Reminds me of the South African character in the movie Lethal Weapon II who kept holding up his ID and parroting "diplomatic immunity".
Popular Mechanics Story : Swat Overkill
- Thread starter RioShooter
- Start date
- Status
Reminds me of the South African character in the movie Lethal Weapon II who kept holding up his ID and parroting "diplomatic immunity".
I don't think they should be disbanded, either. But I do think that they've been created, almost exclusively, with the intent of busting down in drug-related arrests. Nowadays, that seems to be increasingly with a no-knock warrant, a flashbang, and the wrong address. Sometimes even with a warrant acquired after the fact.
With increased power comes increased responsibility. I would not so much as mind that they retained the power they have; they just need to be held to the same exact standards that we mere 'civilians' are held: if you kill someone's dog in the wrong house (or when someone is found innocient) on a no-knock, and you better damn well get brought up on every single possible charge that would cover such property destruction. Raid the wrong house? The officer in charge, as well as his superior, should be held criminally liable for any damage or injury. They better make damn sure their ducks are in line. No raid requires such hastened measures that innocient peoples' civil liberties are abused (and yes, I know 'innocient until proven guilty' - I'm not arguing that, but merely speaking of bystandards and people who are wrongfully accused).
Another problem of SWAT teams and like culture is that they do create a cultural divide between the police and the people they're supposed to be protecting. They create an elitism which is very dangerous, and leading to the disregard for human life that may be partially contributive to the reckless entries resulting in houses getting burned down, husbands murdered, grandmothers shot, and dogs slaughtered.
Ya know, not to redirect too much, but there was a country not too long ago where the militarized Police force (granted, a secret police force) was granted the ability to operate outside of judicial oversight. They'd developed an internal, elitist culture, and basically acted in impunity, making up charges and executing people on their entries if they didn't feel like dragging them off to face charges. They wore black uniforms and entered with no-knock warrants.
I'm talking about the SS Gestapo, for those who aren't paying attention. No, SWAT teams aren't the Gestapo (secret police), but there isn't so much of a dissimilarity anymore in many areas that I personally feel it's acceptable to dismiss offhand.
I'm talking about the SS Gestapo, for those who aren't paying attention. No, SWAT teams aren't the Gestapo (secret police), but there isn't so much of a dissimilarity anymore in many areas that I personally feel it's acceptable to dismiss offhand.
Appropriate uses for SWAT tactics:
- Hostage situations
- Rogue gunmen
- Organized crime busts (where catching them in the act is necessary)
Inappropriate uses for SWAT:
- "snatch and grab" type arrests
- no-knock warrants
- nighttime raids when the occupants are sleeping
- non-violent drug-related arrests
I've had the priviledge to see a SWAT raid. My friend's house was raided a 5 years or so back on drug dealing suspicions alone. I was over there at the time. Not only were there 4 guys living there, all with at least one 'love interest', but the place was a common after-class/work hang-out for several groups of friends due to the size of the basement and the many couches. There were also parties there once or twice a week. None of the tenants did any illegal drugs (well, a little under-age drinking).
The raid was carried out after intercepting someone leaving, and finding he had a pipe in his pocket. After spending the better part of the night and morning destroying property and making a mess which would take two days of cleaning by the people living there to clean up, they left with nothing but some smoke papers they'd taken from a guy who rolled his own cigarettes.
Ironically, they didn't find the (unknown to anyone in the house at the time) hidden closet area in one of the bedrooms which contained the remains of someone's pot growing operation (dead stalks and potting material). But by god, they tore the house appart anyway...
- Hostage situations
- Rogue gunmen
- Organized crime busts (where catching them in the act is necessary)
Inappropriate uses for SWAT:
- "snatch and grab" type arrests
- no-knock warrants
- nighttime raids when the occupants are sleeping
- non-violent drug-related arrests
I've had the priviledge to see a SWAT raid. My friend's house was raided a 5 years or so back on drug dealing suspicions alone. I was over there at the time. Not only were there 4 guys living there, all with at least one 'love interest', but the place was a common after-class/work hang-out for several groups of friends due to the size of the basement and the many couches. There were also parties there once or twice a week. None of the tenants did any illegal drugs (well, a little under-age drinking).
The raid was carried out after intercepting someone leaving, and finding he had a pipe in his pocket. After spending the better part of the night and morning destroying property and making a mess which would take two days of cleaning by the people living there to clean up, they left with nothing but some smoke papers they'd taken from a guy who rolled his own cigarettes.
Ironically, they didn't find the (unknown to anyone in the house at the time) hidden closet area in one of the bedrooms which contained the remains of someone's pot growing operation (dead stalks and potting material). But by god, they tore the house appart anyway...
As far as many people are concerned the only problem with the Gestapo is that they were working for the Nazis.
It seems to me that far too many people are not influenced by Shakespeare, and in fact will believe whatever they are told - even that a rose by any other name is no longer a rose.
Prohibition of alcohol was folly, but the war on drugs that's totally different. Abuse of citizens in the face of the Anarchist or Socialist threat was folly, but in the face of a Terrorist threat it's totally different. Breaking written words to disarm and degrade natives was wrong, but doing the same thing to citizens is totally different...
