Article: Rise of the Warrior Cop

[johnott 5]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323848804578608040780519904.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

 

Article from the Wall Street Journal for 19 Jun 2013: Rise of the Warrior Cop.

 

I agree with much of the article. The police force has changed drastically from years ago. New tactics are a good thing if used correctly and sparingly, but para-military tactics are being used way too much by too many. I don't like it. It worries me that these practices are so accepted and widespread. Police teams are looking more like Commando's or Special Ops than police officers; that would be o.k. if they were going after terrorists... but oft times they are going after average citizens for minor offenses that don't warrant deadly force. Many articles I've read over the years show a disturbing trend in how the police interact with individuals. They seem to push for confrontation. It seems that a citizen just can't do anything right... if you take a step forward then you are being aggressive, if you take a step backward then you are resisting arrest, if you don't move then you're obstructing justice. (I have had no problems with the police where I live. No-one has ever hassled me, but then again I'm an old guy who basically minds his own business and stays out of trouble.) Nevertheless, I still find this information troubling.

[colnar 0]

You know it has gone too far when you find out the Dept of Education has its own SWAT team. What the heck does the Dept of Ed need a SWAT team for?

[bravozulu14 0]

For the children.

[colnar 0]

Well, then those children need more time outs!

[Sixtytwo327 14]

Good story, though it's a bit scary. Reminds me of this one from a few years ago:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/07/mayor.warrant/

[colnar 0]

Yea, the "government" is getting way out of line. We need to start reeling them in.

[diamondd817 827]

No wonder why taxes are so damned high. I am all for smaller government.

[High Exposure 5,664]

If you think cops are "para military" organization, you are absolutely correct. We have always been that way. We wear uniforms, have a chain of command, salute and so-forth. And if you believe we are militarized now, you are ignorant of police history. You only have to go back to the 1920's and 30's to see the reality of life then.

 

So, this article about how terrible SWAT teams are, starts out with discussiong an event in which an under-trained, improperly equipped multi agency narcotics crew served a warrant and things went downhill fast. This is my shocked face.

 

There are plenty of lessons to be learned from that event, but the warrant service he starts his article with was not a SWAT issue. I know that to most journalists, a raid jacket that says "Police" is equal to "SWAT, but that is simply not the case. When non-SWAT investigative units with neither equipment, standards, nor training are involved in operations far over their heads bad things have a tendency to happen.

 

Like it or not, we do have a class of serious criminals who present a hell of a risk in this country. And, lets face it, enforcing the Law is not a people pleasing business, it is a compliance business. There are tasks that require a different level of preparation, and different skill sets. There can be no doubt for the need of well trained, highly motivated cops who do not particpate in community stroking. With the evisceration of the patrol function - affirmative action, productivity, lowering of standards, as well as the non-confrontational bent that most departments follow, the need for tactical teams is not a luxury, but an absolute necessity.

 

As a member of a SWAT team I'd like to believe that other SWAT teams in this country are held to a higher standard, and I know many that truly are - I also know some that are straight up clowns. I know that a fair number of these "teams" are teams in name only, and posses neither the quality, professionalism or training to conduct any type of policing, but, let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

Yes, there have been a few pretty clear errors of judgment, and maybe worse. The guys doing this job are still human beings, capable of mistakes, lapses in judgement, and plain bad luck. Why don't we treat their mistakes like every other profession - Drs, clergy, teachers, carpenters, lawyers, mechanics, etc... gets treated when they screw up. Deal with those situations as the bad occasional incidents they are, and be done with it. Hammer the hell out of people who make BS reports and lie to use LE to "prank" or take revenge on someone ie: SWATTing.

 

Regarding the Department of Education:

 

First, let me say that I dont believe the Dept Of Education has their own SWAT team. See above - a reporter sees a windbreaker with "Police" on it or a Cop with a rifle and it is automatically a SWAT guy. (Side note: I also think it's funny that we gnash our teeth and wring our hands about how often the media gets "it" wrong about certain things, but other topics are swallowed whole and with vigor. Not an ounce of the critical thinking we normally apply to their articles )

 

Now, why the Dept. Of Education needs a budget for arms, ammo, and training.

 

Most Fed agencies have criminal investigators within their ranks. They are responsible not only for internal investigations but are also farmed out to Joint Task Forces so that their expertise (subject matter experts) can be utilized, which results in more efficient investigations and prosecutions. Not every Cop/investigator can know all the nuances of all the laws in all the agencies/departments in the nation. Some of the specialized knowledge of other Government entities is so specific to their field of endeavor that one simply cannot be up to speed on what they do as a general investigator/Police.

 

If you are investigating an environmental crime do you want the EPA or the SS investigating? Or how about the EPA investigates an environmental disaster that takes place on the highway, should the Dept. of Transportation help, or let the EPA go it alone? There is a problem with a nuke plant? Should the Department of Energy send some one to assist or do the State Police have it all under control?

 

Most non-federal agencies can not enforce federal law on their own. They can only do it if cross appointed and/or they are part of a joint task force. This will vary from state to state, but is generally true. For example, note the difference between detaining on a federal arrest warrant and a search warrant service or on-view PC based arrest. There are a lot of federal departments with their own LE functions, in part due to "subject matter expert" issues i described above and in part due to limited authority.

 

Personally, limited and fragmented authority is our friend from a civil rights viewpoint. One of the worst thing that I can think of in terms of creating a system without adequate checks and balances would be a federal entity that looks like a really big state police entity. Would you want to see the DOJ doing anything in obscure areas of the law without the assistance of an agency with expertise in that area?

 

The education people may end up dealing with pretty big dollar amounts as most of the small time/deadbeat students kind of stuff is done as civil collection anyway.

[SgtToadette 59]

I've been reading about this topic and seen a few interviews with the author of the book in question. I have also avoided posting it here because anytime the topic comes up is devolves into ad hominems and disrespectful banter.

 

That said, I think a lot of the complaining about "warrior cops" is superficial and at the end of the day hypocritical. For example:

 

We want our police to be better trained to avoid situations exemplified by the LAPD with Chris Dorner and the NYPD near the Empire State Building.

 

We want our police to remain on the cutting edge of small arms technology to avoid situations like the West Hollywood shootout.

 

Who are we to complain when they start adopting training and equipment from the best source available: the military?

 

Now, with that said, I think that police need to be...I'll reluctantly use the word...humbled. I have seen too many examples of police overstepping their bounds. I understand the concept of bad apples spoiling the bunch. With YouTube and the like, it's going to be easier for isolated cases to spread virally and create false impressions. I get it.

 

However, police are not infallible. I have heard many justifications from LEOs here and elsewhere that they have been numbed by the dregs of society. That because they deal with the worst everyday they lose sight of the good. Well, identifying the problem is certainly the first step in fixing it, so I am grateful for the self-reflection. But, to take a quote from Quantum of Solace: "When you can't tell your friends from your enemies, it's time to go."

 

The police exist for the purpose of protecting the public and enforcing the laws. When I see examples of police trying to circumvent restrictions deigned to protect the rights of the citizenry it strikes a nerve. Policing isn't a game. It's serious business. You sign up knowing the dangers. It is acknowledged and accepted. That is your problem and not mine as a citizen. The job is inherently difficult, as it should be.

 

Intentionally abusing drug dogs by creating false positives so as to override the need for consent is wrong.

 

Intimidating clearly innocent people into surrendering their rights is wrong.

 

Arresting people for 'resisting arrest' is wrong.

 

I hope people don't read this thinking I am in any way against police. That is hardly the case. I am a Criminal Justice major looking to become a cop myself. I am simply for increased responsibility, integrity, and oversight. I will continue to support giving police the resources the need to do their jobs the best they can, but I will also continue to support efforts to ensure that police do no exceed their bounds. I would hope that when a bad apple rears its ugly head, that LEOs and citizens alike will seek to be rid of them (beyond a few weeks paid leave).

[Nick T 4]

If you think cops are "para military" organization, you are absolutely correct. We have always been that way. We wear uniforms, have a chain of command, salute and so-forth. And if you believe we are militarized now, you are ignorant of police history. You only have to go back to the 1920's and 30's to see the reality of life then.

 

So, this article about how terrible SWAT teams are, starts out with discussiong an event in which an under-trained, improperly equipped multi agency narcotics crew served a warrant and things went downhill fast. This is my shocked face.

 

There are plenty of lessons to be learned from that event, but the warrant service he starts his article with was not a SWAT issue. I know that to most journalists, a raid jacket that says "Police" is equal to "SWAT, but that is simply not the case. When non-SWAT investigative units with neither equipment, standards, nor training are involved in operations far over their heads bad things have a tendency to happen.

 

Like it or not, we do have a class of serious criminals who present a hell of a risk in this country. And, lets face it, enforcing the Law is not a people pleasing business, it is a compliance business. There are tasks that require a different level of preparation, and different skill sets. There can be no doubt for the need of well trained, highly motivated cops who do not particpate in community stroking. With the evisceration of the patrol function - affirmative action, productivity, lowering of standards, as well as the non-confrontational bent that most departments follow, the need for tactical teams is not a luxury, but an absolute necessity.

