3 ms·

In a similar vein, NASA has its own SWAT/special operations groups, such as: https://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/main/swat_feature.html https://www.nasa.gov/re

In a similar vein, NASA has its own SWAT/special operations groups, such as: https://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/main/swat_feature.html https://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/main/swat_feature.html https://www.wearethemighty.com/news/nasa-has-a-swat-team-and-theyre-good https://www.wearethemighty.com/news/nasa-has-a-swat-team-and...

tomohawk 8y ago
So many federal agencies have their own SWAT teams that they have a hard time keeping the teams qualified due to limited access to suitable firing ranges around DC. Agencies like EPA, USDA, and Dept of Education have SWAT. Seems like only FBI should have SWAT.
- jfoutz 8y ago
  Eh, domain specific knowledge can be a huge win. I’d guess space swat team would be worried about rocket fuel, but usda might be worried about herbicide. I would be on board with an fbi run certification system. Organizations send agents for extra training. I sorta like consistency though.
  - figgis 8y ago
    You don't call in SWAT for their domain specific knowledge though. You call them in to clear/pacify/etc a location.
    - wongarsu 8y ago
      If there's an active shooter hiding behind a hydrazine tank I would prefer a SWAT team trained in recognizing and handling different types of rocket fuel.
      - PRmaestro 8y ago
        The funding required to train swat teams is high. A course I volunteered at was over a thousand per person not including the costs of sim-munitions, actual munitions, and experts in specific areas. That was the costs before the program decided to hire more trainers instead of utilizing volunteers. Funniest thing was though was how awful SWAT teams were against unprepared volunteers.
      - scarejunba 8y ago
        In the military system, this is handled differently, right? We don’t have National Park Service Army who are uniquely prepared to handle the terrain of National Parks. Or Treasury Air Force who protect the movement of large amounts of money. Why can’t it be federal SWAT w/ Space Proficiency instead of NASA SWAT? Having a bunch of local agencies means they’ll have widely varying levels of training, rules of engagement, and abilities. That’s how you get cops playing dress-up flashbanging babies.
  - tomohawk 8y ago
    SWAT is a paramilitary, and its use should be as a last resort. Police departments, let alone agencies, really have no business having SWAT teams. Policing and SWAT are two very different things, and personnel should not be mixed between the two. If police need SWAT, they should have to call in SWAT from a special agency that has those teams. The first SWAT team in the US was in LA, and if I remember correctly, it was so controversial that the police chief stepped down in protest. It's kind of unbelievable that SWAT is so accepted these days. Makes for good TV, though.
- wavefunction 8y ago
  DC would be especially hard for NASA.
toomanybeersies 8y ago
So does the Department of Education: https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/beware-the-us-education-department-swat-team https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/beware... Practically every branch of the federal government has an armed law enforcement unit: https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/10/20/why-are-federal-bureaucrats-buying-guns-and-ammo-158-million-spent-by-non-military-agencies/#603bc4f364a1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/10/20/why... I'd strongly recommend reading this report on purchases of firearms and military equipment by federal agencies: https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/1/7/Oversight_TheMilitarizationOfAmerica_06102016.pdf https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/1/7/Oversight_TheMilitar... It's fascinating reading, it was posted to HN a couple of years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13548878 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13548878
- hunterjumper06 8y ago
  The Heritage link is in reference to the Office of Inspector General. The Office of Inspector General is independent of the Agency it oversees with a budget that Congress appropriates separately and it’s leadership is independent. Inspector Generals are political appointments and most are senate confirmed positions. Unlike most political appointments, the Inspector Generals stay on throughout Administrations and are only asked to leave if there are performance issues. The mission of the Office of Inspector General is to root out fraud, waste, and abuse. Office of Inspector Generals or OIGs perform financial audits, performance audits (program evaluations), inspections, and criminal investigations. Generally most reports are publicly available and posted on each OIGs website. OIGs are referenced in the media as the “internal watchdog.” Congress can request (and frequently does) OIGs to perform audits, evaluations, or inspections for oversight purposes. Each OIG has an anonymous hotline where employees, contractors, or the general public can report fraud, waste, and abuse. There are 73 OIGs in the Federal government with CIA being the first established by Congress. https://www.ignet.gov/ https://www.ignet.gov/

tomohawk 8y ago

So many federal agencies have their own SWAT teams that they have a hard time keeping the teams qualified due to limited access to suitable firing ranges around DC. Agencies like EPA, USDA, and Dept of Education have SWAT. Seems like only FBI should have SWAT.

jfoutz 8y ago
Eh, domain specific knowledge can be a huge win. I’d guess space swat team would be worried about rocket fuel, but usda might be worried about herbicide. I would be on board with an fbi run certification system. Organizations send agents for extra training. I sorta like consistency though.
- figgis 8y ago
  You don't call in SWAT for their domain specific knowledge though. You call them in to clear/pacify/etc a location.
  - wongarsu 8y ago
    If there's an active shooter hiding behind a hydrazine tank I would prefer a SWAT team trained in recognizing and handling different types of rocket fuel.
    - PRmaestro 8y ago
      The funding required to train swat teams is high. A course I volunteered at was over a thousand per person not including the costs of sim-munitions, actual munitions, and experts in specific areas. That was the costs before the program decided to hire more trainers instead of utilizing volunteers. Funniest thing was though was how awful SWAT teams were against unprepared volunteers.
    - scarejunba 8y ago
      In the military system, this is handled differently, right? We don’t have National Park Service Army who are uniquely prepared to handle the terrain of National Parks. Or Treasury Air Force who protect the movement of large amounts of money. Why can’t it be federal SWAT w/ Space Proficiency instead of NASA SWAT? Having a bunch of local agencies means they’ll have widely varying levels of training, rules of engagement, and abilities. That’s how you get cops playing dress-up flashbanging babies.
- tomohawk 8y ago
  SWAT is a paramilitary, and its use should be as a last resort. Police departments, let alone agencies, really have no business having SWAT teams. Policing and SWAT are two very different things, and personnel should not be mixed between the two. If police need SWAT, they should have to call in SWAT from a special agency that has those teams. The first SWAT team in the US was in LA, and if I remember correctly, it was so controversial that the police chief stepped down in protest. It's kind of unbelievable that SWAT is so accepted these days. Makes for good TV, though.
wavefunction 8y ago
DC would be especially hard for NASA.

toomanybeersies 8y ago

So does the Department of Education: https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/beware-the-us-education-department-swat-team https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/beware... Practically every branch of the federal government has an armed law enforcement unit: https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/10/20/why-are-federal-bureaucrats-buying-guns-and-ammo-158-million-spent-by-non-military-agencies/#603bc4f364a1 https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/10/20/why... I'd strongly recommend reading this report on purchases of firearms and military equipment by federal agencies: https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/1/7/Oversight_TheMilitarizationOfAmerica_06102016.pdf https://www.openthebooks.com/assets/1/7/Oversight_TheMilitar... It's fascinating reading, it was posted to HN a couple of years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13548878 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13548878

hunterjumper06 8y ago
The Heritage link is in reference to the Office of Inspector General. The Office of Inspector General is independent of the Agency it oversees with a budget that Congress appropriates separately and it’s leadership is independent. Inspector Generals are political appointments and most are senate confirmed positions. Unlike most political appointments, the Inspector Generals stay on throughout Administrations and are only asked to leave if there are performance issues. The mission of the Office of Inspector General is to root out fraud, waste, and abuse. Office of Inspector Generals or OIGs perform financial audits, performance audits (program evaluations), inspections, and criminal investigations. Generally most reports are publicly available and posted on each OIGs website. OIGs are referenced in the media as the “internal watchdog.” Congress can request (and frequently does) OIGs to perform audits, evaluations, or inspections for oversight purposes. Each OIG has an anonymous hotline where employees, contractors, or the general public can report fraud, waste, and abuse. There are 73 OIGs in the Federal government with CIA being the first established by Congress. https://www.ignet.gov/ https://www.ignet.gov/