It seems to me that far too many people are not influenced by Shakespeare, and in fact will believe whatever they are told - even that a rose by any other name is no longer a rose.
Prohibition of alcohol was folly, but the war on drugs that's totally different. Abuse of citizens in the face of the Anarchist or Socialist threat was folly, but in the face of a Terrorist threat it's totally different. Breaking written words to disarm and degrade natives was wrong, but doing the same thing to citizens is totally different...
All you have to do is watch some of the TV shows they run now filming that crap. They blow up peoples doors and windows then dont find squat and bitch about "dry holes". Total lack of the legal oversight there.
No need for SWAT teams in small towns or counties. There use is now becoming too wide spread, and abusive. I do ee there need in large urban areas for special circumstances but its getting to the point that the most LEOs Dept are now becoming paramilitary. Before we know it we will be living in a complete police state.
very true about the police state, when there are a few hundred thousand swat members all trained, armed and some nut in the WH decides that he or she wants a federal police force to work for the Fed government, all they have to do is change patches from their police force to a government patch.
hypathitcly, but if the government decided that all the weapons in Boston had the be turned in, all they would have to do is call a hundred thousand members of their new police force up to work with the Boston cops and who would resist?.
What members of the swat team or cops would refuse to relieve their law abiding countrymen of their weapons? Some would even hope for a resistance so when word got out about what happened to the resisters, it would be easier in the next city.
It sounds crazy, but even here, if the government really wanted to take all the guns, it wouldn,t be that hard. and it will happen here eventually. not in my time, but i don't think my grandkids will be taking their kids hunting and my oldest grandkid is 18.
Even in most cities, i think that when a swat team got done searching and securing a quarter of the city, the rest of the city would be standing by the curb with everything but their butter knives.
very true about the police state, when there are a few hundred thousand swat members all trained, armed and some nut in the WH decides that he or she wants a federal police force to work for the Fed government, all they have to do is change patches from their police force to a government patch.
hypathitcly, but if the government decided that all the weapons in Boston had the be turned in, all they would have to do is call a hundred thousand members of their new police force up to work with the Boston cops and who would resist?.
What members of the swat team or cops would refuse to relieve their law abiding countrymen of their weapons? Some would even hope for a resistance so when word got out about what happened to the resisters, it would be easier in the next city.
It sounds crazy, but even here, if the government really wanted to take all the guns, it wouldn,t be that hard. and it will happen here eventually. not in my time, but i don't think my grandkids will be taking their kids hunting and my oldest grandkid is 18.
Even in most cities, i think that when a swat team got done searching and securing a quarter of the city, the rest of the city would be standing by the curb with everything but their butter knives.
I thought the article was pretty balanced, but I disagree somewhat that it's happening this way because of the equipment the police are issued.
See I'm actually all in favor of the cops having M16s and armor and APCs if these things let them handle bad situations better, especially if it would just go to waste otherwise. I believe I should have equal access to these things as well, but that's another issue. The point is inanimate objects have no power to act on their own and do not determine policies.
The problem is that warrants are handed out like candy, and no knock warrants are a travesty. Look I get as mad as the next guy when some scumbag walks on a technicality, but you can't have a fantasy system which swiftly punishes the guilty and never bothers the innocent. Better that 10 guilty men should go free than 1 innocent man be falsely imprisoned.
Unfortunately that is not the attitude we have today. That's the bigger issue here, not what specific equipment the police have.
And yes the lives of our brave LEOs are to be protected, but life is not so dear as liberty and I sincerely want to believe the core of LE professionals are devoted to that very concept. If it was an easy job everybody could do it.
See I'm actually all in favor of the cops having M16s and armor and APCs if these things let them handle bad situations better, especially if it would just go to waste otherwise. I believe I should have equal access to these things as well, but that's another issue. The point is inanimate objects have no power to act on their own and do not determine policies.
The problem is that warrants are handed out like candy, and no knock warrants are a travesty. Look I get as mad as the next guy when some scumbag walks on a technicality, but you can't have a fantasy system which swiftly punishes the guilty and never bothers the innocent. Better that 10 guilty men should go free than 1 innocent man be falsely imprisoned.
Unfortunately that is not the attitude we have today. That's the bigger issue here, not what specific equipment the police have.
And yes the lives of our brave LEOs are to be protected, but life is not so dear as liberty and I sincerely want to believe the core of LE professionals are devoted to that very concept. If it was an easy job everybody could do it.
MachIVshooter
Member
I think the point is that the equipment and training should be matched by accountability. They have better training and equipment than civilians, so should be held accountable for acting more professionally and using the equipment properly.
The mere thought of an innocent civilian being killed in a no-knock raid because of a wrong address lacks a descriptive word. They heve the technology and manpower to get it right; there are no excuses for such mistakes. If we civilians kill someone because we thought they meant to hurt us and it turns out they didn't, we go to prison for murder. Why should it be any different for LEO's? In fact, everyone involved in the botched raid should be held accountable for that murder-from the guy who pulled the trigger to the judge who signed the warrant.
Likewise, when they injure or kill an innocent bystander during a shootout, they should be held more accountable than a civilian due to their training and oath to protect the citizenry. If an armed civilian misses the attacker and kills the 6 year old on the other side of the parking lot, he gets murder 2 or manslaghter. So should the SWAT officer who had lowsy aim.
