Recent Shootings And LODD's: Could ESU Have Saved Lives?

[x635 4,066]

I've been following a lot of the news coverage rearding all the mass shootings and LODD's that have been happening across the country. One common thread is that "if SWAT could have got there faster...."

Yesterday, I was reading the book "E-Man: Life in the NYPD Emergency Services Unit"*by Det. Al Sheppard, Ret. Its described numerous situations in New York City that were similar to what we are seeing on the news, and how ESU was able to put an effective and efficient end to the situation.

With ESU on patrol, you basically have a mobile SWAT team 24/7. ESU exists only in the NYC metro area, as far as I know. Other agencies often have to assemble SWAT, and that takes time.

I know that some of these incidents were unavoidable, but I believe if the ESU concept were in place in more cities, that citizens would be safer. My favorite quote from the book: "When people need help, they call the police....when Police need help, they call ESU". How true it is.

Thoughts and prayers are with the hundreds of people affected by this tragedy including the fallen officers. My hope is that this situation brings to light the need for more funding for ESU/SWAT units that can mobilize faster, funding for development of better weapons and body armor for first responding officers, and better training on these types of incidents.

It's scary how many sickos are out there with high powered weapons that can outpower police officers. We're over spending billions fighting a war against terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan (not that that isn't important), in the interest of "Homeland Security". Meanwhile, we have these US-citizen terrorists in our own country, and I think more funding needs to be shifted to our TRUE homeland security- our local and regional police departments on the front lines right here in our own country.

Firefighters die in a variety of tragic circumstances. Most often, Police Officers are murdered! And I'm sick of seeing both!

*BOOK REFERENCED: http://www.fire-police-ems.com/books/be0050.shtml

[JohnnyOV 2]

With ESU on patrol, you basically have a mobile SWAT team 24/7. ESU exists only in the NYC metro area, as far as I know. Other agencies often have to assemble SWAT, and that takes time.

When I was in Long Island the other week, I saw a nassau county ESU truck operating at a rollover and providing extrication.

I found more info on their website today - their ESU is actually called BSO - Bureau of Special Operations - http://www.police.co.nassau.ny.us/bso.htm

pictures of NCPD - BSO in action - http://billbennettphoto.com/NASSAUPOLICE.aspx

[SageVigiles 1,194]

I absolutely agree Seth. Larger cities like Oakland and Pittsburgh should be able to implement a system like NYPD ESU's. Even SWAT officers in regular patrol cars would help, similar to what LAPD Metro Division does.

[NJMedic 96]

I can't speak for what happens across the country for the but there is enough wackiness in NYC to support a full time ESU style response even if they did not get involved in rescue work. That type of demand is not too common anywhere else. Being a tactical paramedic assigned to a county-based SWAT team the idea of waiting for SWAT to respond to deal with an active shooter, especially if civilians are in the line of fire is not in vogue anymore. Unless SWAT is on the road 24/7 the regular road officers are going to have to deal with this until SWAT gets there which in my area can take up to an hour. If with SWAT on the scene stills can still spin out of control. Two of the officers involved in the San Fransisco were assigned to SFPD SWAT.

[Guest]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to hear something about how since the Columbine shooting Active Shooter responses have changed from waiting for ESU to an aggressive stance from regular patrol officers. With this incident in Pittsburgh however, you aren't going to send an ESU unit to every domestic call, and by the time the three officers had been shot, I would guess that it would be very unlikely an ESU would have beat the backup officers there.

[FFLieu 70]

These shootings all have direct ties to 2004 when Bush decided to let the ban on assault weapons expire. Pretty much every single major shooting since that time has involved - in some way, shape, or form - firearms that, as far as I am concerned, have no place in society except for maybe the Army. Everyone jumped on Obama for his views on gun control, and in light of the events 2 weeks ago in Oakland, 2 days ago in Binghamton, and yesterday in Pittsburgh, can anyone really blame him for wanting to curtail access to firearms?

As far as the instant topic, I don't believe that the presence of ESU/SWAT would have prevented any deaths, unfortunately.

