The management of police specialized tactical units (3rd ed)

Abstract

The use of tactical teams has become one of the most contentious issues within policing. Often claimed as the embodiment of police militarization, their increased use has been suggested to expose the public to significant harm (Kraska, 2021). Notwithstanding the controversial nature of tactical teams, relatively little is known about how they are used and the implications of their use. Despite being framed as a police reference book, The Management of Police Specialized Tactical Units is valuable to anyone interested in developing a better understanding of the training, tactics, equipment, and legal implications associated with tactical teams. As an example, according to Mijares and McCarthy the purpose of tactical teams is not only to provide an improved response to high-risk incidents, but also to supply additional resources that maximize an agency’s capabilities to respond to other calls during an ongoing event. To Mijares and McCarthy, tactical officers reduce the likelihood and severity of force through a coordinated response underpinned by specialized training, tactics, and equipment. This is particularly true when contrasted with an ad hoc response by patrol officers who are not as familiar with each other, receive less training, and have access to less equipment (e.g., less-lethal systems, ballistic shields). Throughout the book the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the various mechanisms in place to maximize the likelihood of a successful outcome when tactical teams are used. For example, the authors note that tactical training should be founded in a concrete understanding of operational realities. Furthermore, the authors emphasize the importance of continuously evaluating personnel, teamwork, tactics, and equipment both in training and following a deployment to ensure that the team’s performance continuously improves. Arguably one of the most valuable components of the book is the authors’ analysis of case studies to discuss the legal implications regarding the use of tactical resources within the American context. Drawing on extensive knowledge from police and legal practitioners, the authors provide a clear and concise discussion of the legal parameters and organizational liability regarding the development, training, and use of tactical teams – something that has been notably absent from most discussions. The considerations provided by Mijares and McCarthy illustrate how, despite common criticisms of tactical teams conducting warrants, the use of patrol officers to carry out this task may be inadequate. Given that training related to clearing structures in a safe and effective manner is primarily restricted to tactical personnel, the use of inadequately prepared officers may result in serious harm, loss of life, and/or organizational liability. Therefore, the authors suggest that it is prudent to use tactical officers during warrant executions given their additional training and equipment, and the level of familiarization that they have with each other and their roles. Despite this, the authors do not adequately explain why the use of tactical resources for warrants has raised significant concerns. While Mijares and McCarthy effectively highlight how tactical practices, policies, and procedures have been refined through the culmination of collective experience, the authors miss numerous opportunities to discuss salient issues related to policing and the use of tactical teams. For example, the authors briefly acknowledge academics critical of tactical teams, such as Dr. Peter