Arizona SWAT Team Case Study

In the film, Do Not Resist, Craig Atkinson illustrates the use of military weapons being issued to police; in addition, the differences of “Warrior” and “Guardian” mentalities in law enforcement. A warrior mentality, as described in Atkinson’s film, is referred to the mental tendencies of soldiers, focusing more on protection. Warrior mentality in officers is used to combat extreme situations, like terrorists attacks or hostage situations. On the other hand, guardian mentalities are focused more on serving the community more than protecting. Law enforcement officers have both the warrior and guardian concepts, some officers have more warrior than guardian while others have guardian more than warrior. It is important to understand the difference between the mentalities. To understand we see which communities have higher crime rates than others and see the kind of funds spent on weaponizing police. With those factors one can deduce what law enforcement stations have the ‘warrior’ persona. At what point do we say “enough is enough”, and take away big brother’s toys? As a nation, we’re only strong united. As the great JFK so powerfully said during the Civil War, “United we stand, divided we fall.” Our division of law enforcers, people of color, political affiliation, and other factors will be this society's inevitable downfall. Today’s society’s annihilation is inevitable because we do not have the proper leaders to guide this nation into prosperity.

The Guyana Force does have a S.W.A.T team which stands for special weapons attack team, is similar to almost the exact same to the United States, in the sense of how they operate. The Kaieteur news describes how the SWAT team draws its members, Author states, “The SWAT team is made up of ranks drawn mainly from the Tactical Services Unit who underwent intense training under highly skilled trainers from the United States of America. The idea to establish the unit came at a time when Guyana was at the end of a debilitating crime wave, and there was a desperate need to ensure that there was an effective police unit to respond to violent crime” (Kaieteur News Online P3). When bringing up the topic of utilizing the SWAT team, some higher officials

When local police departments receive the new military gear, the tendency of them relying on it even in situations that do not have any real threat to the officer or their safety increases. This has been called "the rise of the warrior cop" (Balko). Social psychological research and anecdotal evidence from law enforcement specialists suggest that militarized policing can escalate situations that could have ended peacefully (Singal). There are already a lot of cases of police violence all around the country and not all of the country’s police forces have received military weaponry. There would be more cases like Michael Brown, Laquan McDonald, and Ronald Johnson, where it could have ended peacefully with the person in custody. Instead, they are dead and their deaths have fueled riots and protests all across the nation. These events bring with a lot of negative media for police departments and for the ones in charge of them. If officers were to carry more advanced and deadly weaponry, it will lead to more cases as these. This would be due to the "weapons effect" which states that the presence of weapons fuel more aggressive behavior (Singal). By having the local police carrying these heavy duty weapons, they will be more prone to exhibiting aggressive behavior and lead to more cases like the ones previously mentioned. Bruce Bartholow, a social psychologist at the

To begin with, Balko talks about how our police forces have intensified over the years. He introduces trends that have been continuing on for a very long time. These trends include police becoming more violent and using way more force. This is especially seen in the SWAT team. The SWAT team was initially created because of the killings in Austin, “[it] marked the birth date of the modern police SWAT concept. Since that day, almost every police department in the United States has formed a special response

Policies have changed since the shooting happened in Littleton, Colorado. Before Columbine the primary goal of law enforcement officers before and during a shooting was to set up a perimeter and await arrival of SWAT members (Erickson, 2001). This policy has changed in many states including Pennsylvania where police had been preparing for active shooters with local schools. Police are not able to wait the twenty minutes to an hour for SWAT to arrive at a scene which is why the state mandated that local police receive active shooting training (Coughlin, 2012). This response and a brochure that the Department of Homeland Security came out with are allowing schools a better chance of eliminating a shooter with less causalities and injuries. This brochure goes into to profile of an active shooter, how to respond to an active shooter, how to respond when law enforcement arrives, training staff for an active shooter, preparing for and managing an active shooter situation, recognizing workplace violence, managing the consequences of an active shooter, and lessons learned (DHS, 2008).

