Rise of the Warrior Cop

[UWOA (RIP)]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

The real problem is that when the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems tend to look like nails.

The SWAT teams are not cheap.

They (and their equipment and training) have to be justified by utilization.

So instead of Officer Friendly stopping by for a chat, or asking you to come down to the station house, a dozen heavily armed intruders (who have obtained a no-notice warrant), kick in your door at zero dark thirty, cuff everyone up who has survived, and go about trashing your home.

As most communities have few scenarios where a SWAT team would be required, they have been assigned additional duties to include warrant service and raids for less and less severe crimes.

Criminals have adopted this same MO and use it, frequently under the guise of being police, to conduct home invasions.

Resist, and you run the chance of being incarcerated, should you survive.

Compound this with the emerging harassment technique of calling in an anonymous report on someone you dislike in hopes of targeting them for a paramilitary assault on their home or place of business. Nothing like seeing a couple of dozen heavily-armed officers descending to kick in the door and dragging off a potential rival, even if they aren't guilty, right?

LAPD started the SWAT concept with highly trained individuals serving a specific purpose in a huge metropolitan area. Today, most small towns with 10,000 residents or more have some sort of tactical team of dubious qualifications. And yes, to a large extent, the Federal money has a lot to do with it.

I believe that we should qualify and license SWAT teams and limit their employment to serious offenses requiring a paramilitary effort.

TR

Not necessarily so.

I started the SWAT team for my agency in 1980; prior to that the only unit of tactical significance was a counter-sniper team. My department sent an officer from the training section to two different SWAT schools, one in Texas, the other in Florida. When he came back he knew he still didn't have the expertise to train and operate a team. He asked me to help. I told him I would, but only if I could also go through the course/vetting process. He agreed.

It took three months to prepare, but in the end although we had five trainers running the course (including me when I wasn't acting as a student), I taught over fifty percent of the course, running it in most respects like a mini-Ranger school doing things like running a mile in an M-17 protective mask because they have to be able to fight hand-to-hand wearing it.

The main difference between my agency's team and everybody else's ... and still is to a great extent from what I've seen ... is that we run a TOC staffed only by SWAT personnel for every operation. When you combine the intelligence we gather before and during mission execution with the discipline we developed during the training phase (I can place a man in a position in sub-zero temperatures and come back six hours later and know he'll be in the exact same position, not down at the donut shop) we could operate where others wouldn't expect us, make entries in unexpected places (I taught explosive entry to central Indiana tactical units that were involved in security for the Tenth Pan American Games in Indianapolis in 1986 ... long before other non-federal agencies ever contemplated such techniques.) to resolve incidents with minimum injuries and/or loss of life.

I taught them to think outside the box ... and that their most formidable weapon was their brain ... not the 'toys'. So ... it was not only Special Weapons, but also Special Tactics, military in style, conditioned by a different set of rules of engagement ... the rules captured in state statute, federal code and the state and federal constitutions.

Bottom line: whether it was SWAT or regular street operations I always preached that you treat everyone like a million bucks, the only difference was that you always had a plan to kill'em (that you hopefully didn't have to execute); that was the essential element of being prepared to protect and serve.

I had six police action shootings during my thirty-four year law enforcement career, but only one occurred during a SWAT operation.

.

[Team Sergeant]

I've trained a few SWAT teams and police snipers, that said anyone waking me up at 3:00 AM by knocking down my door had better made peace with their maker before hand as I will do my best to kill them all.

As was mentioned that was extremely excessive force for that situation, and as was also mentioned, the individual should have been met on the street, in broad daylight and arrested.
There is no way anyone would have heard "POLICE" in a dead sleep, the cops know it and we know it. Especially when many bedrooms are opposite the front door. The next noise heard is the front door coming down, yeah, that would get someone's attention, in a very bad way. And those $800 gun lights attached to every swat team members weapon and shined in the face of the victim would make it impossible to identify a police uniform.

There's only one reason for the police to employ a SWAT team, for high risk warrants, this was not a high risk warrant (I don't care if they say it was.... that's BS.). And from reading the article it was a poorly trained team, twelve against one and he wounds half and one is dead. (Not having read the after action report I would venture to say the individual did not do all the wounding and might not have killed the officer either, but he wound up dead anyway, friendly fire maybe, only the police know, 39 shots vs. 250 by police, makes one wonder.)

How well trained are most cops when it comes to shooting situations, not very. Remember the 20 people wounded recently on the streets of NYC when two NYC cops opened fire on one individual? All 20 (I don't remember the exact number) were shot by those two cops, only one was a bad-guy. Remember the recent man-hunt in Calif for the police officer that went on a killing spree? How many cops shot innocent people on that hunt?

