Rise
of the Warrior Cop
Is it time to reconsider
the militarization of American policing?
By RADLEY BALKO
On
Jan. 4 of last year, a local narcotics strike force conducted a raid on the
Ogden, Utah, home of Matthew David Stewart at 8:40 p.m. The 12 officers were
acting on a tip from Mr. Stewart's former girlfriend, who said that he was
growing marijuana in his basement. Mr. Stewart awoke, naked, to the sound of a
battering ram taking down his door. Thinking that he was being invaded by criminals,
as he later claimed, he grabbed his 9-millimeter Beretta pistol.
The
police say that they knocked and identified themselves, though Mr. Stewart and
his neighbors said they heard no such announcement. Mr. Stewart fired 31
rounds, the police more than 250. Six of the officers were wounded, and Officer
Jared Francom was killed. Mr. Stewart himself was shot twice before he was
arrested. He was charged with several crimes, including the murder of Officer
Francom.
The
police found 16 small marijuana plants in Mr. Stewart's basement. There was no
evidence that Mr. Stewart, a U.S. military veteran with no prior criminal record,
was selling marijuana. Mr. Stewart's father said that his son suffered from
post-traumatic stress disorder and may have smoked the marijuana to
self-medicate.
Early this year, the Ogden
city council heard complaints from dozens of citizens about the way drug
warrants are served in the city. As for Mr. Stewart, his trial was scheduled
for next April, and prosecutors were seeking the death penalty. But after
losing a hearing last May on the legality of the search warrant, Mr. Stewart
hanged himself in his jail cell.
The
police tactics at issue in the Stewart case are no anomaly. Since the 1960s, in
response to a range of perceived threats, law-enforcement agencies across the
U.S., at every level of government, have been blurring the line between police
officer and soldier. Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of
military-style equipment—from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel
carriers—American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously
reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11
antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior
cop—armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a
growing threat to familiar American liberties.
The acronym SWAT stands for Special Weapons
and Tactics. Such police units are trained in methods similar to those used by
the special forces in the military. They learn to break into homes with
battering rams and to use incendiary devices called flashbang grenades, which
are designed to blind and deafen anyone nearby. Their usual aim is to
"clear" a building—that is, to remove any threats and distractions
(including pets) and to subdue the occupants as quickly as possible.
The country's first
official SWAT team started in the late 1960s in Los Angeles. By 1975, there
were approximately 500 such units. Today, there are thousands. According to
surveys conducted by the criminologist Peter Kraska of Eastern Kentucky
University, just 13% of towns between 25,000 and 50,000 people had a SWAT team
in 1983. By 2005, the figure was up to 80%.
The number of raids
conducted by SWAT-like police units has grown accordingly. In the 1970s, there
were just a few hundred a year; by the early 1980s, there were some 3,000 a
year. In 2005 (the last year for which Dr. Kraska collected data), there were
approximately 50,000 raids.
A number of federal agencies also now have
their own SWAT teams, including the Fish & Wildlife Service, NASA and the
Department of the Interior. In 2011, the Department of Education's SWAT team
bungled a raid on a woman who was initially reported to be under investigation
for not paying her student loans, though the agency later said she was
suspected of defrauding the federal student loan program.
The details of the case
aside, the story generated headlines because of the revelation that the
Department of Education had such a unit. None of these federal departments has
responded to my requests for information about why they consider such
high-powered military-style teams necessary.
Americans have long been
wary of using the military for domestic policing. Concerns about potential
abuse date back to the creation of the Constitution, when the founders worried
about standing armies and the intimidation of the people at large by an
overzealous executive, who might choose to follow the unhappy precedents set by
Europe's emperors and monarchs.
The idea for the first SWAT
team in Los Angeles arose during the domestic strife and civil unrest of the
mid-1960s. Daryl Gates, then an inspector with the Los Angeles Police
Department, had grown frustrated with his department's inability to respond
effectively to incidents like the 1965 Watts riots. So his thoughts turned to
the military. He was drawn in particular to Marine Special Forces and began to
envision an elite group of police officers who could respond in a similar
manner to dangerous domestic disturbances.
When
A strike force raided the home of Matthew David Stewart, one officer was
killed.
Mr. Gates initially had
difficulty getting his idea accepted. Los Angeles Police Chief William Parker
thought the concept risked a breach in the divide between the military and law
enforcement. But with the arrival of a new chief, Thomas Reddin, in 1966, Mr.
Gates got the green light to start training a unit. By 1969, his SWAT team was
ready for its maiden raid against a holdout cell of the Black Panthers.
At about the same time,
President Richard Nixon was declaring war on drugs. Among the new, tough-minded
law-enforcement measures included in this campaign was the no-knock raid—a
policy that allowed drug cops to break into homes without the traditional knock
and announcement. After fierce debate, Congress passed a bill authorizing
no-knock raids for federal narcotics agents in 1970.
Over the next several
years, stories emerged of federal agents breaking down the doors of private
homes (often without a warrant) and terrorizing innocent citizens and families.
Congress repealed the no-knock law in 1974, but the policy would soon make a
comeback (without congressional authorization).
During the Reagan
administration, SWAT-team methods converged with the drug war. By the end of
the 1980s, joint task forces brought together police officers and soldiers for
drug interdiction. National Guard helicopters and U-2 spy planes flew the
California skies in search of marijuana plants. When suspects were identified,
battle-clad troops from the National Guard, the DEA and other federal and local
law enforcement agencies would swoop in to eradicate the plants and capture the
people growing them.