Yes, the police should have the tools and technology to deal with the criminals they face. But when they screw up, they need to face the music like everyone else. Everyone makes mistakes, but when someone is critically wounded or killed as a result, the person who made the mistake must pay dearly, whether they are a civilian or LEO.
If you say so, Spiderman.
J/K, I agree with you completely. I just couldn't let that opportunity slide by.
Hey, don't talk the talk. Walk the walk. Until you have been the guy doing the no knock entry, and seeing what can come your way, then I wouldn't criticise these guys for trying to do the most thankless job. BTW, most larger forces have warrant teams, which are way different than SWAT, SRT, HRT, or whatever. But there are officers from the SWAT team that may serve on both.
High risk entry is no joke. Clearing a building may be the most frightening thing you'd ever do in your life. And you have to be able to acquire targets in low light, differentiate between friend and foe, cover your partner, and if you need to, hit what you are aiming at while moving. You guys think it's easy? And you have to look and be scary in order to work. You are hopiong against hope that the BGs are going to give up without a fight. The best way to do that is to give them the impression that they aren't going to win, regardless of whether or not they blow your head off, or take out your crotch. Or get a side shot in through the arm hole, and rip your chest in 2. And maybe kill a hostage or 2.
And whatever you do, be absolutely perfect. Yeah man, people demanded this stuff. People escalated to this point. Gotta be perfect, for TV. For the papers. The lawyers. Yeah man, come rappeling down the side of a building, kick out a window, flash bang a room, engage multiple hostile targets who
are ready to shoot you, escort the hostages to safety, and do it while still looking good for the cameras. And the best people can come up with after all of that is " Well, maybe you should dress differently? Don't have to look like joe commando? " LOLOL.
Course, you could always send a couple old fat dudes to knock. "Don't have any drugs in there, do ya junior? " Used to work that way. Till 14 year old kids got a hold of UZIs. Face it man, America is one violent place. I mean, off the charts violent. I know Iraqis must still be pinging over what it is that the Gis are doing over there. And the GIs doing it are probably the same kids who were getting it done to them by the cops here. So they have some experience. They know what works, and what doesn't. But you know what they say. 7.5 hrs of sheer total boredom, and about 1/2 hr of absolute stark raving terror. And you know something? You never get used to it, and you never know. Me, I'd want an amphibious assualt vehicle too, if it meant that I was going to live to see miller time.
The strangest thing about it all? The scariest part of the work day was coming home and putting your own key in your front door, and not knowing what you'd find inside your own house. You couldn't pay me enough money to ever do anything like that again. People gotta make up their minds. Either they want something done about it, or they don't.
I better stop now, As I am starting to ramble.
Stretch
Quit cigs 2W 3D 21h 24m ago. So far saved $107.35, 715 cigs not smoked and counting ...
High risk entry is no joke. Clearing a building may be the most frightening thing you'd ever do in your life. And you have to be able to acquire targets in low light, differentiate between friend and foe, cover your partner, and if you need to, hit what you are aiming at while moving. You guys think it's easy? And you have to look and be scary in order to work. You are hopiong against hope that the BGs are going to give up without a fight. The best way to do that is to give them the impression that they aren't going to win, regardless of whether or not they blow your head off, or take out your crotch. Or get a side shot in through the arm hole, and rip your chest in 2. And maybe kill a hostage or 2.
And whatever you do, be absolutely perfect. Yeah man, people demanded this stuff. People escalated to this point. Gotta be perfect, for TV. For the papers. The lawyers. Yeah man, come rappeling down the side of a building, kick out a window, flash bang a room, engage multiple hostile targets who
are ready to shoot you, escort the hostages to safety, and do it while still looking good for the cameras. And the best people can come up with after all of that is " Well, maybe you should dress differently? Don't have to look like joe commando? " LOLOL.
Course, you could always send a couple old fat dudes to knock. "Don't have any drugs in there, do ya junior? " Used to work that way. Till 14 year old kids got a hold of UZIs. Face it man, America is one violent place. I mean, off the charts violent. I know Iraqis must still be pinging over what it is that the Gis are doing over there. And the GIs doing it are probably the same kids who were getting it done to them by the cops here. So they have some experience. They know what works, and what doesn't. But you know what they say. 7.5 hrs of sheer total boredom, and about 1/2 hr of absolute stark raving terror. And you know something? You never get used to it, and you never know. Me, I'd want an amphibious assualt vehicle too, if it meant that I was going to live to see miller time.
The strangest thing about it all? The scariest part of the work day was coming home and putting your own key in your front door, and not knowing what you'd find inside your own house. You couldn't pay me enough money to ever do anything like that again. People gotta make up their minds. Either they want something done about it, or they don't.
I better stop now, As I am starting to ramble.
Stretch
Quit cigs 2W 3D 21h 24m ago. So far saved $107.35, 715 cigs not smoked and counting ...
Swat shows/news specials are a gas.
2 flash-bangs go off 5 feet away from an infant: "Oh, we didn't know children would be in there..."
80+ man-hours down the drain, 6.5 hours into the raid/search and seizure: "We think we've found a scrap of paper that might've been used as a joint. The raid was a success !"
