Here, there is the rather disturbing quote about “sending a hard message”. If sending a “hard message” is important, then why not simply do raids on random residences? Its bullshit.

Yup. _That_ I'm with you all the way on. The casual indifference towards the use of power and the impact (psychological, economical, societal, etc) it has on 'regular people' can be very frightening...

Gee , thanks for pointing out that toilet thing out. That aside, one can only search the property, person or person(s) named in the warrant. Unless this minor is named, he cannot be searched.

You brought it up, not me.

In my hometown, CRT teams (community response teams) are used in war rent work (they do wear vests, but aren’t armed with automatic weapons). The swat team hits the houses with known violent criminals. Have they made mistakes? Yes. I will not deny that–however they’ve taken down some bad people also.

And how many of those mistakes were stupid mistakes such as not double checking the address?

While I usually agree completely with you on these issues, Steve, I’m not so sure on this one. If someone’s going to train their kid to be a mule/portable stash, it seems likely that they would also teach them to ditch the evidence ASAP when the cops show.

The problem is using SWAT to prevent the destruction of evidence. I just don't think it is worth the risks.

Sure, a heavily-armed SWAT type isn’t the _best_ use of manpower to make sure that doesn’t happen, but he may have been the only guy available when the call of nature came down…

In reading the caption for the picture, my guess is they found nothing at the house. Usually when they find something they trumpet it to all and sundry. Here, there is the rather disturbing quote about "sending a hard message". If sending a "hard message" is important, then why not simply do raids on random residences? Its bullshit.

Uhh, in case you are not up to date on these modern contrivances, that thing in front of the kid is a toilet. He is going, pee, not being searched. Having a machine gun toting SWAT team member guard a 4/5 year old while he pees is ridiculous.

While I usually agree completely with you on these issues, Steve, I'm not so sure on this one. If someone's going to train their kid to be a mule/portable stash, it seems likely that they would also teach them to ditch the evidence ASAP when the cops show. Sure, a heavily-armed SWAT type isn't the _best_ use of manpower to make sure that doesn't happen, but he may have been the only guy available when the call of nature came down...

Unless this minor is named, he cannot be searched.

My understanding is that this isn't true everywhere. I recall a recent drug raid where the warrant included everyone in the house. They did this so that they could search any children that those "paragons of parenthood" might use to hide their drugs.

The picture is not as ridiculous as it looks. I assume this picture was taken after a drug raid on a home. Some people are not beyond placing their “wares” on children.

Uhh, in case you are not up to date on these modern contrivances, that thing in front of the kid is a toilet. He is going, pee, not being searched. Having a machine gun toting SWAT team member guard a 4/5 year old while he pees is ridiculous.

Also, the team is responsible for the welfare of all individuals inside of the house (anti-swaters, place snarky comment here) after the raid.

Gladly! So, storming a house with machine guns and flashbang grenades is how you keep non-violent offenders safe? I'm sorry, I just don't believe that.

Swat teams have their place in policing-although in a limited fashion.

The only glitch here is that SWAT teams are used extensively to serve warrants, even warrants on non-violent suspects with no criminal records.