How many are needed?

[Mikelus Trento]

I'm hoping we have some law enforcement folks on the forums, and maybe they can explain something to me.

I live in a suburb of Austin, Texas. All 3 of the public safety arms in this city of roughly 900,000 are paid the highest in Texas...more than the cities of Houston and Dallas, which are many times larger.

Last week I heard Austin has a TWO HUNDRED member SWAT team. This seems like a little overkill (pardon the pun) to me. Granted, they need to have a response team ready 24/7 every day of the year, but are TWO HUNDRED actually needed?

My question is really very simple....in any situation, how many SWAT guys are needed? 8? 10? Let's say 8 of these highly trained folks can do what needs to be done (and no, you don't need SWAT to hold a perimeter, the normal police can do that just fine.

Now, with 8 as a starting point, let's work this out....3 shifts a day would mean you would need 8 x 3. 7 days a week means you need double that amount, which would also cover vacations and sick time. So you are up to 50.

So why are there 200? Methinks there is a little gravy in this equation.

[Panzerbear]

Last week I heard Austin has a TWO HUNDRED member SWAT team. This seems like a little overkill (pardon the pun) to me. Granted, they need to have a response team ready 24/7 every day of the year, but are TWO HUNDRED actually needed?

well, it depends on what they are needed for. for some general purpose mission even 10 is more than enough. for some kind of compex hostage taking crisis with multiple heavily armed gunmen - probably around 40 will do.

the key here is that not all 200 are probably on duty all the time. also, you have to think in terms of capability of handling two or three SWAT situations at the same time. Austin is a pretty big city, isn't it? either way, I feel like an extra SWAT-capable officer is better than extra five regular cops - all they do is eat doughnuts and pull people over for nothing anyway.

[Rapax]

either way, I feel like an extra SWAT-capable officer is better than extra five regular cops - all they do is eat doughnuts and pull people over for nothing anyway.

Interesting viewpoint. I'd think having 5 regular officers to increase patrol density and even out the workload is better than 1 officer with special training for high risk situations.
SWAT Teams of course will be as large as the situation demands and I could imagine that Austin with 1,6 million people in their metropolitan area has an ample demand. I'm thinking those 200 officers still perform regular police duties as well and don't just sit around the PD till someone hits the alarm button.

[Farnan]

Interesting viewpoint. I'd think having 5 regular officers to increase patrol density and even out the workload is better than 1 officer with special training for high risk situations.
SWAT Teams of course will be as large as the situation demands and I could imagine that Austin with 1,6 million people in their metropolitan area has an ample demand. I'm thinking those 200 officers still perform regular police duties as well and don't just sit around the PD till someone hits the alarm button.

Yep...

That is how it is, at least in most departments (I think NYC and maybe LA are special in having dedicated SWAT teams). SWAT are just regular cops 90% of the time unless they are called up. So they have 200 officers with SWAT training and the reason they need so much is a good deal of them are either going to be off-duty or patrolling doing regular police duties and they don't want to call them off that duty if they can help it (as it weakens police presence elsewhere).

And about that incident, I would shut down the area and call SWAT too. First, you don't want anyone killed in the crossfire if he shoots. Second, SWAT is better armed and protected then patrol cops so calling them in reduces the chance of an officer shot. You may complain its safety officers gone mad, but I don't want to be the Police Commissioner trying to explain to the officer's family why he died when they could have called SWAT and he lived.

Rapax: It seems SWAT is now used on all High-Risk Warrants or situations there may be armed criminals. Which is a good thing as SWAT are better protected and armed, along with better trained so they can solve the situation with the least blood shed on either side and civilians. Especially since a police officer may use lethal force as its his only option that he sees, while the training and equipment of SWAT units can possibly deliver a non-lethal solution.

[Rapax]

Rapax: It seems SWAT is now used on all High-Risk Warrants or situations there may be armed criminals. Which is a good thing as SWAT are better protected and armed, along with better trained so they can solve the situation with the least blood shed on either side and civilians. Especially since a police officer may use lethal force as its his only option that he sees, while the training and equipment of SWAT units can possibly deliver a non-lethal solution.

Yeah it makes sense and it's desirable to have specially trained officers. On the other hand you read about situations where a SWAT Team knocks down doors to arrest people who don't have a history of violence or aren't even suspected to posses weapons. Situations where an unarmed person has been shot just because the officers have been a little too much on edge.
Like I said, I definitely see the necessity and usefulness of these Teams, it just shouldn't become the norm to call heavily armed and armored officers for regular arrests.

[Farnan]

Yeah it makes sense and it's desirable to have specially trained officers. On the other hand you read about situations where a SWAT Team knocks down doors to arrest people who don't have a history of violence or aren't even suspected to posses weapons. Situations where an unarmed person has been shot just because the officers have been a little too much on edge.
Like I said, I definitely see the necessity and usefulness of these Teams, it just shouldn't become the norm to call heavily armed and armored officers for regular arrests.

I agree...

I blame the police commissioners and politicians both. Politicians looking to cut SWAT out of the budget saying its too expensive since its rarely used (neglecting that when it is used correctly it saves lives), and police commissioners over using them to try to prove the politicians wrong.

[chamaeleo]

I wouldn't expect much debate within APD about their SWAT budget...I'll bet everytime a cut is suggested, the guy standing beside the water cooler coughs: "Charles Whitman"...and that's that.