"Here we've ripped off the front door, side and rear windows. We aim to cause as much damage to these fortifide houses as possible. We basically demolish the house. What's that Charlie ? We got the wrong house ? Saddle up! Onto house #2! It's clobberin' time! Rar!!!"
2 flash-bangs go off 5 feet away from an infant: "Oh, we didn't know children would be in there..."
80+ man-hours down the drain, 6.5 hours into the raid/search and seizure: "We think we've found a scrap of paper that might've been used as a joint. The raid was a success !"
"Here we've ripped off the front door, side and rear windows. We aim to cause as much damage to these fortifide houses as possible. We basically demolish the house. What's that Charlie ? We got the wrong house ? Saddle up! Onto house #2! It's clobberin' time! Rar!!!"
My thoughts on "tactical" police forces
I dont like seeing our LEOs parading around in BDUs, tactical vests, and hoods. I dont like seeing cops on the corner with AR-15s or MP5s either. Dont get me wrong I believe some departments have a need for SWAT teams to deal with things like hostage situations, armed standoffs, and raids on drug houses. But there is a shift towards military style behavior, dress, and equipment in many police deparments across the country within the entire force that I find disturbing. We dont regularly use the military for law enforcement in this country for a reason. Most countries that have militarized police forces are third world hell holes with totalitarian governments. I guess I just believe in the old saying "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck". So far it looks and walks like a duck
.
I dont like seeing our LEOs parading around in BDUs, tactical vests, and hoods. I dont like seeing cops on the corner with AR-15s or MP5s either. Dont get me wrong I believe some departments have a need for SWAT teams to deal with things like hostage situations, armed standoffs, and raids on drug houses. But there is a shift towards military style behavior, dress, and equipment in many police deparments across the country within the entire force that I find disturbing. We dont regularly use the military for law enforcement in this country for a reason. Most countries that have militarized police forces are third world hell holes with totalitarian governments. I guess I just believe in the old saying "if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck". So far it looks and walks like a duck
.Para-military police is plain wrong. It's unamerican and it is fundamentally evil, period.
SWAT: Sidestepping the letter of the Posse Comitatus Act while urinating all over its intent and spirit.
SWAT: Sidestepping the letter of the Posse Comitatus Act while urinating all over its intent and spirit.
Stretchman:
That's self-serving nonsense. Many of the attitudes you express are among those that result in the outrages being discussed here. If the job is so tough that you're cracking up, find some other way to earn a living before you hurt someone. Law enforcement is stressful. No matter how stressful it is, though, you are not entitled to hurt people because you can't handle the stress.
As for that "Hey, don't talk the talk. Walk the walk." take off the suit, lay down the shield and the gun, and become a citizen who has the absolute right to expect that law enforcement officers protect and serve. Then wait apprehensively for a SWAT team to shout "POLICE!" while simultaneously breaking down your door, swarming into your home with AR-16s pointed at you, your wife, and your children, and destroying your property. When you get your mind wrapped around that scenario, watch your six-year-old son enter the room, rubbing his eyes after being awakened by the noise, and see him take a few bullets in the head.
When you've thought your way through all that--which is the kind of situation that disturbs people here and elsewhere--then say your excuses out loud and see how they sound.
Don't talk the talk. Walk the walk. There be real people here, there, and everywhere. When you the protector turns into you the predator, it's obscene for you to whine about how tough you have it.
Damned right you have to be "perfect." That's the job. If you can't cut it, find work that doesn't put people's lives in your hands.
You're a scarey dude but not for the reasons you think: your attitudes are those that result in the incidents that horrify the people who look to you for protection.
The bad guys have sympathy-grabbing stories too. There ought to be some way to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys.
That's self-serving nonsense. Many of the attitudes you express are among those that result in the outrages being discussed here. If the job is so tough that you're cracking up, find some other way to earn a living before you hurt someone. Law enforcement is stressful. No matter how stressful it is, though, you are not entitled to hurt people because you can't handle the stress.
As for that "Hey, don't talk the talk. Walk the walk." take off the suit, lay down the shield and the gun, and become a citizen who has the absolute right to expect that law enforcement officers protect and serve. Then wait apprehensively for a SWAT team to shout "POLICE!" while simultaneously breaking down your door, swarming into your home with AR-16s pointed at you, your wife, and your children, and destroying your property. When you get your mind wrapped around that scenario, watch your six-year-old son enter the room, rubbing his eyes after being awakened by the noise, and see him take a few bullets in the head.
When you've thought your way through all that--which is the kind of situation that disturbs people here and elsewhere--then say your excuses out loud and see how they sound.
Don't talk the talk. Walk the walk. There be real people here, there, and everywhere. When you the protector turns into you the predator, it's obscene for you to whine about how tough you have it.
Damned right you have to be "perfect." That's the job. If you can't cut it, find work that doesn't put people's lives in your hands.
You're a scarey dude but not for the reasons you think: your attitudes are those that result in the incidents that horrify the people who look to you for protection.
The bad guys have sympathy-grabbing stories too. There ought to be some way to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Real Uzi's? Figment of media imagination.
Civilian Uzi lookalikes? No more dangerous than a Glock (actually, arguably less so).
