This Is WHY Dynamic Entry Could Be Dead In 2024
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
- Jon Becker, Owner of Ardvark, the leading tactical brand for law enforcement SWAT teams shares his opinion on SWAT teams conducting dynamic entries.
----------
🔴 Check out our website and subscribe for free give aways at www.shotsfired...
--------
➡️ For e-mails, you can reach the team at shotsfiredpodcast360@gmail.com
---------
✅ Follow us on Instagram:
@shotsfiredpodcastofficial
Are dynamic entries becoming less of a thing? Drop a comment and let us know your thoughts.
Yea it just took like 10,000 dead Americans. Besides the fact that cops are inherently incompetent (otherwise they'd have real jobs) and time and time again raid the WRONG HOUSE!
It's been almost 31 years since the Waco Siege. Think of how differently the outcome could have been (nobody can be certain as to the possibility/probability matrix) had they done a tactical pick up on Vernon Howell (AKA David Koresh) during one of his many and predictable trips into town. In my opinion, tactical pick ups are the best option to keep the initiative in the hands of the officers involved.
100% agree. This is a very underutilized tactic. Remove bad guy from his comfort zone.
You mean when they are fully alert and armed with a gun driving 2,000lb weapon?
I would argue they are out of their element when it's 4am, they are in the boxers, passed out in bed completely caught off guard thinking you are the tooth fairy standing in his room. Heck, it's funny to see even when I wake up my wife out of a deep sleep 😂
@@tedr9066 No, when he was walking in or out of the coffee shop that he liked to frequent.
@@michigunder1522or they could have just left those people alone. Ever consider that?
@@COWBAYOUBADASS My comment isn't about whether they should or should not have gone in (that administration made several horrible blunders) only about how they could have done it differently where a less tragic outcome may have been possible.
Context. Surround/Callout, like the threshold assessment, is a tactic passed down from special operations units who were trying to figure out a way to combat suicide/IED threats inside of buildings in Iraq/Afghanistan. We don’t typically run across suicide/IED threats in the states. Those special operations dudes got out of the military and started teaching tactics to federal law enforcement (who benefit most from this tactic due to the fact that they don’t have qualified immunity), who then passed the tactic down to state and local law enforcement. If you surround and callout, you will have to make entry eventually - especially if the suspect refuses to surrender. When we surround/callout we have no speed, we have lost all surprise, and we have no violence of action. The only time my team has used a surround/callout approach on a search warrant is when we had intelligence to suggest that the house we were hitting was boobytrapped.
1) Risk to the general public, 2) Risk to team members, 3) Risk to the suspect. This is the hierarchy of concerns when it comes to mission planning. Dynamic entries respect this hierarchy more than any other tactic by nearly eliminating all risk to the general public. Open-air gunfights (surround/callout, vehicle takedowns) and high-speed pursuits (vehicle takedowns) add unnecessary risk to the general public.
For the majority of high-risk search warrants, a dynamic entry with distraction devices and a good team is king.
Dynamic entry is dumb for warrants. Surround and call out is best.
@@handled99 I agree. The risk to public is not greater for dynamic versus contain/callout. Risk to officers and suspect (initially) is much higher for dynamic. Rather than making a fight or flight decision to grab a weapon, there's time for a suspect to process and eventually make a decision. Plus you can help control their location in the house with gas or use robots and drones to get accurate intel or communicate with them without throw phones. It just seems there's very little reason to do dynamic for a search warrant. Lives are more important than evidence getting flushed.
Well in the US the supreme court says that you must knock announce your presence and give the home owner a reasonable time to answer. There goes surprise. Any one inside a residence willing to fight can grab a weapon as soon as you announce. There goes speed. Violence of action is more to me a mindset. If I'm going across a threshold then I'm committed. Military tactics dont always work in SWAT/LE ops. Speed, surprise, violence of action is all relative.
Good teams are diminishingly rare to non-existent. Whether you agree that killing Breona Taylor was warranted, the tactics were abysmal.
@@TheJuggernautKing3my state has exceptions to knock/announce under certain articulable circumstances, but we do announce our presence with a loud speaker and emergency lights as we are breaching.
The major problem not discussed is most swat cops suck at tactics because they don’t have the repetitions, but think that they are cag/seal tm 6 operators. They adopt a military mindset forgetting that they are not military, they are police.
Agree 💯….I wrapped up my SWAT career in October 2021 and we were already moving to surround and call out.
Let me guess, you served in the military, probably the marines, protecting and fighting for freedom, just to come home to fight to take away the rights of Americans? POS!
Good conversations. Tactics have come a long way over the years. Most teams probably are not doing dynamic entries like they used to.
Agreed. Always the exception.
Big city Dallas PD SWAT still runs dynamic on all warrants.
@@boykin911 Dallas is one of our neighboring teams and we run dynamic on all warrants, too. The have some impressive data and statistics to continue the tactic.
What’s the data that supports the tactic used to obtain dope?
@@nates4946 There is no specific tactic(s), that I am aware of, to obtain dope.
We switched from "always dynamic" to "only dynamic if necessary" (HR when assault triggers are met, AS) on most teams with TTPOA/NTOA accreditation years ago.
The discussion goes hand in hand with using LP every single chance you get.
Great discussion fellas.
Incorrect my man....1966 Austin Texas was the cause and start for SWAT. TOWER SNIPER. after that atleast for Texas SWAT began
Just realized how my comment sounded.. Wasn't meant with any ill will was just a little knowledge drop.
That's ok. There is so much history that no one person or group has all the answers, everyone develops their own understanding based off of their training and experience and mission. Mr Becker is correct about the mission and orientation that came from Munich's influence, its a milestone. You can go back to Fairbairn and Sykes to get an even further understanding of the origins of how we do what we do in this context. Props for leaving your original comment up and posting a more thought out follow up. That's exactly what the point of this conversion is about.
Local teams only surround/call out now for warrants. We now have teams of guys that have never entered a structure that hasn't first been called out and cleared by a robot/dog. We're talking teams of guys that have never entered a structure with a known suspect inside. And who've never done a dynamic entry 'for real'. I get it. Safer for the officer, lower risk, lower liability. Even when we switched to a roll up and entry but a slow/methodical clear of the residence at least we were entering/ clearing houses and making apprehensions. In the event these guys need to do a hostage rescue/dynamic entry I can't even imagine how amped up they are going to be. Teams that have never rolled up to a house and hit a door. Or enter a residence with a person in it...
Very interesting. Had no idea of the full history behind the Munich Olympics and the growth of SWAT in the US
It’s a combination of very high profile shootings outside that such as the Marita Robberies in the 80s the LA Shoot Out and Columbine. It wasn’t just one event but, everything all together.
Not true....1966 Texas
Not true....1966 Texas
@@mr.m1394 not quite. Munich was a precision operation, whereas Waco was more of a beleaguering without plan.
I never mentioned waco.... I spoke of austin texas tower sniper. During that event was the first make shift of any kind of team put together after that was the beginning of SWAT. Again can speak atleast for Texas
I wish your podcast was required listening for all police officers. I make all my students listen to a few of your episodes as a requirement.
Love your guest’s thoughtful comments. Well done!
In the active shooter scenario, there will never be a more appropriate tactic than dynamic entry. The reduction of no knock warrant service has merit, but I can't see a point in time when dynamic entry will be shelved.
correct. anyone with the slightest knowledge would agree to that. I'm pretty sure they speaking solely towards search warrants/arrest warrants.
What protocols are in place to ensure that Dynamic Entry be used when necessary as opposed to Surround and Call Out?
e.g. Uvalde
As a former swat officer things like active shooter/killer are always dynamic and meant to directly address the threat. This is more for your search warrants/barricades/traditional swat call outs
The issue is the average local swat team isn’t training or even operating enough to be good at HR tactics and Surround and Call Out tactics. To assume that a 5 year swat guy who has never done an operational dynamic entry, and who has to split theory training on HR and SCO, will just rise above all of that and perform successfully is why incidents like Uvalde happens
Most SWAT tactics are military based. In the later days in Iraq the dynamic entry became less and less. A 12.5 machine gun in a hallway is just laying in wait. They spec ops guys learned to surround the compound and call the bad guys out. And most times the did come out.
They all have their place. They’re just tools in a toolbox. While in Syria we used call outs. If you had asked me my opinion of call outs beforehand, I’d say they’re dumb. But afterwards I found myself liking them. We also did dynamic stuff, and a ton of deliberate/combat clearance stuff. A lot of the stuff I currently teach is LOC style CQB. As far as CQB goes, most people are far behind. In my opinion LOC style clearing is the objectively the best.
They all have their place. They’re just tools in a toolbox. While in Syria we used call outs. If you had asked me my opinion of call outs beforehand, I’d say they’re dumb. But afterwards I found myself liking them. We also did dynamic stuff, and a ton of deliberate/combat clearance stuff. A lot of the stuff I currently teach is LOC style CQB. As far as CQB goes, most people are far behind. In my opinion LOC style clearing is the objectively the best.
20 years at war there are a lot of us with combat experience who have made our peace with our God . I mean a lot ! You come kicking in most of our doors Jesus is coming . The problem is the level of incompetence in LE today because of the defund the police movement has made it where people like me will not tolerate anyone kicking my door .
"When in doubt, surround and call-out". Breach and Hold, using your resources. Slow it down you have time. Dynamic entry has a specific purpose.
A “blanket policy” of doing a dynamic entry or not dynamically entering is wrong. I know we all want a “one size fits all” solution but people need to be smarter than that. Creating a flexible execution checklist will also simplify the process as well.
Sports and game strategy is so far ahead of training doctrine in LE. They want to place two tactics on a podium that's been institutionalised like a debate, but by trying to compete tactics the reality is that its like a guitarist debating if strumming or picking is a better way its nothing like that. You don't find guitarist or racers getting emotional about how their pedal is used just that they want to achieve coherency in every way possible. Maybe people who go into jobs where you had to inherently take life to save life, and that attribute of a work can skewer perception because that's not what they want to be, they don't want to be part of that and then get confused by smaller aspects of that line of work. Because the idea of killing someone is so horrible that all that anxiety is misplaced on theorising tactics but not having the background to know what works and doesn't depending on the scenario.
There are certainly situations where a dynamic entry is the best and even the safest option, but there's a very good reason that the military has moved to call outs. In Iraq and Afghanistan we learned the hard way how much of a tactical disadvantage you're in when making entry to an unfamiliar structure. It only takes a few incidents where you lose half your stack in the first few seconds of an operation to rethink how you're conducting business. Granted, the military has options not available to civilian law enforcement when the call out doesn't work, but you're still in the same situation you were before the call out. You may still have to breach, now without the element of surprise, but most of the time you really don't have that anyway.
How many SWAT officers/ Subjects or suspects are shot on a surround and call out vs The same using dynamic entry? I think the numbers may surprise you. According to NTOA instructors , the numbers of OIS are greater using the surround and call out.
If bad guy comes out of a structure armed and gets engaged that’s on the suspect. If you look at how many cops were struck by gunfire while making entry into a structure, that number is always going to be higher. Your odds are better on either a surround and call out, or doing a take away.
The catch with the takeaway is, you are saying this guy is too dangerous to take in his house, ok cool. but it's ok for the patrol cop with less cover, less back up, and probably less trained to take the guy on the side of the road?
@@shotsfiredpodcast50I was actually just catching up on past videos and saw you guys did a debrief of an officer wounded as they surrounded and were gassing a house. And that was easy to find, surround and call outs aren't full proof either.
@@tedr9066 nothing is fool proof. but why are we always so quick to rush to our death when there are other options to achieve the same outcome?
@@tedr9066 its usually not done with just a random patrol officer. Its usually a planned vehicle assault conducted by trained fugitive guys after a lot of surveillance and planning.
Did you hear your own explanation? "They shoot hostages, they shoot at patrol guys, hostage rescue,......" then you say "there's no stimulus". WOW is all I can say.
I think you still need to train for it even if it ends up going into the back pocket
I think both techniques have a place. They are specific and neve generic. Most SWAT in our area is surround, call out, gas, dismember the structure and then clear.
A well-executed entry (if its the right house!) can spiral into litigation in a 'skinny minute'.👍
And when it's the wrong one.. may the poor taxpayer fear for their already beleaguered wallet
@@wingatebarraclough3553nope, most of the time the government gets off scot free. Even if they completely destroy your house. As long as these re-re's think it's the right place, no surveillance needed, no real intelligence gathering, just some crackhead saying that's the place. How did the real world become the Team America movie?
Although we are comparing apples and oranges with special ops and SWAT teams. Both have different functions I believe dynamic entry is still king. Sitting hours even days in a stand off makes no sense and a waste of time and resources. I believe the reason for OIS is lack of training and application. The mindset between a spec ops soldier and a SWAT officer are so different. You can’t apply what some socom units are teaching fully because there are more unknown variables in “Domestic CQB”. I believe the use of drones with violent of action would be able to lessen the blow with OIS, I rather sqwack the guy upon entry then having a standoff, closing roads, using resources and wasting time. I believe Dynamic Entry is still king just needs to be refined for the modern day situation. Just my two sense.
Explain these unknown variables in domestic CQB because I hear all the time that spec ops guys have more leeway on raids than domestic law enforcement agencies do when that’s not true at all.
It’s not so much leeway… it’s a mindset, most CQB conducting in spec ops are raids. There are certain variables to this but we are staying on “comparing jobs”. Speed and violence of action is used whether it’s a raid on a compound or HR. One police are not trained to this level of aggression nor are they taught the same tactics. An example is suppressive fire. As a police officer you got more variables in what can happen and you have more pressure coming from the brass, politics, and body cam. There is a reason US MARSHALS don’t use the body cams out of all law enforcement agencies. It’s because when talking about doing a job such as HR or CQB it’s the most dangerous unpredictable job you can do. You have to account for a million things and be able to adapt and overcome in situations that are not always black and white. Just that alone most police aren’t train to be free thinkers nor possess the skills to do that job. Not to mention the fitness and mentally clarity you need to conduct CQB. All in all it’s just a shit show because it demands the best and trained constantly. Most police even swat don’t get trained enough to conduct t that job. Some special considerations but most. No
People who wear wigs should not drive convertables.
Can’t even argue that.
When a guy goes down you are exactly right, You must continue on. Unfortunately in the words of Gen Garrison in Somalia, “ we just lost the initiative.”
This is a great honest conversation
Very few swag guys across this country are game that’s why they surround and call out. They don’t have the money to train these guys anymore in a lot of the cities and they’re getting sued constantly because their officers are fucking up. How can you conduct CQB or HRT or even a dynamic entry if half of your guys Don’t know what the fucks going on and you can’t tell me they don’t because that guy just told a story of a swat team, making entry and guys going down and then pulling out that doesn’t sound like a top-tier unit to me doesn’t sound like tip of the spear fighting to me And isn’t that what special weapons and tactics is all about?
Enjoyed all the comments on this podcast
Thank you.
Purple Heart combat veteran Chris Kuehne had his home raided by a tactical squad in 12 degree weather over a non-violent trespassing charge. His pregnant wife and child were forced to stand outside and freeze after the raid. His wife miscarried the day after the raid.
Please quit saying that “Dynamic Entries” are done, fizzling out, past their time or whatever you all can come up with. Also for your credibility don’t quote or reference the NTOA as a credible resource. The NTOA has very little credibility left with the officer in the field. The NTOA has become dependent on federal subsidiary to bank roll them and in turn have their narrative pushed out. Here is the reality of it, a lot of so called “trainers” are not really good at entry anyway and they have trained a generation of SWAT members that are poor at making a “Dynamic Entry” and when mistakes happen or bad things go on it is swept under the rug of, if we had ran it as a “Surround & Callout” this would not have happened. The reality of it is either the ones saying it are late in the careers and don’t really care if the next generation has the option to run it dynamically or deep down they know they don’t have either the ability or don’t know how to get it so they slow the operation down under the fake guise of being safer. My department runs on average 175-200 warrants a year with over 90% of those being executed as a “Dynamic Entry”. Having the ability to be dynamic for an entry is an excellent tactic that when just like any other tactic done correctly will yield positive results. Not to mention when the SWAT team has to perform a Hostage Rescue entry they are much better prepared for it because of the experience of clearing space on the move. Again please quit spewing the same ridiculous narrative that the NTOA, DOJ and the brass want to hear…..
Interesting skull shape btw.
What episode number is this?
Police Department internal transparency does exist (true within my department).
You have stealth and also dynamic actions it was never about only doing dynamic or only doing stealth.
During my academy days, we had scenarios of an arrest warrant for someone we knew was armed. I always tried to formulate a plan to lure the subject out. The training instructors would say, “No, you’re banging on the door and yelling law enforcement we have a warrant and going through the door.” Meanwhile, they referred to the door as the ‘Portal of Death.” Absent homicidal maniac with hostages, I cannot think of too many scenarios where banging down the door is the way to go.
The classic example of this is Waco. David Koresh routinely went out into the city of Waco and some of the places he went were routine.
Had the ATF been smart they would have arrested him in town. Instead we all know what happened
Work on getting the correct address first!
2X2 column formation just like they did in Die Hard-Nakatomi Plaza/LAPD.
@4:55 mark - “Safety Priorities: Innocent victims, hostages…(BEFORE) cops…”. Yeah, tell that to the Uvalde community!
In many cases surround and callout on a narc warrant will result in destruction of evidence. I understand that evidence is lowest on the priority scale, but if you know surround and call out will result in loss of evidence then you are accepting failure of the mission. This result could be that the narcotics laws become unenforceable simply because a team refuses to accept risk. This tactic essentially gives criminals safe haven inside of a dope house. If we refuse seek out these criminals where the operate, we are in danger of these organizations gaining levels of power here as the have in Mexico. I also don’t think it’s fair to ruin an investigation on the tactical side because a team doesn’t want to make entry. Yes the criminals may make poor decisions, but this is likely to happen in any law enforcement encounter. I for one am tired of the law only being applied to people who give up. Those who make split second poor decisions are exactly the people who the law should be applied to.
Remember too that the job is ultimately about public safety and service to the public including innocent people. There have been at least 4 cases where a subject was chased into someones home or business and the building was severely damaged by dynamic entry and pyrotechnic devices. The homeowner then had to pursue legal action and fight qualified immunity because no restitution was offered. Actions like that put a huge stain on law enforcement and reinforce the "us vs them" mentality to the public. This makes the job more dangerous. Departments and officers need to be accountable
First “SWAT TEAM” was formed in 1964 in shithole PHILADELPHIA….. although at the time and through the 90s it was called STAKEOUT…
“Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make them all yourself.”
― Eleanor Roosevelt
Debriefing is important.
The only time dynamic entries should be used is in active shooter and hostage situations. Super dumb that vast majority of dynamic entries are used in search warrants for drugs.
I agree that evidence is a lower priority, but I think saying that undermines the importance of evidence under different circumstances.
If the narc unit’s case against a drug dealer is dependent upon the search warrant and the suspect flushes it on a surround and call out, then I agree, who cares.
If it’s a violent suspect that you’re serving an arrest warrant for, again I agree, surround and callout. If he doesn’t want to come out, it’s just a barricade and you start introducing chemical munitions etc.
Where I think dynamic entries still have place in warrant service is for child pornography cases for example. If you surround the suspect, that’s too much time for him to damage critical evidence by physically destroying electronic devices, and that’s not really a, “We’ll get him next time,” type of warrant like dope is. I’m not saying an officer’s life is worth a computer, but I think the additional risk is worth the potential outcome of getting a sex offender in prison.
Just my two cents.
The SWAT team I was on moved away from dynamic entries for search warrants a few years ago and it was one of the best things we ever did. Luckily we had a very forward thinking team commander. We still trained dynamic for hostage rescue of course but for everything else we moved to cordon and callout followed by combat clearing.
Did Mr. Becker ever serve as a law enforcement officer?
Dynamic entry should only really be a thing for hostage rescue anyway. No need for it otherwise.
Munich?! Really .
I believe dynamic entry is very relevant, but we should also utilize slice based entries. You should have the ability to be versatile and switch between the two and pair it up with target acquisition regarding a threat/hostage/civilian. But I also believe it depends on what the particular mission is at hand.
Speed, surprise, and violence of action is all relative. Really a military tactic. It's not for SWAT and L.E. because we have different rules, policy, and procedures. Threshold evaluation is the way to go. I rather fight the guy from outside the room instead of inside when possible. Dynamic has its place in Hostage Rescue. I'm happy teams are finally slowing down. I've been preaching that for years.
If SWAT was created for hostage rescue, who is responsible and accountable for its misuse?
I completely agree, and have been saying this for the last 2 years. different threats yield different types of entries, each team must ask themselves what is their driving force, Find the data, and remain Flexible in tactics. Because there isn’t a one size fits all.
Always trying to give the criminals more of an edge and screw the safety of the officers and law abiding citizens.
High risk, low gain activity.
End qualifiedimmunity
Evidence is number one.... Full stop
Swat went from “special weapons and tactics” to “surround, wait, and talk” but hey that 5% of society is happy so who cares right?
difference between a dirt bag and a dirt bag with a badge?
the dirt bag is accountable
the dirt bag with a badge is immune to accountability
wonder why dirtbags with badges only have friends with badges and their wives
😮😊o
Should have never been allowed.
Tell someone that in the early 2000’s and prior to that’s all they did.
Based on?