Skip to main content

Feature: Reining in SWAT -- Towards Effective Oversight of Paramilitary Police Units

Submitted by Phillip Smith on (Issue #634)

As is periodically the case, law enforcement SWAT teams have once again come under the harsh gaze of a public outraged and puzzled by their excesses. First, it was the February SWAT raid on a Columbia, Missouri, home where police shot two dogs, killing one, as the suspect, his wife, and young son cowered. Police said they were looking for a dealer-sized stash of marijuana, but found only a pipe with residues. When police video of that raid hit the Internet and went viral this month, the public anger was palpable, especially in Columbia.

SWAT team, Contra Costa County, California
Then came a botched SWAT raid in Georgia -- not a forced entry, but otherwise highly aggressive, and directed at the wrong building -- that left a 76-year-old woman hospitalized with a heart attack.

And then came the tragedy in Detroit two weeks ago, where a member of a Detroit Police SWAT team killed seven-year-old Aiyana Jones as she slept on a living room couch. Allegedly, the officer had a tussle with the girl's grandmother as he charged through the door after a flash-bang grenade was thrown through the window, and the gun discharged accidentally, though the account has been disputed by the family's attorney. In this instance, police were not looking for drugs but for a murder suspect. He was later found in another apartment in the same house. Again, the public dismay and anger was palpable.

Botched (wrong address or wrong person) raids or raids where it appears excessive force has been used are certainly not a new phenomenon, as journalist Radley Balko documented in his 2006 study, "Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Policing in America." But most raids gone bad do not get such wide public or media attention.

The victims often are poor, or non-white, or both. Or -- worse yet -- they are criminal suspects, who generally generate little sympathy, even when they are abused.

And while they were originally created to handle very special problems -- terrorist incidents, hostage situations, and the like -- there just aren't that many of those. As a result the use of SWAT has seen "mission creep," where SWAT teams are now routinely called out to serve search warrants, particularly in drug cases. In 1980, 2,884 SWAT deployments were recorded nationwide; the number today is estimated by experts at 50,000 annually or more.

The sheer normality of SWAT teams doing drug raids now, as well the status of their victims, has resulted in effective immunity and impunity for SWAT teams that commit errors or engage in unnecessary force. Most of the time when a raid goes bad, nothing happens.

It seems to take an especially outrageous incident, like Columbia or Detroit, to inspire public concern, and even then, it is the citizenry and perhaps part of elected officialdom against the powerful law enforcement establishment. Creating effective oversight over SWAT teams and their paramilitary raids is not easy -- but it can be done, or at least started.

The now infamous 2008 raid on the home of Berwyn Heights, Maryland, Mayor Cheye Calvo by a Prince Georges County Police SWAT team is a case in point. In that raid, police were tracking a package they knew contained marijuana, and once it was delivered to Calvo's house and taken inside, the SWAT team rushed in, manhandled Calvo and his mother-in-law and shot and killed Calvo's two dogs.

But further investigation showed the Calvos were doubly victimized, not criminals. They were victims of drug dealers who would send packages to unknowing addresses, then pick them up after they were left by the delivery man. And they were the victims of a SWAT team run amok.

SWAT team, Pasadena, Texas
But Prince Georges SWAT hit the wrong guy when it Calvo's house, and not just because Calvo and his mother-in-law and his dogs were innocent victims. Calvo was not just an upstanding member of the community -- he was the mayor of his town. And beyond that, his former day job with the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) gave him both personal connections to legislators and the knowledge to work the system.

Prodded by Calvo and others, the Maryland legislature last year passed a bill making it the first state to make any attempt to rein in SWAT. That bill requires each agency with a SWAT team to file annual reports detailing their activities and the results of their raids. The effort was opposed by law enforcement, of course, but legislators were swayed by hours of gut-wrenching testimony from raid victims.

"It was the telling of the stories of a number of people who had suffered either botched or ill-advised raids," Calvo explained to Drug War Chronicle. "It happens so often, and the stories don't get told in a meaningful way, but my incident made such wide headlines that people called me reaching out, and once those circles developed, we were able to get some political momentum," he recalled.