And no police officer in the United States has EVER been killed using an Uzi or civilian Uzi lookalike. Ever.
IIRC, the U.S. homicide rate is only about 1.5 times that of Germany--more violent in some ways than average, but by no means off the charts. The violent crime rate in the United States is still near a 40-year low, and it would be lower still were it not for Prohibition 2.0.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab
Yes, there are small pockets in the U.S. that are much more violent than the national average, but on the whole, the U.S. is a pretty safe place from a crime standpoint.
And if you get the wrong address, it's no joke for the innocent homeowner(s) that are the victims, either. And for them, it WILL be the most frightening thing they've ever experienced in their life.
If you are raiding the right house for the right reasons, we're in 100% agreement. You guys have one of the toughest jobs there is.
But I think most of us here are just saying, don't treat this as casually as an increasing number of departments seem to be. Don't raid a house on the word of some anonymous informant. Don't scribble down an address and later raid it without surveillance to make sure you're raiding criminals. Don't raid a house looking for evidence except in the most extraordinary circumstances; if the case is so weak that you can't charge/convict on the evidence you already have, the case is too weak for a dynamic entry in most cases, IMO. Make sure somebody does the homework before staging a raid. Innocent people should NEVER, EVER be the subject of a SWAT raid, and if they are, somebody screwed up and should be held accountable--and procedures should be modified as needed to keep it from happening again.
There is no excuse for not getting the address right. SWAT should NEVER raid the wrong house.
If an airline pilot lands a plane on a taxiway instead of the runway and kills a passenger or two, the response isn't "well, nobody's perfect, can't make an omelet without breaking eggs," etc. Airline pilots are EXPECTED to do everything right, and they have lots of procedures and checklists in place to help them do so. If somebody screws up, there will not just be accountability, there will be procedural changes put into place to ensure that it doesn't happen again.
When you are putting people's lives on the line, there is no excuse for NOT having the same level of care to ensure you don't raid an innocent person, IMO.
FWIW, I am very pro-police in general, and I think SWAT, properly used, is a good thing. But the casual attitude toward the use of SWAT and dynamic entries in non-high-risk situations (routine arrests, serving of search warrants, etc.) scares the HECK out of me, because if my door gets kicked in in the middle of the night, what do I do?
Is there a requirement to have a certain amount of time in police work,or years on the job,to be able to join swat? Seems like officers with a lot of time on dealing with police problems in the actual area of operations would cut down on a lot of the mistakes we hear about.
If you are a soldier who has just spent the last few years dealing with death at sexual distances,face to face,and a group of people dressed in black,armed to the teeth,breaks into your home in the middle of the night,or anytime,do you think who are they? The thought that they might be police officers,with the wrong house,might not occur to you.After you have killed a couple of them,thinking that you are defending your family,and they have shot you and your dog,when it occurs that they have the wrong house,and the shooting stops,who is to blame?
992
If you are a soldier who has just spent the last few years dealing with death at sexual distances,face to face,and a group of people dressed in black,armed to the teeth,breaks into your home in the middle of the night,or anytime,do you think who are they? The thought that they might be police officers,with the wrong house,might not occur to you.After you have killed a couple of them,thinking that you are defending your family,and they have shot you and your dog,when it occurs that they have the wrong house,and the shooting stops,who is to blame?
992
Well said, benEzra. All the law-abiding gun owners I've ever met are firm supporters of law enforcement officers.
Many of them with concealed carry permits, I know, would help a cop in trouble without blinking an eye. It makes sense: they fear criminal attacks and respect cops who put their lives on the line to defend us all against them. I've never met a CCW permit holder who was soft on crime or defended criminals. I've also never met a CCW permit holder who wasn't proud of the law enforcement officers among his friends. We like and respect law enforcement officers who protect and serve, we need them, and we must assist them every way we can. They are us doing essential work on our behalf and our families'.
But there are big exceptions. Lee Paige, the DEA agent who shot himself in the foot after bragging about his professionalism is one of the exceptions. Paige is the poster child for what is being discussed. It wasn't his carelessness that triggered the widespread contempt for him. It was his arrogance in declaring that he was the only person in that room qualified to handle that gun. His negligent discharge immediately after making that statement should have been a self-correcting error, but Paige evidently never got the message. He still seems to be defending his behavior and considers himself a professional. He is not, and it's not because of a negligent discharge in a room full of kids and their parents. It's his attitude and behaviors.
The other big exceptions evidently don't get the message either. Paige's superiors evidently don't get it: after a slap on the hand, he's still employed by the agency. Arrogant cops who abuse their authority to push people around or exploit them, the BATFE and its agents who create and enforce arbitrary rulings that criminalize unwary gun owners and dealers, and SWAT teams that harrass or even murder innocent citizens and whine about their tough lives to excuse their behavior--these are the kinds of people we don't need and they do "jobs" that don't need doing.
There are only a few differences in the consequences of having your door broken in by criminal home invaders or by a SWAT team or other law enforcement officers. The immediate results are the same: trauma, violation, disrupted lives, destroyed property, and perhaps physical injuries or death. The longterm results are dramatically different. They create fear of the very people who should be trusted to do right by the citizenry and produce contempt for the laws and the system that enable such people. Such people get little respect because they deserve none at all.
