear the police. Well, were back at responsible use again. There are thousands and thousands of SWAT teams in the US, some (I'd bet most) do it right. Some invariably are misused.

To say S.W.A.T. teams are very expensive depends on how it is structured. The vast majority excluding large counties/cities are uniform or investigative LE's who wear the swat hat when time comes. The investment there is in training and special equipment. Very few S.W.A.T. teams sit on their a$$ waiting on a call. Point I wanted to make is the very people who complain about losing their rights are the same group who are quick to condem LE. Their solution? Put restrictive laws in place to punish the small minority of people who abuse their powers. This is the same tactic that the anti gunners use for the benifit of us all.

Jim

Then at the same time, you've got Barney in his patrol car behind the billboard, and instead of just happily making sure that the teenagers don't kill each other while playing improvised NASCANHRA (hmmm... maybe just coined a term for all the hot-rodded Japanese cars...), he's jonesing to fire up that new .308 bullpup that they just stuffed in his trunk... Maybe if he walks into the malt shop with it, the kids will pay attention to him, rather than giggle about the toilet paper trailing from his shoe...

Is there a rule that says that Officer Friendly is dead, and that he's _got_ to be replaced by Officer Badass?

Yeah, there _is_ a valid need for guys to kick down doors. At the same time, it's getting to where that seems like the standard model, rather than the last resort.

We've got Hammer Syndrome at play here - you know what happens when you give a 3-year-old a hammer? Everything looks like a nail. Mayberry gets a SWAT team, and there's a twofold pressure: They have to justify the equippage and training budget, and hey, it's just cool to watch all those guys running around yelling... And they seem to enjoy it so much... The joys of mixing adrenaline and testosterone... and black cordura...

So they start using 'em to enforce warrants that could just as easily be done by walking into Floyd's, and telling him that he really needs to pay those tickets...

Looks like ya have er all figured out bogie, good luck.

Jim