Now, to put this in perspective we need to look at the recent events of Ferguson, Missouri. 18-year-old Michael Brown was shot six times and killed by police officer Darren Wilson. The shooting sparked civil unrest in the community and resulted in protests, rioting, vandalism, and other such responses. In reaction to the social outcry and protest response, the police force took to militarized procedure to contain the civilians. On August 11, 2014 the local police stations outfitted

Police Department’s approach to active shooters and the response to those incidents have changed drastically over the last (2) decades. To put it differently, Police Administrators now realize that the original tactics used to respond to active shooter incidents weren’t the best options available. It is best to first realize what the actual definition of an “active shooter” is. The agreed-upon definition of an “active shooter” by US government agencies is “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area” (“Active Shooter,” 2013). Additionally, it goes on to tell some of the reasons why an active shooter incident is so difficult to respond to. Specifically, the unpredictability and how brief the incidents themselves typically are (“Active Shooter,” 2013).

From emergency personnel, to retail vendors, to educators and students, to government or military employees and members of the general public, anyone could potentially be involved in an active shooter crisis situation. As active shooter incidents are becoming more frequent in recent years; being prepared to effectively respond when faced with such a crisis situation can save lives and help a city to better prepare for and respond to such crisis situations (FBI major findings, 2014, para. 1-2). According to a recent FBI Active Shooter Incident Study (2014), “individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in populated areas (excluding gang or drug related shootings)” are considered to be active shooters. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how the city of Aurora, Colorado handled the active shooting crisis that occurred on July 20, 2012. This paper will explain the crisis situation and discuss the communication responses that ensued on that day.

To comprehend how policing in America has evolved to how policing in America began, one must understand its antecedents. The element of modern policing in America is connected precisely to its English heritage. “Beliefs about police and citizens, crime prevention, the posse, constable, and sheriffs advanced from English law enforcement” (History of American Policing, nd.) The evolution of policing in America “inherited most of its governmental institutions from Great Britain. British policing can be traced back to Norman Conquest of England in 1066”

One way to limit policy brutality from occurring is to restrict the flow of military equipment to police departments. Many believe that the access police departments have on military guns and personnel carriers creates a militarized culture that promotes violence and unnecessary force. In the past 8 years alone the Defense Department has “distributed more than $1.5 billion worth of surplus equipment”, which many see as unnecessary. The line between the defense department and local enforcement agencies is blurred where it should not be; confiscating high-caliber weapons, grenade launchers, armed drones, and other military equipment may be the solution to repress police violence.

Police departments are too militarized because they are using vehicles that are regularly used by military or higher grade departments. The News Cazette says, The county will have a new vehicle available soon — the Champaign County sheriff's office this year received a demilitarized Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle that it is currently modifying for use in police activities. The county acquired the vehicle, free of charge, through the state's Law Enforcement Support Office, which distributes surplus military property to state police agencies. Police departments are too militarized because they are using vehicles that

Police Agencies in modern society are a part of the American fabric to serve and protect the American public. The United States currently have more than 15,000 police agencies, (Walker & Katz, 2011). Police Departments across the United States face similar critical issues policing. All police officers face dangers in the job of policing the dangers can emanate from internal and external origins. Police officers have continued to evolve to serve communities by finding better less than lethal alternatives to weapons used. In addition, police departments have continued to keep up with

Now officers are wearing camera’s on themselves rather just in the police patrol car for evidence that the vehicle camera may have not caught. Each time these advancements are implemented, police officers have to ensure they complete classes to ensure they are functioning and working the more advance equipment properly (Charles, 2002). They also have different weapons. Some of their weapons could be considered lethal and some are considered less than lethal but again it all is part of new developments and they have to be trained to use them. With all of the new technology advancements and new weapons police are constantly faced with dangers and new challenges (Charles,

After the recent shooting, Tuesday night, on the corner of West Gray Street and Davis Street, police are speaking out on how they plan to take action. "I can't reiterate the fact that this is serious business that's being played out there. Total blatant disregard for human safety and as far

Technically, SWAT officers do not see them self as military soldiers, but as peace officers. It may come off to be very aggressive and violent tactics. However, the main purpose of a SWAT team that has been called out to a situation is to mintage. Which Intel’s hostel, and innocent bystander criminals in general. SWAT Team strategies are intended to threaten and confuse by the means of possibility. Normally a SWAT Team call-out starts with on-duty team associates on rounds, training event or conducting additional police assignments. A typical SWAT Team may receive an incident call over their police radio which involves a SWAT Team.