That kind of law enforcement officer is nothing more than Lee Paige amplified and multiplied. They are arrogant and negligent or abusive. There is no valid way to defend their attitudes or behaviors. Attempts to defend them serve only to increase the hostility.
We can understand and attempt to defend against criminals. But we can't understand or defend against arrogant, abusive law enforcement and its officers. And those differences make such law enforcement much more dangerous to us all than even the worst of criminals. No-knock warrants, the judges who issue them or excuse their consequences, the agents who execute them, and the people who defend them are more serious threats to society than the Bloods and the Crips, because they operate under the color of law.
How is it possible to tell a child that the people who broke into his home and shot his dog were the good guys and that the policeman is his friend?
So it's significant when law abiding gun owners and, especially, CCW permit holders fiercely denounce certain specific--documented--police behaviors and attitudes. When people who are strongly inclined to support law enforcement become its critics, there's something dreadfully wrong with the behavior and attitudes that transform them into critics.
The Lee Paiges need to listen and stop trying to defend the indefensible. So do their superiors and those who enable them. It hurts legitimate law enforcement when they don't.
Many of them with concealed carry permits, I know, would help a cop in trouble without blinking an eye. It makes sense: they fear criminal attacks and respect cops who put their lives on the line to defend us all against them. I've never met a CCW permit holder who was soft on crime or defended criminals. I've also never met a CCW permit holder who wasn't proud of the law enforcement officers among his friends. We like and respect law enforcement officers who protect and serve, we need them, and we must assist them every way we can. They are us doing essential work on our behalf and our families'.
But there are big exceptions. Lee Paige, the DEA agent who shot himself in the foot after bragging about his professionalism is one of the exceptions. Paige is the poster child for what is being discussed. It wasn't his carelessness that triggered the widespread contempt for him. It was his arrogance in declaring that he was the only person in that room qualified to handle that gun. His negligent discharge immediately after making that statement should have been a self-correcting error, but Paige evidently never got the message. He still seems to be defending his behavior and considers himself a professional. He is not, and it's not because of a negligent discharge in a room full of kids and their parents. It's his attitude and behaviors.
The other big exceptions evidently don't get the message either. Paige's superiors evidently don't get it: after a slap on the hand, he's still employed by the agency. Arrogant cops who abuse their authority to push people around or exploit them, the BATFE and its agents who create and enforce arbitrary rulings that criminalize unwary gun owners and dealers, and SWAT teams that harrass or even murder innocent citizens and whine about their tough lives to excuse their behavior--these are the kinds of people we don't need and they do "jobs" that don't need doing.
There are only a few differences in the consequences of having your door broken in by criminal home invaders or by a SWAT team or other law enforcement officers. The immediate results are the same: trauma, violation, disrupted lives, destroyed property, and perhaps physical injuries or death. The longterm results are dramatically different. They create fear of the very people who should be trusted to do right by the citizenry and produce contempt for the laws and the system that enable such people. Such people get little respect because they deserve none at all.
That kind of law enforcement officer is nothing more than Lee Paige amplified and multiplied. They are arrogant and negligent or abusive. There is no valid way to defend their attitudes or behaviors. Attempts to defend them serve only to increase the hostility.
We can understand and attempt to defend against criminals. But we can't understand or defend against arrogant, abusive law enforcement and its officers. And those differences make such law enforcement much more dangerous to us all than even the worst of criminals. No-knock warrants, the judges who issue them or excuse their consequences, the agents who execute them, and the people who defend them are more serious threats to society than the Bloods and the Crips, because they operate under the color of law.
How is it possible to tell a child that the people who broke into his home and shot his dog were the good guys and that the policeman is his friend?
So it's significant when law abiding gun owners and, especially, CCW permit holders fiercely denounce certain specific--documented--police behaviors and attitudes. When people who are strongly inclined to support law enforcement become its critics, there's something dreadfully wrong with the behavior and attitudes that transform them into critics.
The Lee Paiges need to listen and stop trying to defend the indefensible. So do their superiors and those who enable them. It hurts legitimate law enforcement when they don't.
I think that SWAT teams should be disbanded. They accomplish nothing. They are security theater. If there is a REAL hostage threat, the FBI has teams for that.
Think of it this way, your house is surrounded, they want to arrest you, you do not want to be arrested. They cutoff your gas, your electricity, water, septic and whatever else they can. After a few days, you are coming out or they can go in, relatively safely.
Not only that, there are 1,000 times when you can get a suspect without having to a "standoff" type scenario eg While he is taking a dump... et cetera. I would guess a LOT of these SWAT style raids are done for the purposes of justifying the SWAT team and timed accordingly. We have advanced surviellance techniques, which means that we can track a target easily and should use those "tools" instead of escalating violence.
SWAT teams are a waste of tax payer money.
I haven't got a dog in this fight, but mbt2001 makes a pretty good case that there is no need for these teams.
I know that each one of you reading this has good self control and would not personally abuse authority or brandish guns as an individual, however, individual behavior is different than GROUP behavior and especially when you put GOVT into the picture you invariably get an adversarial situation of a component having to justify its existence.
