SWAT should practice on non-violent calls

[rambone]

Here's a critique of an article from Tactical Response magazine, where the author advocates using SWAT routinely on non-violent calls. This is a mindset that jeopardizes innocent lives, hardens and militarizes the police, further distances us from the days of the Peace Officer, wastes money, destroys property, and will be exceedingly useful for the developing Police State.

Practice on the People

The author is actually suggesting SWAT commanders lobby to have their teams deployed in situations for which they normally wouldn’t be to ensure they’re in good practice. Put another way, he suggests they practice their door smashing, room-clearing, flash-grenade deploying, and other paramilitary tactics on less-than-violent people, so they’re in better form when a real threat arises. Never mind that there are going to be living, breathing, probably bleeding people on the receiving end of these “practice” raids. There’s officer safety and “SWAT team profile” to think about. It’s just an appalling mindset.

We have a report of an illegal garden on your coordinates.
​

 

[rambone]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV7u91A3KGQ

 

[Big Naughty]

That picture is closer to reality than 99% of Americans realize. There was a lady in Michigan who had to fight her city recently in order to keep her front yard garden. Of course when the bureaucrat who was attacking her got flooded with bad press he stopped his bullying.

I find it ridiculous that police in this country need a 113 with a M2 mounted on top. What scenario are they planning on happening?

 

[rambone]

What scenario are they planning on happening?

Slaves getting fed up.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

[STRIKE]Slaves[/STRIKE] Consumers getting fed up.

FTFY. Gotta keep it PC & use the new, approved terms for the old words.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What scenario are they planning on happening?

The scenario of not getting funding.

There's also the angry chicken farm scenario, or, as I call it, acluckalypse now.

 

[jbombelli]

They better be practicing if they're coming this way.









purposely not purple.

 

[Mosinowner]

= Thats us

 

[Kick]

Maybe practicing in real life situations with real people, that are "less-than-violent", could help prevent future tragedies like the recent shooting of the Marine in Arizona

 

[hornadylnl]

Maybe practicing in real life situations with real people, that are "less-than-violent", could help prevent future tragedies like the recent shooting of the Marine in Arizona

Yes, because your training trumps the bill of rights.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I don't think non-volent offenses should be the "no" criteria for SWAT teams. I have no problem with them flash banging a guy with volumes of child porn.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Yes, because your training trumps the bill of rights.

Explain how SWAT runs afoul to the Constitution, 'm curious.

 

[Kick]

Yes, because your training trumps the bill of rights.

I don't see why the two can't exist hand-in-hand. Just because SWAT is called out does not mean the situation is going to be violent. Much like a fire truck responding to a medical call. Just because the fire truck is there, you cannot assume anything is one fire....

and who's training are we talking about? I thought we were talking about SWAT teams?

 

[phylodog]

Gotta say I actually agree with Rambone on this one. (check for star alignment now)

While I don't agree with the "throw the baby out with the bath water" thinking of some when it comes to SWAT teams. I'd like to think that if a SWAT team needs to "practice" on situations where their use is not warranted, perhaps that jurisdiction needs to rethink whether they need a team at all.

 

[Kick]

Gotta say I actually agree with Rambone on this one. (check for star alignment now)

While I don't agree with the "throw the baby out with the bath water" thinking of some when it comes to SWAT teams. I'd like to think that if a SWAT team needs to "practice" on situations where their use is not warranted, perhaps that jurisdiction needs to rethink whether they need a team at all.

See, I was thinking that typical practice involves worst case training. Getting team members out in the public in "no shoot" situations, or situations in which the team functions as a normal patrol officer, would teach team members how to quickly deescalate from 10 back down to 1.

 

[jsharmon7]

I'm going to have to fall on the side of "disagree" with the idea of letting SWAT practice on "routine" situations. If there isn't a need then I don't see what they're going to learn or gain from the "practice." You may as well just stick to training scenarios. If they are interjecting things into routine situations for the sake of training, that's crossing the line in my book. I don't think there are evil ulterior motives with what they are doing, I just think it's unnecessary and potentially dangerous.

 

[phylodog]

See, I was thinking that typical practice involves worst case training. Getting team members out in the public in "no shoot" situations, or situations in which the team functions as a normal patrol officer, would teach team members how to quickly deescalate from 10 back down to 1.

The vast majority of SWAT officers function as normal patrol officers outside of when the team is requested for a situation or warrant. An officer who needs to be put into situations to teach them how to de-escalate, does not belong on a SWAT team to begin with.

99.9% of our operations are no shoot operations. We have had one SWAT police action shooting (that I can remember) in the past 4.5 years (since the merger of IPD & MCSD) and we have had hundreds, if not over a thousand operations in that time. That shooting evolved very quickly and there were only two SWAT officers on the scene when the shooting occurred. The number one purpose of a SWAT team (or perhaps I should say our SWAT team) is to preserve life. That is how it should be. If it isn't, something is wrong.

I've said it many times before and I'll say it again, not all SWAT teams are created equal.

 

[Benny]

Gotta say I actually agree with Rambone on this one. (check for star alignment now)

While I don't agree with the "throw the baby out with the bath water" thinking of some when it comes to SWAT teams. I'd like to think that if a SWAT team needs to "practice" on situations where their use is not warranted, perhaps that jurisdiction needs to rethink whether they need a team at all.

I guess I've repped you too recently.

 

[Gabriel]

The vast majority of SWAT officers function as normal patrol officers outside of when the team is requested for a situation or warrant. An officer who needs to be put into situations to teach them how to de-escalate, does not belong on a SWAT team to begin with.

This.

 

[bingley]

Seems like our SWAT teams can probably get plenty of free practice in Mexico, on violent calls, too. These non-violent offenders just won't cut it. Maybe I'm just talking out of my rear here, but to me it seems like it may not be that much different from running a course. If you want the skills, you have to go to the two-way range.

In the best case scenario, our SWAT teams pacify the drug thugs, reestablishing order in Mexico which allows the economy to grow. The subsequence increase in jobs will keep the desperate poor of Latin America from crossing the US border illegally in search of a better life. And the SWAT teams get practice! Three birds with one stone.

Da Bing