 

As a member of a SWAT team I'd like to believe that other SWAT teams in this country are held to a higher standard, and I know many that truly are - I also know some that are straight up clowns. I know that a fair number of these "teams" are teams in name only, and posses neither the quality, professionalism or training to conduct any type of policing, but, let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

Yes, there have been a few pretty clear errors of judgment, and maybe worse. The guys doing this job are still human beings, capable of mistakes, lapses in judgement, and plain bad luck. Why don't we treat their mistakes like every other profession - Drs, clergy, teachers, carpenters, lawyers, mechanics, etc... gets treated when they screw up. Deal with those situations as the bad occasional incidents they are, and be done with it. Hammer the hell out of people who make BS reports and lie to use LE to "prank" or take revenge on someone ie: SWATTing.

 

Regarding the Department of Education:

 

First, let me say that I dont believe the Dept Of Education has their own SWAT team. See above - a reporter sees a windbreaker with "Police" on it or a Cop with a rifle and it is automatically a SWAT guy. (Side note: I also think it's funny that we gnash our teeth and wring our hands about how often the media gets "it" wrong about certain things, but other topics are swallowed whole and with vigor. Not an ounce of the critical thinking we normally apply to their articles )

 

Now, why the Dept. Of Education needs a budget for arms, ammo, and training.

 

Most Fed agencies have criminal investigators within their ranks. They are responsible not only for internal investigations but are also farmed out to Joint Task Forces so that their expertise (subject matter experts) can be utilized, which results in more efficient investigations and prosecutions. Not every Cop/investigator can know all the nuances of all the laws in all the agencies/departments in the nation. Some of the specialized knowledge of other Government entities is so specific to their field of endeavor that one simply cannot be up to speed on what they do as a general investigator/Police.

 

If you are investigating an environmental crime do you want the EPA or the SS investigating? Or how about the EPA investigates an environmental disaster that takes place on the highway, should the Dept. of Transportation help, or let the EPA go it alone? There is a problem with a nuke plant? Should the Department of Energy send some one to assist or do the State Police have it all under control?

 

Most non-federal agencies can not enforce federal law on their own. They can only do it if cross appointed and/or they are part of a joint task force. This will vary from state to state, but is generally true. For example, note the difference between detaining on a federal arrest warrant and a search warrant service or on-view PC based arrest. There are a lot of federal departments with their own LE functions, in part due to "subject matter expert" issues i described above and in part due to limited authority.

 

Personally, limited and fragmented authority is our friend from a civil rights viewpoint. One of the worst thing that I can think of in terms of creating a system without adequate checks and balances would be a federal entity that looks like a really big state police entity. Would you want to see the DOJ doing anything in obscure areas of the law without the assistance of an agency with expertise in that area?

 

The education people may end up dealing with pretty big dollar amounts as most of the small time/deadbeat students kind of stuff is done as civil collection anyway.

Best way to put it bro

[W2MC 1,699]

Prince Georges Co settled with Mayor Calvo a few days before the case went to trial...

 

 

 

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/crime-scene/ruben-castaneda/pr-georges-settles-lawsuit-in.html

[ChrisJM981 924]

 I would hope that when a bad apple rears its ugly head, that LEOs and citizens alike will seek to be rid of them (beyond a few weeks paid leave).

 

 

As a member of a SWAT team I'd like to believe that other SWAT teams in this country are held to a higher standard, and I know many that truly are - I also know some that are straight up clowns. I know that a fair number of these "teams" are teams in name only, and posses neither the quality, professionalism or training to conduct any type of policing, but, let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

Yes, there have been a few pretty clear errors of judgment, and maybe worse. The guys doing this job are still human beings, capable of mistakes, lapses in judgement, and plain bad luck. Why don't we treat their mistakes like every other profession - Drs, clergy, teachers, carpenters, lawyers, mechanics, etc... gets treated when they screw up. Deal with those situations as the bad occasional incidents they are, and be done with it. Hammer the hell out of people who make BS reports and lie to use LE to "prank" or take revenge on someone ie: SWATTing.

 

Regarding the Department of Education:

 

First, let me say that I dont believe the Dept Of Education has their own SWAT team. See above - a reporter sees a windbreaker with "Police" on it or a Cop with a rifle and it is automatically a SWAT guy. (Side note: I also think it's funny that we gnash our teeth and wring our hands about how often the media gets "it" wrong about certain things, but other topics are swallowed whole and with vigor. Not an ounce of the critical thinking we normally apply to their articles )

 

 

Concerning bad apples, I know all about working with subpar coworkers. Friends of the politically connected, nepotism, and eoe hires are normally where problematic employees come from. The union is obligated to defend these people when they get brought up on internal charges, and more often than not they get either a brief suspension or no disciplinary action is taken. These people would most likely be ex-employees or facing criminal charges if they worked anywhere else. Oh and I almost forgot to mention that when problematic employees are identified by instructors during their training period, often my employer fails to act upon recommendations to terminate trainees.