Some branches of Govt are innocuous, but when you get to SWAT (as in Atlanta) or BATF, well, we saw their true colors at Waco. Do a grandstand play just before the budget hearings. Group behavior does get more squirrelly than an individual's does.
I know that each one of you reading this has good self control and would not personally abuse authority or brandish guns as an individual, however, individual behavior is different than GROUP behavior and especially when you put GOVT into the picture you invariably get an adversarial situation of a component having to justify its existence.
Some branches of Govt are innocuous, but when you get to SWAT (as in Atlanta) or BATF, well, we saw their true colors at Waco. Do a grandstand play just before the budget hearings. Group behavior does get more squirrelly than an individual's does.
It's pretty saddening to think that in the land of the free your life is in the hands of people like this.
If the cops screw up they should be fired and jailed, if someone at the courthouse screws up they should share the same fate. If the informants lie and give the wrong address they should be jailed.
It shouldn't be that hard to tell whether or not the people in the house being raided are the ones that they're looking for or not.
Cops who bust into the wrong house and get shot shouldn't be given special treatment, nor should the home owner be unfairly prosecuted.
If the cops screw up they should be fired and jailed, if someone at the courthouse screws up they should share the same fate. If the informants lie and give the wrong address they should be jailed.
It shouldn't be that hard to tell whether or not the people in the house being raided are the ones that they're looking for or not.
Cops who bust into the wrong house and get shot shouldn't be given special treatment, nor should the home owner be unfairly prosecuted.
This Idea that drug heads are somehow supersmart and need to be outsmarted by UberPolice in masks and vest astounds me. I can stand on a street corner and in ten minutes, pick out who is selling drugs. I have met a lot of these supposed drug lords when they have come around our job sights looking to sell their sister or some rock. They are not bright, they are not smart, they are not devious, they are rock stupid...
You grab four or five street boys and get them to cough up a delivery man, get a couple of delivery men and you got the warehouse. it really is not that hard.
Media cops keep talking about being outgunned by the bangers, not the case, The use of full auto weapons by criminals just does not happen. it really does not. Most have no idea how a gun works, fewer still have any practice time with a gun. Cops want to increase their odds in a gun fight, go to the range and practice hitting what you are aiming at.
I was listening to a guy who had been in the Battle of the Bulge talking about being in battle and the act of shooting someone. He was remarkably matter of fact in describing taking a timed, patient, aimed shot.
more or less verbatim " I saw them coming up the slope, I raised my rifle, centered the front sight in him, took the slack out of the trigger and let a bit of air out and let the trigger break" he just shrugged, "it was what i was trained to do, that one fell, i slid the front sight over to the next and did the same. maybe did it thirty or forty more times that day." Get this mentality in to the cops, aim, fire. repeat. not just yank the trigger and let the noise scare him away.
That all said, two of the most nut job people i know are local "special tactics" cops. Both revel in telling stories about beating the crap out of some kid who mouthed off, or how easy it is to find a place to spend the day doing nothing but getting paid for it. One has even bragged about getting "favors" from hookers in return for keeping ex pimps away.
I went to a pro football game last fall and ended up calling in on one officer who was tapping in time with the half time music, except he was doing it with his trigger finger on the trigger of his MP5. They want to search me for contraband, but they let a moron have a select fire weapon.
put cops in uniforms, give then small beats, let them know the neighborhood, and burn all the extra squad cars. Cops on foot stop like 90 % of street crime.
You grab four or five street boys and get them to cough up a delivery man, get a couple of delivery men and you got the warehouse. it really is not that hard.
Media cops keep talking about being outgunned by the bangers, not the case, The use of full auto weapons by criminals just does not happen. it really does not. Most have no idea how a gun works, fewer still have any practice time with a gun. Cops want to increase their odds in a gun fight, go to the range and practice hitting what you are aiming at.
I was listening to a guy who had been in the Battle of the Bulge talking about being in battle and the act of shooting someone. He was remarkably matter of fact in describing taking a timed, patient, aimed shot.
more or less verbatim " I saw them coming up the slope, I raised my rifle, centered the front sight in him, took the slack out of the trigger and let a bit of air out and let the trigger break" he just shrugged, "it was what i was trained to do, that one fell, i slid the front sight over to the next and did the same. maybe did it thirty or forty more times that day." Get this mentality in to the cops, aim, fire. repeat. not just yank the trigger and let the noise scare him away.
That all said, two of the most nut job people i know are local "special tactics" cops. Both revel in telling stories about beating the crap out of some kid who mouthed off, or how easy it is to find a place to spend the day doing nothing but getting paid for it. One has even bragged about getting "favors" from hookers in return for keeping ex pimps away.
I went to a pro football game last fall and ended up calling in on one officer who was tapping in time with the half time music, except he was doing it with his trigger finger on the trigger of his MP5. They want to search me for contraband, but they let a moron have a select fire weapon.
put cops in uniforms, give then small beats, let them know the neighborhood, and burn all the extra squad cars. Cops on foot stop like 90 % of street crime.