"I happened to be in a unique position," he said. "Through my experience at NCSL, I knew a lot of legislators and worked with the Judiciary Committee in Maryland to get a bill drafted. When we had hearings, it wasn't just one or two stories, probably more like a dozen, including people we didn't know about, but who just showed up to tell their stories. There was a wrong house raid with a dog killed, there was a warrant served at a bad address, a mother whose house was raided after her son was caught with a gram of marijuana, there was a triple no-knock raid at three homes with the same name on all three, there was a former member of the judiciary committee whose mother's home was raided because police were looking for a relative. They kicked in her door and knocked her to the ground," Calvo recalled.

"Each story helped connect the dots," he explained. "Those stories made a powerful case. We were not saying the Assembly should micromanage the police, but we wanted to shine a light on what was happening. The first step was making people aware, and getting the SWAT data makes tangible and comprehensive what is otherwise anecdotal."

Although the first formal report on Maryland SWAT raids is not due until this fall, preliminary numbers from the first six months of reporting have already generated more stories in the press and kept the issue alive. And they provide grist for the reform mill.

"It's not just the number of raids, it's that 92% of them are for search warrants, not hostage situations or bank robberies or the like," said Calvo. "It's that two times out of three, they kick in the door. It's that in some jurisdictions -- Prince Georges, Anne Arundel, Annapolis -- the majority of deployments are for misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies. Prince Georges had 105 raids against nonviolent offenders in six months, and that speaks to deeper policy problems. Baltimore County deployed only once for a nonviolent offense. That's more a model of professionalism."

Calvo said he plans to use the full year's worth of SWAT raid reporting due this fall to return to Annapolis to push for further reforms. "The legislature could impose training standards or other statewide protocols," he said. "It could impose more transparency. A full year of data will be helpful with that. Hopefully, the reporting requirement passed last year will end up being just the first step in a multi-step process to insert some better judgment into the process for when these paramilitary units are deployed."

PolitickerMD cartoon about the Calvo raid
The dog-killing SWAT raid in Columbia, Missouri, has also resulted in activism aimed at reining in SWAT, and it has already had an impact. Under withering public criticism, Columbia Police Chief Ken Burton quickly instituted changes in the SWAT team's command and control structure and when and how it could be used. He also came out for marijuana legalization, saying he believed many police would be happy to not have to enforce pot prohibition.

The activism is continuing, however. "There is a lot going on in response to that raid," said Columbia attorney Dan Viets, a member of the board of national NORML. "The ACLU and NORML are involved, but so are groups of citizens who have not been activists before. And our police chief has been pretty responsive -- he doesn't have that bunker mentality that so many cops do," Viets said.

"For us, it's not so much SWAT as the use of search warrants for nonviolent crimes. Whether they have SWAT on the back of their jackets or not, they still do the same brutal stuff," the defense attorney continued. "The execution of a search warrant is almost always a violent act, it's a home invasion. It isn't that they're SWAT that matters, it's the fact that they engage in violence in the execution of those search warrants," he said.

"We are trying to suggest that police not use search warrants for nonviolent crime," said Viets. "They can rely on the tried and true: Send in an informer to do a controlled buy, then get an arrest warrant. Even the chief has said that they would try to arrest people outside their homes."

Similar outrage and activism is occurring in Detroit, where anti-police sentiments were loudly voiced in the days after the killing of Aiyana Jones. Police brutality activists usually isolated in their complaining are being joined by everyday citizens. The Detroit City Council is investigating. The Rev. Al Sharpton spoke at Jones' funeral. But whether the uproar results in a reformed SWAT policy remains to be seen.

"The death of that girl in Detroit was an inevitable result of the broad use of these things," said Calvo. "When you're doing 50,000 or 75,000 SWAT raids a year, it will eventually happen."

"Whatever one thinks about using SWAT tactics when looking for a murder suspect, the results in Detroit show how dangerously volatile these tactics really are," said Dave Borden, executive director of, who is also the moving force behind the Americans for SWAT Reform web site and campaign. "There is every reason to believe that conducting a late night raid and detonating flash bang grenades led to the physical contact between the woman and the officer in which the gun discharged, killing the girl. That's all the more reason to avoid those tactics wherever possible, certainly in routine drug search warrants."