 

There are very few objective journalists. When either an individual or the news outlet the individual works for has a preformulated direction for an article to take, you can be fairly positive that facts and circumstances will be twisted and/or left out to lead to the predetermined conclusion the "author" is  attempting to convey.

[ChrisJM981 924]

Browsing the local news I found this gem: http://www.nj.com/passaic-county/index.ssf/2013/07/hawthorne_standoff_ends_peacefully.html#incart_river_default

 

 

Hawthorne police called in a SWAT Team Saturday morning after receiving a call that a borough man, with a history of injuring himself, was threatening to do so again, according to a report on northjersey.com.

Michael Cahill, 38, allegedly broke into his parents home and threatened himself before his parents called police, according to the report.

Police Chief Richard McAuliffe told northjersey.com that the Swat Team was called "not only for our safety but for his."

When they arrived on scene, police escorted Cahill's parents from the home and then went door-to-door evacuating neighbors.

The SWAT Team brough an armored vehicle, according to northjersey.com, and more than a dozen sheriff’s deputies and officers from the Hawthorne, Glen Rock and North Haledon police departments aimed their rifles and shotguns at the house.

Negotiators with the sheriff’s office called Cahill on his cell phone and talked him into surrendering, the report said. He was arrested and taken to St. Joseph’s Hospital in Paterson for psychiatric evaluation.

 

A man threatens himself, so for his safety they brought in an armored car and pointed rifles at him?

[diamondd817 827]

Browsing the local news I found this gem: http://www.nj.com/passaic-county/index.ssf/2013/07/hawthorne_standoff_ends_peacefully.html#incart_river_default

 

 

A man threatens himself, so for his safety they brought in an armored car and pointed rifles at him?

A swat team + armored vehicle + more than a dozen sheriff's deputies and officers + who knows how many more government employees + dozens of government vehicle (left running). All for one person. Who is paying for all this? Residents of NJ are ok with their tax money being wasted like this? Im not.

 

Any normal State it would have had 2 officers show up and it would have been over.

[BlueLineFish 615]

The ignorance in the two posts above me is staggering. A mentally deranged man may not just look to hurt himself. He is irrational and does irrational things. You have a team ready for whatever. Plus they are trained with far more less lethal tactics than your everyday officer.

 

Second no edp call is going to be handled by just two officers. You have no clue on tactics so stop speaking about them. Maybe in the police movies you watch where two cops can do everything. That's not the real world. Emotionally disturbed calls always get a larger number of officers.

[Combat Auto 174]

Everyone wants a strong, highly trained PD, but it needs to be extreemly balanced with ethical behavior, extreem visiblity, airing on the side of not pointing a gun at a civy unless fully warented...My experiences with Cops has been largely very good. I had one experience maybe 15 years ago when I got pulled over on the NJ parkway in toms river and the your wise-ass cop was trying to pick a fight with me - nasty. A few years later a bunch of them from that area were in trouble for some sort of abusive behavior.

 

There seems to be more stories lately of cops pointing guns at people for no good reason - some posted on this forum. Maybe the cops are watching too many cop shows - I don't know...I personally do not want a gun pointed at me for a traffic violation, or any other half-ass reason...I don't have any hard data on this, but watching the real-life Cop shows (the ones where they video a real cop during the day) I too often see  a gun pointed at someone for things like prostitution, smoking pot, etc. -I cetainly don't condone any of these activities but it is an eye-opener when cops go right-up to the edge of deadly force...

 

When a government agancy and its agents literally have life and death power over citizens, it needs to be watched 24X7. Cameras, internal affairs, other watch-gropus, etc. The few % bad apples need to weeded out. I think if any cop has an issue with being watched they should find another profession. As cops they get responsibilities and privilages (eg carry permit) well beyond ordinary citizens. With that goes (or should) the extra scrutany.

 

On a final note, in the wide spectrum of choices as to what civilians should be allowed to arm themselves with. My starting view is that everything your local police has you should be able to legally have. That is balance. After-all, if the cops need it to protect them selves - I might too.