I take offense to the Warrior Cop title, cops are not "warriors", real warriors are trained to kill the enemy, cops are NOT trained to kill the enemy but to "defend" themselves while effecting an arrest.

As this swat team found out the hard way, not everyone is going to cower when their door gets busted down in the dead of the night. This was IMO a very bad shoot and a very bad idea to start with.

Save the swat teams for the bank robbers and serial killers, some guy with a few pot plants does not justify a swat team arrest.

"Warrior cops", they're joking right......

[18C4V]

That article is so full of facts It takes you down the road to make you believe that it was a SWAT Entry but it was not. It was a bunch of officers from different agencies composed of a narcotices task force. I guess Strike Force sounds so much cooler and no one is fact checking the writer of the article.

The SWAT word is so thrown out there just like the word Special Forces.

[UWOA (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

I've trained a few SWAT teams and police snipers, that said anyone waking me up at 3:00 AM by knocking down my door had better made peace with their maker before hand as I will do my best to kill them all.

As was mentioned that was extremely excessive force for that situation, and as was also mentioned, the individual should have been met on the street, in broad daylight and arrested.
There is no way anyone would have heard "POLICE" in a dead sleep, the cops know it and we know it. Especially when many bedrooms are opposite the front door. The next noise heard is the front door coming down, yeah, that would get someone's attention, in a very bad way. And those $800 gun lights attached to every swat team members weapon and shined in the face of the victim would make it impossible to identify a police uniform.

There's only one reason for the police to employ a SWAT team, for high risk warrants, this was not a high risk warrant (I don't care if they say it was.... that's BS.). And from reading the article it was a poorly trained team, twelve against one and he wounds half and one is dead. (Not having read the after action report I would venture to say the individual did not do all the wounding and might not have killed the officer either, but he wound up dead anyway, friendly fire maybe, only the police know, 39 shots vs. 250 by police, makes one wonder.)

How well trained are most cops when it comes to shooting situations, not very. Remember the 20 people wounded recently on the streets of NYC when two NYC cops opened fire on one individual? All 20 (I don't remember the exact number) were shot by those two cops, only one was a bad-guy. Remember the recent man-hunt in Calif for the police officer that went on a killing spree? How many cops shot innocent people on that hunt?

I take offense to the Warrior Cop title, cops are not "warriors", real warriors are trained to kill the enemy, cops are NOT trained to kill the enemy but to "defend" themselves while effecting an arrest.

As this swat team found out the hard way, not everyone is going to cower when their door gets busted down in the dead of the night. This was IMO a very bad shoot and a very bad idea to start with.

Save the swat teams for the bank robbers and serial killers, some guy with a few pot plants does not justify a swat team arrest.

"Warrior cops", they're joking right......

I have to agree with TS. No knock warrant service is usually reserved for drug evidence recovery ... and I'm no big fan of those even though I worked on a narcotics task force for the FBI (never did one). Through first hand observation I've learned that narcotics laws don't work. It's just a big game with enforcement making it big business.

If you don't have that requirement then you don't have that kind of situation.

I would also make the observation that while LEOs are not warriors, the skill sets are very similar -- that's why I became one, and that's why folks like TS are asked to train them. It's the ROE that are very different -- and includes defending others as well as one's self ... the protect part of "protect and serve."

One final note, as a LEO you can't protect anybody if you get dead ... so when I train LEOs I emphasize situational awareness so they don't get dead ... and that, with marksmanship, goes a long way toward winning a gunfight.

.

[Streck-Fu]

No knock warrant service is usually reserved for drug evidence recovery ...

It seems that the threshold for drug evidence is getting pretty low. There seem to be increasing reporting of arrested offenders turning 'witness' and giving up low level users to appease the arresting/investigating officers who are more than happy to deploy SWAT/tactical teams under the guise that it is a drug bust.

It becomes especially fucked up when they invite Reality TV crews along for the ride....

Columbia, MO SWAT :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF2nM9wsBYs

News article: LINK

He plead guilty to misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia and released with a $300 fine....

This is a glaring example of what SWAT/Tactical Teams should not be....

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by 18C4V

That article is so full of facts It takes you down the road to make you believe that it was a SWAT Entry but it was not. It was a bunch of officers from different agencies composed of a narcotices task force. I guess Strike Force sounds so much cooler and no one is fact checking the writer of the article.

The SWAT word is so thrown out there just like the word Special Forces.

You are correct, but it doesn't matter to me what it's makeup, it was 12 heavily armed LEO's making entry into a home that, IMO, was not justified given the circumstances.

I've discussed the militarization of American Law Enforcement before and it needs to end. MRAPS, Drones, machineguns, it needs to end.