"In Detroit, they were going after a murder suspect, but there are a whole lot of questions about their tactical intelligence," said criminologist David Klinger, a former LAPD and Redmond, Washington, police officer and author of "Into the Kill Zone: a Cop's Eye View of Deadly Force," who now works for the Police Executive Research Forum. "Did they know there were children present? Why didn't they just do a contain and call?" where police secure the perimeter and tell the suspect to come outside, he asked.

While sending in the SWAT team in Detroit may be justified, said Klinger, the use of SWAT for small-time drug raids is not. "If you're sending in a SWAT team for a small amount of marijuana, that doesn't make sense," said Klinger. "There are some domestic agencies that don't understand that they should be utilizing some sort of threat assessment. That's one of the big issues regardless of who has oversight. A lot of it is a training issue about when SWAT should be utilized."

There are different pressure points where reformers can attempt to get some control over SWAT deployments. They range from the departmental level, to city hall or the county government, to the state house, and to Congress.

"The first level of oversight should be within the agency, whether it's the chief or some other officer with oversight over SWAT," said Klinger. "You need to make sure they have appropriate command and control and supervision, appropriate surveillance, tactical intelligence, and evidence of something out of the usual as opposed to just 'there's drugs there.' There needs to be a threat matrix done -- are there unusual fortifications, is there a history of violence, are weapons present other than for self protection?"

Neill Franklin is a former Maryland police officer with SWAT experience. He is also the incoming head of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). For Franklin, SWAT has limited legitimate uses, but aggressive, paramilitarized policing has gone too far. He blames the war on drugs.

"Back in the 1970s and 1980s, we didn't use SWAT teams to conduct search warrants unless it was a truly documented violent organization," he said. "As the drug war escalated, we started using SWAT to execute drug-related warrants. When I first started as an undercover officer, the narcotics team executed the warrant, along with two or three uniformed officers, but not with the high-powered weapons and force we use today. The drug war is the reason for using these teams and the driving force behind them," said the former narc.

"Because police have become accustomed to serving so many warrants, they've also become accustomed to using SWAT for every warrant," said Franklin. "In the past, they were more selective. You had to provide the proper intel and articulate why a SWAT team was needed, what was the history of violence, what was the prospect of violence. Some departments now are very strict -- you have to ID the house and the people you're after, you have to photograph the house and the door you're going to go through, you have to know who should be in that house, what special circumstances may be involved, and whether there are children or animals in the house -- but now, I think a lot of departments aren't doing the proper intel."

"You need a threat matrix that talks about unusual weapons," said Klinger. "Does some guy have an automatic shotgun? Is he a major dealer? That's when you might want to send in SWAT, but it's not a good idea to routinely use SWAT."

In addition to doing surveillance and gathering intelligence, police need to ensure they are using the right personnel for SWAT teams, said Franklin, alluding to the fact that such teams are often accused of having a "cowboy" mentality. "These guys are self-selected and handpicked," he said. "You need people in good physical shape, but you have to have a process for selecting the right people with the right personalities."

Franklin also pointed a finger at judges. "I think a lot of the time, judges give warrants out too easily," he said. "A lot of them are just boilerplate, already typed up; you just fill in the blanks and a little detail. They are too easy to draft and get approved by a judge. The judges need to be a bit more strict and ask some questions to ensure a no-knock warrant is justified."

But departmental policies are where to begin, Franklin said. "Policy is the critical point," said Franklin, "policy is the key. And maybe judges need to be involved in asking those policy questions. Are there kids in the home? Dogs? Special circumstances? Do you have photos? I don't think judges are asking enough questions, and there is too much rubber-stamping of warrants. The judges are too loose on this; they need to tighten up."

The next levels of oversight -- and opportunities for intervention -- are the local and state governments, said Klinger. "It generally stops with the mayor and city council, but now Maryland has a law where they have to report, and I don't have a problem with that. We are a representative republic, and the power of the police is very strong. The government operates by the consent of the governed, and the governed need to have information about what their police are doing. Why not?"

There is plenty of work that could be done at the state level, said Eric Sterling, head of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation (CJPF). "You could amend a state criminal procedure statute to require that a specialized kind of warrant would be needed to use a SWAT team. You could spell out particular things that had to be established, you might require additional verification of informant information beyond an ordinary search warrant, or specific evidence about possession of weapons and evidence about their connection to criminal activity, you could require higher degrees of confirmation about the address, you could require specific findings regarding the presence of children or the elderly, that a buy be done not by an informant but by a member of the law enforcement agency, that there be continuous surveillance of the property for some period before the raid takes place to verify who is present," Sterling said, ticking off a list of possibilities.

As Missouri attorney Viets noted above, it's not just SWAT, it is aggressive tactics like dynamic entry and no-knock raids that are also under scrutiny, whether done by SWAT or by other police units. It is those situations that are most dangerous for police and citizens, with the breaking down of doors, the yelling of commands, the flash-bangs, the confusion. And even the cops are talking about it.

"There is a big debate going on in the SWAT community," said Klinger. "Do you do a dynamic entry, or do you do something less? Some agencies will do a breach and hold, where they get through the front door, but stop there until they make contact with people inside. Another version is the 'contain and call-out', where they announce their presence and ask the people to come outside. Then, officers can carefully, slowly go through the place, and you know that if someone has a gun, he's after you. Sometimes we need to be aggressive, and there's nothing wrong with a dynamic entry, but you want to make sure you're using SWAT in the appropriate circumstances. We want to be minimally aggressive."

"It's those no-knock warrants, whether it's SWAT or not, where people tend to get hurt, where their animals are slaughtered," said Franklin. "That seems to be the norm now. You hear SWAT personnel joking about this all the time. If you know there's an animal in the house, why don't you just have Animal Control along? Unless that dog is so aggressive he's actually ripping people apart, he could be secured. Mostly they are just doing what they are supposed to do: barking and holding their ground."

[Ed: In many cases including the raid in Columbia, a warrant has nominally been served as a knock-and-announce, but the waiting is so short that it effectively equivalent to a no-knock. The term "dynamic entry" roughly applies to both kinds of situations, and "no-knock" is often used to refer to both kinds.]

"I don't know why they're shooting dogs," Klinger said with a hint of exasperation. "Unless they were being aggressive and attacking, you need to rethink what you're doing if you're shooting dogs. Just take a fire extinguisher with you and zap the dog with it. Shooting dogs unnecessarily suggests a lack of training about how to discern what is and is not a threat."

As long as the war on drugs continues, so will the issues around SWAT, no-knock raids, and search warrants. "The vast majority of these warrants are drug related," said Franklin. "The ultimate solution is ending prohibition. That would resolve so many issues."

Somewhat surprisingly, Klinger agreed. "We should just legalize drugs and call off the hounds, but if we're going to have drug prohibition, we have to be able to enforce it," he said. "If the rest of the polity says no to legalization, we can't have a regime where dopers just sit in their homes and do what they want. But if we are going to have the prohibition model, we need appropriate oversight over policing it."

Sterling pointed out some other pressure points for SWAT reform until we get to that day when drug prohibition is just a bad memory. "A private way of thinking about this is to use the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. to include in accrediting criterion better control or management of the way in which SWAT teams are used," said Sterling.

There are also reform possibilities at the federal level, Sterling said. "If you want to set national standards, Congress arguably has the power under the 14th Amendment in terms of equal protection to enforce the Fourth Amendment," he said. "You could provide that SWAT activity carried out outside the limits of such a special warrant could result in civil liability, denial of federal funds to the agency, or potential criminal penalties. There are examples of this in the wiretap law. It's very, very strict in its requirements about what law enforcement agencies have to do and it has very strict reporting requirements. There is certainly precedent in national law for how we regulate highly invasive, specialized law enforcement activities."

Sterling, a Maryland resident himself, said the Maryland SWAT reporting law passed after the Calvo raid shows political space can be created to support reform, but that it isn't easy. "It took raiding the mayor and killing his dogs and their being completely innocent white people to get relatively minor legislative action," he said. "The record keeping requirement is clearly a baby step toward challenging SWAT, and there was very decided knee-jerk law enforcement opposition to it."

It's going to take some organizing, he said. "You have to have a collection of groups deciding to make this an issue the way they made addressing the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity an issue. I'm not aware that this has developed yet, and perhaps this is something the drug reform community should be doing. We could take the lead in trying to raise this with more powerful political actors."

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.


Arlene Williams (not verified)

What country are we talking about? What era is this??? Are we in Nazi Germany under Hitler or the former Soviet Union under Stalin???Is this the gestapo ? In reference to Detroit, I was born there in 1937 and was always proud to be from this city which has seen better days. I have made my home in NY since 1962. Are we going backwards or forward? We must all stand together, regardless of our differences. There is no room for prejudice! We cannot tolerate these tactics in this country.I am a medical marijuana activist and will post this on my website and anywhere else that I can.

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 1:32pm Permalink
Thomas Jefferson (not verified)

Buried in the Defense Bill passed by Congress last December is an amendment that forbids police unions from negotiating with their respective city. The Federal government is sending you a message: "Clean up your act or the Federal government is going to institute emergency rules, where you're going to have to answer to a Military Handler.

So make up your mind, are you going to continue to act like a punk ass kid, or are you going to grow up and act your age?

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 2:40pm Permalink
don laface (not verified)

In reply to by Dan Fouts (not verified)

to ???...if you haven't figured what he meant about punk ass kids or're seriously lacking in the education part...are you a swatter by chance?

Sun, 05/30/2010 - 12:59pm Permalink
Jean Boyd (not verified)

In reply to by Thomas Jefferson (not verified)

I am Jean boyd in Spokane and I have seen the convoys and I gave them the peace sign. I was in a vehicle.The Good Feds are sending a message and I send it as well. I go there and tell them and I want to live. I am a peaceful person and a mom.
How long will the Swat team people and some are Security too, get before the military will stop them. I am praying hard and I went to the jail and the real police are working on it. I know they will resolve it soon. There is good and bad in everything and the good will overcome and I help a little.
They are slow. Slow to grow up. Some of us had to grow up at the age of two or three just because of a little drug and a war over the petty cr--. I will never be hurt again by any man or womanin any uniform or without uniform in any little or big town or city. I am home now on sick leave. I am going to see my mother. Let them throw the thugs out if they want to be so rough and people are watching. People who do not understand this situation need to stay out of it. They will actually try to stop me from peace work because they are worried. People be worried. Read your current events and understand. There are many good books...well I am talking to the choir, I never knew what that expression meant before.

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 5:33pm Permalink
Thomas Paine (not verified)

Since when did two wrongs make it right? There's no justification for abuse. None. EVER!

Free People have a moral imperative to resist evil and NOT give into it.

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 3:45pm Permalink
Jean Boyd (not verified)

In reply to by Thomas Paine (not verified)

Two wrongs always made a right in the USA of the 20th century. Moving right along into the age of Aquarius, the 21st Century and killing and maming is not allowed.

Sun, 05/30/2010 - 12:14am Permalink
Shoreline (not verified)

The Drug War is a war against America commited by Americans. We wouldn't allow Osama bin Laden, Saddam Huesein, or the Taliban to do this, why do we allow some other bozos the right to control our lives? Why have we allowed Nazi Americans to control our country and personal destinies? Those Americans that persecute others for their personal beliefs should themselves be persecuted and ostracized from the land of the free.

Ever wonder why German citizens were powerless to confront the aberrant beliefs of the Nazi party? Doesn't it seem like we're in the same boat, virtually powerless? Does it seem like America is trying to force this same agenda on the rest of the world, as well? Are Americans that believe in personal freedom being persecuted by other Americans who feel it is their destiny and within their power to control our lives? Ever feel like you were being forced to live up to a standard that someone else feels an American should be? Is this still the land of the free or are we just kidding ourselves? It's not the American government that made our country great, it was American people that believe in freedom that made our country great.

Remember George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and the "Big Brother" introduced therein? Well, we didn't get Big Brother, we got "Big Mother-#%&*&%". I'm not sure which is worse.

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 4:49pm Permalink
Jean Boyd (not verified)

In reply to by Shoreline (not verified)

A Soul Ja girl that I know well told me there will be absolute peace now and it is under control. Just a couple of stragglers and they got their number. Please be kind now. Remember LOVE, Peace and Freedom to speak up. I am a peaceful one. Care for you Anony...I know you are hurt in it all. Finally it is ended. How do they stop? There will be poppy tea and marijuana for you...Whatever you like... : )

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 6:03pm Permalink
Dan Simonds (not verified)

So I wonder what would happen if SWAT broke into a law abiding citizens home and got shot as they entered being mistaken for a bad guy. I have a weapon sitting right next to my chair and one by my bed and if ANYBODY came crashing through my door,they would go flying right back out. It seems to me that when SWAT breaks down the door of the wrong home,it would be considered "breaking and entering".And if they are armed,it would be even worse.

Fri, 05/28/2010 - 8:46pm Permalink
Moonrider (not verified)

In reply to by Dan Simonds (not verified)

google Corey Maye, Ryan Frederick and that poor old woman (sorry, I cannot at this moment recall her name) in Georgia, she ended up dead, the other two in prison.

I'm pro-choice on EVERYTHING!

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 5:41am Permalink
Jean Boyd (not verified)

In reply to by Dan Simonds (not verified)

I am no Soul ja girl, I am Hanjin China Shipping Home Marine. I know lots of other good Marines, like Hatsu and more. And many that are watching the situation. I have a hammer and it is in my tool box. Peter Paul and Mary said, "IF, I had a bell." "I would ring out free-e-dom, Justice, and Love between the brothers and the sisters....all-all...over this land.and and." I have chimes, I will ring chimes in the street. I quit wondering because I am Canadian-American, i guess I thought "What if I stand on the boarder, one foot in Canada, the other in Usa, what will I get for a couple of grams of pot? Good question; like yours. I will get none because I am no one.

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 5:14pm Permalink
newageblues (not verified)

but I wouldn't mind locking some politicians and drug warriors up in a room and not letting them out until they have a sober discussion of alcohol vs. cannabis with reformers. You know, like we were their fellow citizens, or something, who have a perfect right to know why alcohol users are elevated so far above cannabis users, despite their violent tendencies that aren't shared by cannabis users. The law is such a sick, stinking joke.

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 11:13am Permalink
Jean Boyd (not verified)

In reply to by newageblues (not verified)

The kids that had to turn to heroin because the drug war people at the top had to make a lot of money for their people. I am happy if they are happy, however let us have poppy tea and no more grief. Peace for all around. Junkies, pot users, brownie eaters, girl scouts and little kids who smell glue. PeACE FOR ALL HUMANS AND ANIMALS ON PLANET EARTH.
By the way, I like your comment.

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 5:00pm Permalink
John Adams (not verified)

The "punk ass kid" that I refer to are those duly sworn law enforcement officers that have evidently watched too many cop shows on TV when they were growing up.

"It's gotta be true if ya seen it on TV". It is the way of State Propaganda, American style.

Sat, 05/29/2010 - 5:22pm Permalink
Thomas Paine (not verified)

I don't use police anyway, and yes I HATE THEM because anytime I've been anytime I've been a victim of violent crime they've tried to bust ME! My fate is sealed for Senators Joe Lieberman & John Mc Cain are pursuing legislation to strip citizenship of those ACCUSED of terrorism (that's ME), for the Federal Government have been "opening my mail for inspection".

So Pal, (or is it officer pal?), there's a word for those that sell out their country. "The Tyrant is on the run".

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 7:26am Permalink
Lea (not verified)

As we get closer to ending this hideous and failed war on drugs there will most likely be a flood of Truly brainwashed individuals trying their best to comment on a subject they know little about.
Agree with Jean on being peaceful however, we must be vigilant and brave in the face of their continued lies. No more excuses.

Excellent article by the way, thank you.

Mon, 05/31/2010 - 2:29pm Permalink
sicntired (not verified)

[email protected],Vancouver,B.C.CanadaThe courts in BC Canada have ruled that the use of swat style raids is excessive and have already thrown out a case for this reason.The police have said that they will continue along with business as usual but this leaves any defense lawyer with a client busted by a SWAT team in a SWAT style raid with the ammunition needed to have the case tossed.The reasons given by police don't stand up to scrutiny either.I don't remember hearing about any officers being hurt in a drug raid unless it was in an accident or by another officer.The flushing of evidence makes no sense in a grow raid and any raid that results in a flushing of the evidence is a raid that doesn't require a swat team.The excessive use of this kind of tactic must be expensive and it has proven to be dangerous to pets and innocents as well as to the team members themselves.The fact that the numbers show that the number of this kind of raid has been blown out of proportion since the advent of the drug war says it all.These raids are,for the large part being used in drug raids,mostly on non violent drug users and low level pot sellers.Not the kind of people who require this kind of massive force to take them down.

Thu, 06/03/2010 - 11:55pm Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.