I would have to agree with the train of thought that SWAT teams are not truely needed. America made it through the era of heavy organized crime of the Roaring Twenties without "Special Weapons And Tactics" teams. But also back then, cops actually lived where they worked and knew everyone there. Not by trying to be Big Brother, but by being a part of their community. With this came a sense of responsibility. Today, you have cops that live nowhere near where they work, no personal responsibility felt towards the areas they patrol, and an adversarial relationship to the public at large. Not all cops are this way of course, but the number that are is disturbingly large today. SWAT teams take this detachment and lack of a sense of personal responsibility even further. They are militarized, often with a mindset based on the dehumanization of anyone not in blue. They view all citizens with suspicion and contempt. This, is recipe for disaster.
So, with these points to consider I'm inclined to say that they should be put in a blue uniform, issued a sidearm and a radio, and have them actually walk a beat. They'd be more useful to society at large as cops doing real policework, rather than trying to live out their John Rambo fantasies at the taxpayer's expense, and in a disturbing number of cases, over the dead bodies of innocent citizens. There is no place for para-military tactics in the society of a (purportedly) free nation. Save such bad behavior for third world gutters where if anything it's at least expected.
So, with these points to consider I'm inclined to say that they should be put in a blue uniform, issued a sidearm and a radio, and have them actually walk a beat. They'd be more useful to society at large as cops doing real policework, rather than trying to live out their John Rambo fantasies at the taxpayer's expense, and in a disturbing number of cases, over the dead bodies of innocent citizens. There is no place for para-military tactics in the society of a (purportedly) free nation. Save such bad behavior for third world gutters where if anything it's at least expected.
SWAT teams are not TRULY needed, but they should be maintained.
I like to think of SWAT teams as the 16.5" M4gery with ACOG scope and M855 filled 20-round magazines jungle-taped on a 3 point tactical sling that I wish I had in the back of my safe.
Really, there isn't much I can't do in terms of self-defense, crime deterrence, target shooting, plinking, or fondling that I couldn't do just as well or better with my Finnish M39 Nagant or Benelli M1.
But there MIGHT come a day when the drug crazed nazis and stormtropper zombies come crawling over my walls, and then I'll need the 60 rounds of ammo and 120 rnd bandolier with holy water grenades strapped to my back.
SWAT teams should be maintained - the problem is that too many municipalities have bean counters who insist that each team "justify" its cost and existence. Thus you concurrently have overuses of force, and extensions of SWAT into otherwise police-level action.
This is akin to looking into your safe and saying, well, alll this ammo just takes up so much room, and it's very unlikely they'll ever have a shortage of ammo at the store, so why don't I just sell it off because it just isn't justifying its space and expense to maintain.
The solution to this is twofold: to elect or hire bean-counters and officials who understand that a SWAT team is like an insurance policy - you pay for it, but you hope to never have to use it. Secondly, SWAT teams must also be made more affordable to maintain. Smaller towns should have members its police force double as SWAT, and there really is no need for yearly equipment changes just so the boys in NOMEX can keep up with the Joneses. Swat teams should also number no more than five or six at the most. Properly done, I believe SWAT teams can be maintained for less than half a million a year.
I like to think of SWAT teams as the 16.5" M4gery with ACOG scope and M855 filled 20-round magazines jungle-taped on a 3 point tactical sling that I wish I had in the back of my safe.
Really, there isn't much I can't do in terms of self-defense, crime deterrence, target shooting, plinking, or fondling that I couldn't do just as well or better with my Finnish M39 Nagant or Benelli M1.
But there MIGHT come a day when the drug crazed nazis and stormtropper zombies come crawling over my walls, and then I'll need the 60 rounds of ammo and 120 rnd bandolier with holy water grenades strapped to my back.
SWAT teams should be maintained - the problem is that too many municipalities have bean counters who insist that each team "justify" its cost and existence. Thus you concurrently have overuses of force, and extensions of SWAT into otherwise police-level action.
This is akin to looking into your safe and saying, well, alll this ammo just takes up so much room, and it's very unlikely they'll ever have a shortage of ammo at the store, so why don't I just sell it off because it just isn't justifying its space and expense to maintain.
The solution to this is twofold: to elect or hire bean-counters and officials who understand that a SWAT team is like an insurance policy - you pay for it, but you hope to never have to use it. Secondly, SWAT teams must also be made more affordable to maintain. Smaller towns should have members its police force double as SWAT, and there really is no need for yearly equipment changes just so the boys in NOMEX can keep up with the Joneses. Swat teams should also number no more than five or six at the most. Properly done, I believe SWAT teams can be maintained for less than half a million a year.
How many times?
I would really like to know how many times a SWAT team has actually been shot at during a raid. In addition, I would be curious what percentage had actually fired their weapon in a raid. I would bet it is extremely small in either case. Incidents like the Northridge robbery are few and far between and the dire predictions of gangs using automatic weapons never materialized. There is definitely a need to be prepared for a terrorist or criminal armed attack but realistically, I would bet that normal police activity would be more than enough to handle 99.9% of all actions.
I would really like to know how many times a SWAT team has actually been shot at during a raid. In addition, I would be curious what percentage had actually fired their weapon in a raid. I would bet it is extremely small in either case. Incidents like the Northridge robbery are few and far between and the dire predictions of gangs using automatic weapons never materialized. There is definitely a need to be prepared for a terrorist or criminal armed attack but realistically, I would bet that normal police activity would be more than enough to handle 99.9% of all actions.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked