loomer wrote:Oddly, here in Australia, we actually had a lot of dynamic entry drug-raids back in the 90s, against Asian gangs selling heroin. They didn't require poorly trained paramilitary forces - they required detectives and a battering ram and that was it. I guess my question is - for Kazie, in particular - why the fuck were we able to do it safe and efficiently with the barest force possible and you guys can't do it right with goddamn SWAT teams?
(loomer, I get a bit argumentative in this post, and I want you to know I'm not arguing against you but rather in general; we probably agree a lot on this matter.)
This is a result of the War On Drugs, in which seizing some dope is more important than safeguarding the lives of suspects, bystanders, and yes, fellow police officers. This is the result of a kind of corruption worse than some crook slipping an officer some cash to look the other way - the corruption of power and glory, fostered by government officials and politicians looking to make their name with numbers showing they're "winning the war on drugs" and feeding police departments arsenals of bigger weapons and revised legislation to help them assume the role of front-line combatants.
Go back to the article linked on the first page, the one from the libertarian rag; it cites
Generation Kill, which highlighted that the worst shitheads Evan Wright saw in Iraq were the reservists of whom a substantial number were police officers and DEA agents.
No, not every cop is corrupt; yes, there are many noble and gallant law enforcement officers. But consider the role of the SWAT team; they dress up and arm themselves in the department's most prestigious equipment, and their job is to either take down the most violent offenders, or (increasingly) to break down doors and storm a residence. These are relatively high-risk duties, but they are also the most aggressive. And SWAT is specialized towards this role. What personality types do you believe will be most attracted to becoming part of a SWAT unit? Hell, imagine you're a cop, you want to help people, you're gung-ho about the
To Protect And Serve motto,
you want to be the best asset to your community that you can be as a police officer. Would you really want to volunteer for a SWAT team? Do you think you'd get the most satisfaction out of that?
(And yes, I know, not everyone on a SWAT team is like that; what I'm suggesting is that certain personality types may be disproportionately represented.)
The existence and use of SWAT teams is not in and of itself unacceptable; there are situations which can call for officers who are more heavily armed and combat trained than your average beat cop, but which do not call for deploying the National Guard. The use of violent entry is not in and of itself unacceptable; there exist conditions where the risks are called for. At issue is the
excessive use (some might say
casual or
routine use) of such tactics, which carries risks which are unacceptable in certain circumstances.
Ultimately, there really needs to be stronger oversight, a civilian authority that can alter policy to attempt to prevent further abuses or errors in judgment and tactics, and can forcefully insist on the investigation of questionable incidents. The mayor of a city or the elected sheriff/commissioner of a county would probably be responsible for such a thing, so either the elected official wasn't doing their job, and/or the people failed to forcefully demand and elect someone who would do that job. I suppose I'm saying there's no one person that holds all of the blame, but similarly we all share a measure of the blame.
Except for the children. Imagine being in your room and a bullet rips through your neck and you bleed out on the floor, without the chance to fall in love or do any of the things you dreamed about. What the fuck, man.