[Sdiver]

But ... But .... who will save the children ???

[TacOfficer]

Response to SWAT Teams.
"A number of federal agencies also now have their own SWAT teams, including the Fish & Wildlife Service, NASA and the Department of the Interior."

I do wonder why the Departments of Education and Interior need a SWAT team, but I can understand why Fish & Wildlife Service and NASA has them.

Fish and wildlife are tasked with apprehending poachers, who are typically armed. NASA has many high value targets for terrorists.

SWAT teams and the like are an essential part of today's Law-enforcement community. The argument that SWAT teams in small communities are not necessary has no merit. Small communities such as Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown to name a few give fresh examples why these "soft targets" need a response team to address heavily armed offenders. Barney Fife with one bullet in his pocket for his revolver and a kind thought will not stop an offender that has prepared with semi automatic carbines, pistols with large capacity magazines and body armor. Boston's offenders armed with IEDs, attacked hundreds then ambushed and killed an officer.

Domestic terrorism is no longer a hypothetical nor abstract idea. It's a reality that has to be addressed as a constant threat.

"Federal Law prohibits military personnel from enforcing the law within the United States except as expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress"

Response teams fill the void that exist between patrol officers and the military. The mind set of officers trained to meet these domestic threats are couched in Law and the Use of Force model more appropriate for addressing these attacks within our communities. Military leaders have related that combat Rules of Engagement are not suited for this environment.

Like anything else, the quality of service is only as good as the training and material. Unfortunately training is a rarer commodity than material. Smaller communities utilize their officers in multiple roles that limit their availability to train. Larger departments facing budget woes, have the ability to field dedicated teams but have manpower shortages that would otherwise enable appropriate training for first responders. Every community, large or small deserves officers that are equipped and trained to serve and protect.

Lack of sufficient training and manpower does not negate the need. It does increase the potential for tragedies and liability. All too often politicians place a higher priority on placating those seeking handouts with our taxes, than enabling first responders to train and prepare to meet the challenges of today's threats.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

....................Your post................

Excuse me.

NASA needs a SWAT Team because of all it's high value targets? Where is the NASA SWAT Team located? Where are the high value targets located? I'll bet most of the high value targets are located a great distance from the SWAT Team.

Fish & Wildlife? You've got to be kidding. Again, is the officer on the beat driving around with one in his pocket? I don't think so.

Everybody needs a SWAT Team?

Don't think so. You get one you want to use it - as we can see from the basic point of this thread.

SWAT Teams have gone way beyond their mission while looking for a job.

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

Response to SWAT Teams.


SWAT teams and the like are an essential part of today's Law-enforcement community. The argument that SWAT teams in small communities are not necessary has no merit. Small communities such as Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown to name a few give fresh examples why these "soft targets" need a response team to address heavily armed offenders. Barney Fife with one bullet in his pocket for his revolver and a kind thought will not stop an offender that has prepared with semi automatic carbines, pistols with large capacity magazines and body armor. Boston's offenders armed with IEDs, attacked hundreds then ambushed and killed an officer...

...Response teams fill the void that exist between patrol officers and the military. The mind set of officers trained to meet these domestic threats are couched in Law and the Use of Force model more appropriate for addressing these attacks within our communities. Military leaders have related that combat Rules of Engagement are not suited for this environment.

What is the average duration of an active-shooter situation? What is the average response time for law enforcement?

[ddoering]

SWAT teams allow the Feds to get around that pesky Constitutional constraint about using the military against Americans on US soil.

[Team Sergeant]

If some dude told me at a bar that he was a member of the Department of Education's SWAT team, I would have peed my pants laughing.......

And now that I know there actually is a Department of Education SWAT team, I'd still pee my pants laughing if someone told me they were a member.......

The joke is on us, we're paying for this incompetence.......

[sinjefe]

You've obviously drunk the kool aid. Let me guess, you're on a SWAT team?

[18C4V]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

You are correct, but it doesn't matter to me what it's makeup, it was 12 heavily armed LEO's making entry into a home that, IMO, was not justified given the circumstances.

I've discussed the militarization of American Law Enforcement before and it needs to end. MRAPS, Drones, machineguns, it needs to end.

That's a general statement, we in my agency nor does the surrounding agencies don't have Drones, MRAPs, and machine guns.

As for making that entry, it's all about leadership and that's in every profession. I can point out countless bad leadership calls within our own Regiment.

[18C4V]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

What is the average duration of an active-shooter situation? What is the average response time for law enforcement?

Too many variables go into that. Where it happens, size of department, time of day etc.

Large cities can have officers on scene in seconds depending on time (commute traffic, baseball games, foot ball games, etc). Smaller agencies will have longer response times.