E-mail Scott
Scott's Links
About the Author
Opinion Archives
Social Media:
Google Plus
Monthly Archives:

January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
May 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
August 2012
September 2012
October 2012
November 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
April 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
August 2013
September 2013
October 2013
November 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
January 2015
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
August 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
December 2015
January 2016
February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
November 2016
December 2016
January 2017
February 2017
March 2017
April 2017
May 2017

Powered by Blogger
Subscribe via RSS

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Time to limit the use of SWAT teams

Posted by Scott Tibbs at 4:30 AM (#)

Imagine this scenario: Agents of the state storm a home in the middle of the night. They toss a flash bang grenade in through the window, and break into the home holding the family at gunpoint with assault rifles. In the confusion of the raid, a seven year old girl is shot and killed. Is this the Soviet Union in 1955?

No, this is the United States of America in 2010.

Welcome to the consequences of the increasing militarization of aw enforcement. Instead of going to the home and serving a warrant for the arrest of a murder suspect, Detroit police conduct a raid on the home in the middle of the night. The suspect is brought in, but an innocent child is killed in the process.

Did the Detroit police have raid the home, complete with a dangerous flash bang grenade, or could they have simply served a warrant for the arrest of Chauncey Owens? Was it necessary to burst in with overwhelming force? Most importantly, will there be a review of how often paramilitary force is used by law enforcement?

This isn't the first outrage resulting from the increasing use of overwhelming, military-style tactics by law enforcement. The mayor of Berwyn Heights, Maryland was held at gunpoint for hours by a SWAT team that shot and killed his two dogs. An Atlanta SWAT team gunned down a 92-year-old woman in her own home and then planted drugs to cover up the botched raid. Cory Maye spent time on death row for killing a police officer during what turned out to be a completely unnecessary SWAT raid on his home, but was released this year.

Many conservatives were horrified by the government's use of force to bring down the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas. The sight of tanks breaking into the compound - which was soon engulfed by a fire that destroyed the compound and killed 76 people - was seen as an overreach of federal power. But why do so many conservatives not object to overwhelming force used by local law enforcement?

If we conservatives believe in limited government and individual liberty, it is time to start placing limits on what law enforcement is permitted to do and restrict the use of SWAT raids. There is a time and place for the use of SWAT teams, but it should be clear to everyone that they are being overused, and that overuse results in unnecessarily confrontational situations as well as tragic and preventable deaths.

Below are the rules for commenting on ConservaTibbs.com.

  1. A reasonable level of civility is expected. While it is expected that controversial political and social issues may generate heated debate, there are common-sense limits of civility that will be enforced.

  2. This blog is a family-friendly site. Therefore no cursing, profanity, vulgarity, obscenity, etc. will be allowed. This is a zero-tolerance rule and will result in automatic deletion of the offending post.

  3. Anonymity has greatly coarsened discourse on the Internet, so pseudonyms are discouraged but not forbidden. That said, any direct criticism of a person by name cannot be done anonymously. If you criticize someone, you have to subject yourself to the same level of scrutiny or the comment will be deleted.

  4. Please keep your comments relevant to the topic of the post.

  5. All moderation decisions are final. I may post an explanation or I may not, depending on the situation. If you have a question or a concern about a moderation decision, e-mail me privately rather than posting in the comments.

Thank you for your cooperation.