• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Has there ever been a SWAT team action that was justified?

radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Has there ever been a SWAT team action that was justified?

I can name two off the top of my head...

1. The SLA shoot-out in 1974... Symbionese Liberation Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2. The North Hollywood bank robbery and shoot-out in 1997... North Hollywood shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To be fair, I'm sure there are some others, but those are the two that pop into my head immediately. The vast majority of warrant searches and civil code enforcement does not qualify.
 
Overwhelming force insures that things go smoothly. Being purely reactionary is bad policy. An ounce of prevention...
 
What makes you say a warrant search does not apply? You going to walk up to a drug house, knock on the door and ask politely to execute a valid search warrant? I'm not going to funerals for the people I train to be police officers because you think you don't need a swat team to execute it.


radcen said:
Has there ever been a SWAT team action that was justified?

I can name two off the top of my head...

1. The SLA shoot-out in 1974... Symbionese Liberation Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2. The North Hollywood bank robbery and shoot-out in 1997... North Hollywood shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To be fair, I'm sure there are some others, but those are the two that pop into my head immediately. The vast majority of warrant searches and civil code enforcement does not qualify.
Click to expand...
 
radcen said:
Has there ever been a SWAT team action that was justified?

I can name two off the top of my head...

1. The SLA shoot-out in 1974... Symbionese Liberation Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2. The North Hollywood bank robbery and shoot-out in 1997... North Hollywood shootout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To be fair, I'm sure there are some others, but those are the two that pop into my head immediately. The vast majority of warrant searches and civil code enforcement does not qualify.
Click to expand...

Hostage situations, serving warrants on gangs/organized crime establishments and anywhere you do not want to give the alleged perps a chance to destroy evidence while Barney the deputy tries to politely and patiently serve the warrant. ;)
 
What would be safest for police in a raid is to fire grenades thru all the windows to insure everyone inside is dead before the police enter. Nothing matters in law enforcement than the safety of the officers.

That's what the slogan is "To Serve and Protect Ourselves" on police cars means.
 
Police being patient and polite certainly is an intolerable concept. Shoot first, ask questions later. Let God sort out the guilty and innocent. After all, all Americans are terror suspects anyway. :roll:
 
Overwhelming force does not insure things go smoothly, nor are any citizens allowed to use "overwhelming force" to insure that things "go smoothly."
 
joko104 said:
Police being patient and polite certainly is an intolerable concept. Shoot first, ask questions later. Let God sort out the guilty and innocent. After all, all Americans are terror suspects anyway. :roll:
Click to expand...

Only if you are on Obama's list, or sort of close and there is a typo. ;)
 
joko104 said:
Overwhelming force does not insure things go smoothly, nor are any citizens allowed to use "overwhelming force" to insure that things "go smoothly."
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree to a certain extent, Joko. Nothing will ever guarantee that things go smoothly, but overwhelming force has an enormous psychologically dampening effect on your adversary(s).
 
joko104 said:
Overwhelming force does not insure things go smoothly, nor are any citizens allowed to use "overwhelming force" to insure that things "go smoothly."
Click to expand...

Semantics, really?

Ok...

Overwhelming force makes it much less likely that things will get out of control. Being purely reactionary with assets is stupid. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and, in this case, greatly increases the safety of all involved.

As far as citizens go, feel free to use whatever force you want. Just be ready to pay the price.
 
joko104 said:
Police being patient and polite certainly is an intolerable concept. Shoot first, ask questions later. Let God sort out the guilty and innocent.
After all, all Americans are terror suspects anyway. :roll:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...





That is why we are all under constant surveillance.
 
ecofarm said:
Semantics, really?

Ok...

Overwhelming force makes it much less likely that things will get out of control. Being purely reactionary with assets is stupid. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and, in this case, greatly increases the safety of all involved.

As far as citizens go, feel free to use whatever force you want. Just be ready to pay the price.
Click to expand...

A price police don't have to pay.
 
Ray410 said:
Gotta disagree to a certain extent, Joko. Nothing will ever guarantee that things go smoothly, but overwhelming force has an enormous psychologically dampening effect on your adversary(s).
Click to expand...

You just stated one of the problems. That word "adversary."

Assuming you believe people should be treated by the police like "adversaries," which you seem to do, then there is still the reality that adversary is a 2-way word. Simply, with SWAT trained to treat everyone as an "adversary," it is entirely reasonable that people should see SWAT as their adversary too.
 
Last edited:
The OP suggested that SWAT tactics were nearly never valid. I disagree. I think they are valid when police have produced the evidence necessary to convince a judge that a warrant is necessary to search and sieze propert and suspects, and if the history of those suspects is found to be violent, if their actions are reasonably assumed to be violent - why not use a SWAT team? Why would you advocate anything less IN THAT CASE? I realize there are many cases where THAT isn't there and it can be over used and used poorly and wrong. My little department I worked on didn't have a SWAT team. We were it. We also had a rule for who went through a door first - single men. Now you know why I got married so early :)


joko104 said:
Police being patient and polite certainly is an intolerable concept. Shoot first, ask questions later. Let God sort out the guilty and innocent. After all, all Americans are terror suspects anyway. :roll:
Click to expand...
 
joko104 said:
A price police don't have to pay.
Click to expand...

What exactly is your objection?

That laws exist against killing cops?

That you cannot have overwhelming force? Of course you can. Hire a company of men, arm them, build bunkers and pay them. There... now you can overwhelm a SWAT team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom