SWAT everywhere? A response to Jenkins, Semple, Bennell, and Huey

Kevin Walby

doi:10.1177/0032258x211002596

Abstract

This paper is a response to an article on public police special weapons and tactics (SWAT) teams written by Jenkins and colleagues (2020). Jenkins and colleagues are responding to a study showing that tactical units and members are being used more in Canadian policing. For Jenkins and colleagues, not only are SWAT teams being used properly, but drawing from interviews with tactical members they suggest SWAT teams should be used more in the future. This response focuses on conceptual, methodological, and empirical deficiencies in the work of Jenkins and colleagues. This response shows that Jenkins and colleagues ignore social theory, ignore relevant contrary data, are ignorant of the harms of policing, and are ignorant of the violence that Black and Indigenous peoples face from Canadian police. Relatedly, this response offers a criticism of what is called evidence-based policing scholarship. Using the work of Jenkins and colleagues as an example, the argument here is that evidence-based policing scholars are in a conflict of interest because of how closely they work with police and due to the funding they receive from police agencies and justice ministries. This conflict of interest decreases the credibility and trustworthiness of the claims of evidence-based policing scholars. Overall, this response draws attention not only to the harms of public policing and criminalization, but also to how evidence-based policing scholarship is supporting the expansion of violent, harmful, and regressive forms of social control.

Highlights

On October 7, 2020, the Ottawa Police Tactical Unit, or Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team, executed a search warrant at the apartment of Anthony Aust and his family in Canada’s capital city
SWAT teams are responsible for numerous deaths each year, as the research of many scholars (Kraska, 1996; Kraska and Kappeler, 1997; see Delehanty et al, 2017; Lawson, 2019; Radil et al, 2017) has shown
Jenkins and colleagues work in an area referred to as evidence-based policing scholarship, where academics work in tandem with police to create an approach to research that privileges the voice of police but excludes other critical forms of data

Summary

Introduction

On October 7, 2020, the Ottawa Police Tactical Unit, or Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team, executed a search warrant at the apartment of Anthony Aust and his family in Canada’s capital city. In their article on the use of tactical officers in three Canadian police services, Jenkins and colleagues (2020) suggest much the same Their argument is that regular duty police are not able to respond to most calls that are so-called high risk and that more and more calls involve such risk Jenkins and colleagues work in an area referred to as evidence-based policing scholarship, where academics work in tandem with police to create an approach to research that privileges the voice of police but excludes other critical forms of data It refers to the words of police as evidence and the accounts of other persons as biased, normative or political. I comment on a number of conceptual, methodological, and empirical issues I see with the article by Jenkins and colleagues

SWAT practices in context

Findings

SWAT everywhere?