On the other hand you read about situations where a SWAT Team knocks down doors to arrest people who don't have a history of violence or aren't even suspected to posses weapons. Situations where an unarmed person has been shot just because the officers have been a little too much on edge.

Big problem w that in Albuquerque. My friends' duplex was raided at 3am, SWAT was after a white-collar criminal (con artist w no history of violence) living in the other half: shotgun blasted the front door, bullets went through their bedroom wall, and one anxious officer must've felt threatened by a freaked-out 15 lb Italian greyhound so they blasted the pathetic dog too. I'd much rather they solve murders, than propogate em.

[lordoftheT]

Plus there's always the (very small) risk of a old fashioned gunfight. Not likely at all really but its nice to have them just in case.
And as Panzerbear said Austin is a pretty big city they end up having multiple things going on at once.

[Mikelus Trento]

Perhaps it is also because the regular police are over-eager to call them in?

[lordoftheT]

Perhaps it is also because the regular police are over-eager to call them in?

Yeah they really need to come up for rules for what is and Isn't SWAT worthy

[Mikelus Trento]

Yeah they really need to come up for rules for what is and Isn't SWAT worthy

An example from last week in Austin.....

A guy approached an undercover last week down in our pretty well-known entertainment district called 6th Street, and tried to sell him some grass. I'm not sure of the exact statute, but I "think" possessing anything less than two ounces is considered a misdemeanor, and someone is ticketed and released for this.
Obviously this person was dealing, which is a different matter.

Well, he ran onto the roof area of one of the bars down there, and shouted out he wasn't going to give up and HAD A GUN. Big surprise there since half the folks in Texas now pack it seems.

The next thing you know, the SWAT team was there, and of course closed down the entire entertainment district...all over a relatively benign crime made much worse by the culprits false claim.

But did they REALLY need the SWAT team, the armored car, and to close down the whole area?

I'm detecting that anytime the financing of the public safety officers comes up, and ever more so in these times, the unions for them cry "public safety, public safety" and get whatever they want. It's like playing the race card, or the child-abuse card.

[Mithie]

I wouldn't be surprised at that figure, Mikelus, as Texas is the primary gateway state between Mexico and the US, and I'd imagine a higher than normal (as well as well paid) SWAT/police force is needed to battle the illegal drug/weapons/human traffic that flows across the border (with hubs in major cities like most crime rings). I'd imagine the narc division in Austin handles quite a few more cases on average than, say, Seattle.

[Mikelus Trento]

I wouldn't be surprised at that figure, Mikelus, as Texas is the primary gateway state between Mexico and the US, and I'd imagine a higher than normal (as well as well paid) SWAT/police force is needed to battle the illegal drug/weapons/human traffic that flows across the border (with hubs in major cities like most crime rings). I'd imagine the narc division in Austin handles quite a few more cases on average than, say, Seattle.

I can understand why you think that, but actually Austin is called a "sanctuary" city. Illegal immigration is not a problem here because there is no effort to find and deport them. If they are peaceful they are left alone. As far as the drugs, Austin is not known for that, since we have but one major highway running through town. It is not what is called a "hub city" for the traffickers for that reason. For the record, Austin is more than 250 miles from the border.

I would surmise Seattle would be much more likely to have narcotics issues/human trafficking being a port.

[Mithie]

I can understand why you think that, but actually Austin is called a "sanctuary" city. Illegal immigration is not a problem here because there is no effort to find and deport them. If they are peaceful they are left alone. As far as the drugs, Austin is not known for that, since we have but one major highway running through town. It is not what is called a "hub city" for the traffickers for that reason. For the record, Austin is more than 250 miles from the border.

I would surmise Seattle would be much more likely to have narcotics issues/human trafficking being a port.

Never been to Austin - wouldn't know, actually, but sounds like a nice place to live.

[Panzerbear]

ugh why are you so against SWAT officers of Austin, I dont understand? imo they are better defenders of American people than all divisions of the US Army stationed in TX combined.

[Mikelus Trento]

I am not against the need for highly trained police for SPECIAL situations. I am arguing against the need to have 200 of them for a city of Austin's size and relative tranquility.

[Mikelus Trento]

Rapax...

Every one of those communities surrounding Austin has its own well numbered police force, and there are county sheriffs. Austin itself (the city the SWAT deal with), is just over 900k.

[Rapax]

Rapax...

Every one of those communities surrounding Austin has its own well numbered police force, and there are county sheriffs. Austin itself (the city the SWAT deal with), is just over 900k.

Well sure but it is my perception anyway that US law enforcement agencies have a big love for SWAT Teams and will deploy them for all kinds of situations, whether really necessary or not. It's like every little town needs to have their own SWAT Team and therefor I'm not surprised a city like Austin would have one numbering 200. Maybe that's a problem, I don't know.

ugh why are you so against SWAT officers of Austin, I dont understand? imo they are better defenders of American people than all divisions of the US Army stationed in TX combined.

But see, the US Army is called upon to fight wars, just as SWAT Teams are called upon to handle high risk situations. Outside of that, the people should be defended by the regular police, they are important first and foremost.

[Valiant Champion]

The expansion of forces such as SWAT teams, law enforcement and agencies within the Deparment of Homeland Security is one of the big reasons why there is an ammo shortage.

SWAT will be called upon to help suprress a revolt.

What is a SPECIAL situation? I think they should enlighten us specifically what the scenario is they claim they will need that many SWAT to help them with.

I am sure they know why they have that many.

[Phier]

With the Katrina 'victims' that still haven't returned home, I think that number seems about right.