We have been raised in the greatest democracy on the planet.  Our nation’s most powerful force is its citizens (as a whole) uniting to fight for a cause they believe in.

In a very similar way, a SWAT team is a democracy.  When a team comes together to right a wrong they cannot be stopped.  Tecumseh has been famously quoted as saying, “One twig is weak but a bundle of twigs is strong!”  It is imperative that all members of a SWAT team understand that the command staff is there to support the operators, not the other way around.  The command staff is tasked with directing the operators’ energy into positive avenues of development and training, reduce risk to their operators and handle the paperwork so the operators can focus on the task at hand.

SWAT and tactical teams already have a very dangerous job.  When command staff then makes it more dangerous by not allowing the operators to use tactics that are known as industry-standard, it creates a very dangerous work environment.  In fact, it puts you – the operator – at a higher risk of injury or death and is known as deliberate indifference!  Some industry-standards all teams should be using are flash bangs, explosive breaching, shotgun breaching, covert clearing, sniper placement prior to warrants, less lethal options and armored vehicles…just to name a few.

Budgets are tight.  Departments are running lean these days, and this has to be taken into consideration.  Armored vehicles are extremely expensive but grants, donations, fundraising and federal assistance are all options to enable your team to have this capability.

Budgets are not a factor, however, when it comes to the simpler options that could save lives, such as porting a window, wall or conducting multiple breaches.  These options are some of the most obvious and yet many teams have been restricted from using them because the command staff is more concerned with property damage than the safety of their officers.

The command staff must have confidence in the abilities of their operators to conduct explosive breaching, for example, before they will allow it.  If a commander shows up once a year to training, how is he going to be able to evaluate the capability of the team?  Command staff should be taking part in training, watching everything – constantly evaluating his operators and their capabilities.  If you aren’t seeing your command staff at training, bring the training to them!  Film what you’re doing.  Show them you are capable because, after all, the tactic you’re fighting to use may very well save your life!

The power to change is in your hands.  You, the team, can bring about positive change.  It takes strength, guts and moral fortitude, but as a team you can stand up to anyone.  It is your job to ensure you have the safest possible work environment!

Alone you are deadly.  Together you are unstoppable!

By Steve Claggett   |   Director of Training   |   Fulcrum Tactical

Since the inception of SWAT in 1968, every team has searched for the “Magic Tactic.”  The ultimate weapon, the ultimate round, the ultimate tools and, yes, the ultimate tactic.  Weapon and ammo decisions are generally made way over an operator’s pay grade by “cubicle warriors” whose knowledge of operational needs are boiled down to beans and brass tacks.  That is why, as an operator, you must remember to simply control what you can.  Be proficient with whatever they give you.

Nothing evokes debate in the SWAT world more than tactics.  Every team believes in and defends their tactics to the brink of fistfights.  And passion in this job is a good thing as long as it does not cloud our judgment and stifle our objectivity.  While teaching around the country, I’ve noted that the reason some teams use a certain tactic is because it was handed down by Sun Tzu himself and was above reproach or evaluation.  The phrase “This is the way we’ve always done it…” should be forbidden verbiage in the tactical world (along with “I can’t…,” “Why me?” and “Hold my rifle while I try this…”).

As an example, I’m familiar with approximately NINE (9) different CQB systems for room domination.  The four most common are: Points of Domination, Direct to Threat, Limited Penetration and Threshold Assessment.  As with everything in life, each system has strengths and weaknesses.  Both are revealed depending on environment, situation and the suspect’s motivation.

To quote John Holschen, a friend and spec ops medic, “You can moonwalk through doorways and be successful until somebody shoots at you.”  I hope this statement does more than evoke the unsettling image of Michael Jackson poised in the stack kitted up in body armor, white socks and glitter glove.

What this statement should inspire is the premise of periodic

reassessments of our tactical doctrine.

Assess everything you do AND the way you do it from this simplistic standpoint:  What do you GAIN? And what do you LOSE?  As long as the gains outweigh the losses, then the option is viable.

Consider, after three energy drinks, the endless debate of “Dynamic” versus “Surround and Call-Out” for high-risk warrant service.  The maelstrom of opinions generated across the country by this topic not only shows my command of the computer thesaurus (i.e. maelstrom), but also the visceral opinions on how to run the same operation.   Both are right and both are wrong.  My opinion on this:  Be flexible enough to do either and everything in between.

Using the same template for every operation has gotten good teams in a ton of trouble. We are given an immense amount of tools to do this job (AKA: Tactical Options).  Relying solely on the hammer for every gig shows not only a lack of tactical creativity but, in some cases, a disregard for operational priorities.  Relying solely on the bullhorn also reflects a lack of imagination which equates to warrants drying up due to lack of seizures (Narco Cops objectives).  Additionally, we eventually have to make entry.  Have we created or lost a tactical advantage by announcing our intentions?  The answer lies between the two options when executing most high risk warrants.

Situations must dictate tactics.  Smart hurts less.

Quote of the day:  “A warrior takes everything as a challenge while the ordinary man takes everything either as a blessing or a curse.”  – Carlos Castaneda, Author/Anthropologist