Advocates of these tactics
said that drug dealers were acquiring ever bigger weapons and the police needed
to stay a step ahead in the arms race. There were indeed a few high-profile
incidents in which police were outgunned, but no data exist suggesting that it
was a widespread problem. A study done in 1991 by the libertarian-leaning
Independence Institute found that less than one-eighth of 1% of homicides in
the U.S. were committed with a military-grade weapon. Subsequent studies by the
Justice Department in 1995 and the National Institute for Justice in 2004 came
to similar conclusions: The overwhelming majority of serious crimes are
committed with handguns, and not particularly powerful ones.
The new century brought the
war on terror and, with it, new rationales and new resources for militarizing
police forces. According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, the
Department of Homeland Security has handed out $35 billion in grants since its
creation in 2002, with much of the money going to purchase military gear such
as armored personnel carriers. In 2011 alone, a Pentagon program for bolstering
the capabilities of local law enforcement gave away $500 million of equipment,
an all-time high.
The past decade also has
seen an alarming degree of mission creep for U.S. SWAT teams. When the craze
for poker kicked into high gear, a number of police departments responded by
deploying SWAT teams to raid games in garages, basements and VFW halls where
illegal gambling was suspected. According to news reports and conversations
with poker organizations, there have been dozens of these raids, in cities such
as Baltimore, Charleston, S.C., and Dallas.
In 2006, 38-year-old
optometrist Sal Culosi was shot and killed by a Fairfax County, Va., SWAT
officer. The investigation began when an undercover detective overheard Mr. Culosi
wagering on college football games with some buddies at a bar. The department
sent a SWAT team after Mr. Culosi, who had no prior criminal record or any
history of violence. As the SWAT team descended, one officer fired a single
bullet that pierced Mr. Culosi's heart. The police say that the shot was an
accident. Mr. Culosi's family suspects the officer saw Mr. Culosi reaching for
his cellphone and thought he had a gun.
Assault-style raids have
even been used in recent years to enforce regulatory law. Armed federal agents
from the Fish & Wildlife Service raided the floor of the Gibson Guitar
factory in Nashville in 2009, on suspicion of using hardwoods that had been
illegally harvested in Madagascar. Gibson settled in 2012, paying a $300,000
fine and admitting to violating the Lacey Act. In 2010, the police department
in New Haven, Conn., sent its SWAT team to raid a bar where police believed
there was underage drinking. For sheer absurdity, it is hard to beat the 2006
story about the Tibetan monks who had overstayed their visas while visiting
America on a peace mission. In Iowa, the hapless holy men were apprehended by a
SWAT team in full gear.
Unfortunately, the
activities of aggressive, heavily armed SWAT units often result in needless
bloodshed: Innocent bystanders have lost their lives and so, too, have police
officers who were thought to be assailants and were fired on, as (allegedly) in
the case of Matthew David Stewart.
In my own research, I have
collected over 50 examples in which innocent people were killed in raids to
enforce warrants for crimes that are either nonviolent or consensual (that is,
crimes such as drug use or gambling, in which all parties participate
voluntarily). These victims were bystanders, or the police later found no
evidence of the crime for which the victim was being investigated. They include
Katherine Johnston, a 92-year-old woman killed by an Atlanta narcotics team
acting on a bad tip from an informant in 2006; Alberto Sepulveda, an
11-year-old accidentally shot by a California SWAT officer during a 2000 drug
raid; and Eurie Stamps, killed in a 2011 raid on his home in Framingham, Mass.,
when an officer says his gun mistakenly discharged. Mr. Stamps wasn't a suspect
in the investigation.
What would it take to dial
back such excessive police measures? The obvious place to start would be ending
the federal grants that encourage police forces to acquire gear that is more
appropriate for the battlefield. Beyond that, it is crucial to change the
culture of militarization in American law enforcement.
Consider today's police
recruitment videos (widely available on YouTube), which often feature cops
rappelling from helicopters, shooting big guns, kicking down doors and tackling
suspects. Such campaigns embody an American policing culture that has become
too isolated, confrontational and militaristic, and they tend to attract
recruits for the wrong reasons.
If you browse online police
discussion boards, or chat with younger cops today, you will often encounter
some version of the phrase, "Whatever I need to do to get home safe."
It is a sentiment that suggests that every interaction with a citizen may be
the officer's last. Nor does it help when political leaders lend support to
this militaristic self-image, as New York City Mayor Michael
Bloomberg did in 2011 by declaring, "I have my own army in the
NYPD—the seventh largest army in the world."
The motivation of the
average American cop should not focus on just making it to the end of his
shift. The LAPD may have given us the first SWAT team, but its motto is still
exactly the right ideal for American police officers: To protect and serve.
SWAT teams have their
place, of course, but they should be saved for those relatively rare situations
when police-initiated violence is the only hope to prevent the loss of life.
They certainly have no place as modern-day vice squads.
Many longtime and retired law-enforcement
officers have told me of their worry that the trend toward militarization is
too far gone. Those who think there is still a chance at reform tend to embrace
the idea of community policing, an approach that depends more on civil society
than on brute force.
In this very different view
of policing, cops walk beats, interact with citizens and consider themselves
part of the neighborhoods they patrol—and therefore have a stake in those
communities. It's all about a baton-twirling "Officer Friendly"
rather than a Taser-toting RoboCop.
Corrections &
Amplifications
The Consumer Products Safety Commission does not have a SWAT team. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that it did.
The Consumer Products Safety Commission does not have a SWAT team. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that it did.
A version of this article appeared July 19,
2013, on page C1 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the
headline: rise of the warrior cop.
No comments:
Post a Comment