[PDM 91]

Here's the thing. I have no problem with swat teams, but we need personal accountability. A team kicks in the wrong door without a knock and clear identification, every single member of the team is personally liable, criminally and civilly, for any personal injury or property damage. Oh, and if the innocent homeowner takes out a few of the cops because he thinks his home is being invaded he should have immunity from prosecution. How would anyone on this board react if his front door is kicked in In the middle of the night with no knock or police identifying themselves? That's what I thought.

[pjd832 146]

.......... How would anyone on this board react if his front door is kicked in In the middle of the night with no knock or police identifying themselves? That's what I thought.

No offense but I'd venture to say 97+/-% would drop a steamy chalupa in their tactical pajamas as opposed to possessing the skill set to come from a dead sleep to firefight in the seconds it took for the entry team to have them proned out at gunpoint.....

 

And swat teams don't identify themselves as Leo upon entry?

[Underdog 1,593]

There shouldn't be warrior cops without warrior citizens.  The private individual should be able to own just about anything issued to a average cop.

[PDM 91]

It depends. If you have a gun safe next to your bed and your kids are in the next bedroom and your door is kicked in I have no doubt that the people with 40 or 50 or more hours of tactical training - and many of us do - you just might get to your firearm and react. And that would be a tragedy all around. If you read the article you'd see that many swat teams do no knock entries even though they may be illegal.

[Underdog 1,593]

So, then the answer would be NOT to have Warrior Cops?  If police are going to be para-military, then they better have the training, etc.  before they attempt something like that.  IE, they should have the right house.  Storming the place should be the last resort, etc. 

[bhunted 887]

It's not the team that makes the decision. The chain of command does. Intel comes from the top. The team performs as directed. The team leader either has the intel and/or has it passed down to him/her be it correct or not.

 

 

Sent from John's iPad 2 via Tapatalk HD

Typos courtesy Apple...

[Vlad G 345]

So .. I wonder how we ever survived before SWAT teams? I mean I think we still had police, and crime, and warrants to be served and suicidal people, but I don't recall massive disasters from not having these issues dealt by armored vehicle.

 

Mind you, there is a reason and a place for SWAT, but the problem is that once you have it, you are tempted to use it a lot more then you should because you need to justify the expense.  And if you don't have a formal SWAT team then you still swarm grandma with 15+ officers because her wifi was open.

 

The claims that police was always militarized are false. I think younger officers may think it is true, but I have a number of retired officers in my family and every single one of them can not believe what the police forces have been turned into compared to days past. The police forces of the 20s and 30s were not militarized, the federal police forces were.  I can argue that older police uniforms were far more akin to those of fireman and even milk delivery man, then combat troops, and today the difference is non-existent.  NJ is particularly egregious about this, just look at our state trooper formal uniform.

[PDM 91]

Whoever makes the decision to kick in a door without a knock should have his ass on the line. The police need to be held accountable to their masters -- the public.

[Sticky Grips 4]

I just posted this same article in the politics section. I think no-knock warrant use is out of control.

[Pythagoras 2]

So .. I wonder how we ever survived before SWAT teams? I mean I think we still had police, and crime, and warrants to be served and suicidal people, but I don't recall massive disasters from not having these issues dealt by armored vehicle.

 

Mind you, there is a reason and a place for SWAT, but the problem is that once you have it, you are tempted to use it a lot more then you should because you need to justify the expense.  And if you don't have a formal SWAT team then you still swarm grandma with 15+ officers because her wifi was open.

This.

[diamondd817 827]

You have no clue on tactics so stop speaking about them.

One needs not to be an expert in police tactics to see this is excessive and a waste of taxpayers money. You being a payer of sky high NJ taxes should be concerned too.

 

How much do you think this call cost taxpayers? $100,000? More? What's your take?

[jrfly3006 42]

One needs not to be an expert in police tactics to see this is excessive and a waste of taxpayers money. You being a payer of sky high NJ taxes should be concerned too.

How much do you think this call cost taxpayers? $100,000? More? What's your take?

quite honestly neither you or I know the history of this guy or what was reported about him this time.. Many similar situations have turned into disasters because of a lack of response..if the chief deemed it necessary then im prettty sure the situation met some criteria..dont forget that after its over the Chief is gonna have a poop ton of paperwork, debriefs and explaining to do about the response.. If youre gonna do something .. Do it right..whatever the cost.. (I dont know where you came up with 100k.).. If it was the cost of keeping officers and suspect alive .. Then its worth it.. Towns spend $$$ on much less important things

[RUTGERS95 890]

agree with vlad and pdm......

 

also, police have NEVER more paramilitary than they are today.  The reason they are so paramilitary and excessive is because they were not

[Barms 98]

i'm impressed this thread has stayed civil..  I posted the article yesterday morning then deleted it thinking it would go down the tubes fast.