4 ms·

We should centralize the "heavy response teams" until we hit a level of aggregation where they are being deployed relatively frequently (over a large area) and

We should centralize the "heavy response teams" until we hit a level of aggregation where they are being deployed relatively frequently (over a large area) and it makes sense to give them a lot of very specific training on those scenarios. Frankly, the National Guard is a fairly compelling option here for most states. There are already existing bases, they train in hostile shooter scenarios frequently, and they already have access to all the gear SWAT claims they need. National average SWAT response time is an hour. Helicopters fly about 160mph. One military base could provide support for a lot of cities at once.

wpietri 5y ago
Ooh, using the National Guard for SWAT-ish activity is a really interesting idea. It puts military gear and tactics back in the hands of the military. It would give more oversight to the decision to call them in as well.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> We should centralize the "heavy response teams" until we hit a level of aggregation where they are being deployed relatively frequently (over a large area) and it makes sense to give them a lot of very specific training on those scenarios. Yeah, while I generally advocate decentralizing local law enforcement and distributing “policing” within domain-focussed local agencies that are mostly not solely about law enforcement, tactical response and major investigation functions both are things that make sense to be pulled out of local agencies entirely and (separately from each other) centralized at a state or regional level, and the National Guard is a very good place to put the tactical response function.