[20y2 43]

Depending on ESU is a very false sense of security. In situations like this time is essential. If ESU is immediately available fine, let them respond in. However ESU responds to aideds, MVAs, EDPs and a host of other things meaning that usually they will not be immediately available. What has to happen is better training for ALL police officers and a rifle and shotgun (along with O2 and an AED) in every car. Depending on ESU to save the day leads to weaker cops, just as sending a medic to EVERY medical call can lead to a weaker EMT ( he will never have to deal with an unstable patient by himself all the way to the hospital.)

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Absolutely, as some have mentioned, Post-Colombine, law enforcement CANNOT wait for tactical teams. I believe the shooting in the Colombine Massacre was over in approximately 20 minutes, it took about 40-50 minutes for the first SWAT team on scene. But what I think Seth was talking about was an already on-the-road ESU such as NYPD's version, riding in teams of two. A team that is already on the street and does not have to wait for the "callup" to meet up, tac up and THEN respond. If I'm understanding what Seth is talking about, I think THAT type of ESU unit could definitely make a difference for response times. Patrol wouldn't have to wait so long for SWAT. However, if you look at the types of calls that killed the police officers in the last week, I don't know that this unit would have been dispatched.

Oakland: Car stop by a motorcycle unit. ESU wouldn't always back up a motorcycle unit on a "routine" traffic stop (yes, I recognize that no traffic stop can ever be assumed to be routine, but you guys get my point)

Pittsburgh: Domestic/Neighbor Dispute. Domestics are generally a hotter call, but with the amount of domestics a department gets everyday, could you really dispatch 2 tac officers to every one? I doubt it.

BUT, that being said, Tac Officers could have responded MUCH faster to the incident for the purposes of scene stabilization, search, officer-down rescue, etc. Definitely two sides to this coin, but I can't see how an on-the-road tac team would hurt.

Also, what 20y2 said is was right on point. Put the shotguns away and get patrol rifles in those cars, and get your Officer's trained in rudimentary tactical maneuvers. I'm not saying make everyone a SWAT Operator, but give them an idea of how to operate. Again though, would you bring your rifle inside on a domestic?

Edited April 5, 2009 by SageVigiles

[INIT915 1,119]

Current active shooter scenarios, as has been mentioned, no longer bring a "contain the perimiter" mentality. That's why field personnel (in any agency taking this seriously) have instructed all field personnel in how to engage active shooters. Many agencies, NYSP and other County/Local PD's also deploy rifle-equiped cars on patrol.

If I remember the story correct, two of the four fatalities in Oakland were of SWAT Members, no?

[27east 19]

These shootings all have direct ties to 2004 when Bush decided to let the ban on assault weapons expire. Pretty much every single major shooting since that time has involved - in some way, shape, or form - firearms that, as far as I am concerned, have no place in society except for maybe the Army. Everyone jumped on Obama for his views on gun control, and in light of the events 2 weeks ago in Oakland, 2 days ago in Binghamton, and yesterday in Pittsburgh, can anyone really blame him for wanting to curtail access to firearms?

As far as the instant topic, I don't believe that the presence of ESU/SWAT would have prevented any deaths, unfortunately.

Right. The best thing to do here is to blame Bush. Since it's obviously his fault. Gun control worked so well in DC until it was overturned by the Supreme Court......

Just a thought, I don't know, but mabye if law-abiding people were more free to exercise their constitutional rights and have better access to concelaed carry permits, things would be different.

better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Edited April 6, 2009 by 23piraf

[FFLieu 70]

Right. The best thing to do here is to blame Bush. Since it's obviously his fault. Gun control worked so well in DC until it was overturned by the Supreme Court......

Just a thought, I don't know, but mabye if law-abiding people were more free to exercise their constitutional rights and have better access to concelaed carry permits, things would be different.

better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

Sorry buddy, but the facts speak for themselves. Major Incident Homicides involving automatic assault weapons have increased exponentially since the September 13, 2004 expiration of the federal law codified within 18 USC Chapter 44 which banned weapons such as the TEC-9, AK-47, AR-15, "Street Sweeper," "Striker 12" and AR-70, just to name a few. Now, since you're obviously pursuing a law enforcement career (as I am), tell me just what the heck does anyone need with a weapon called the "Street Sweeper?" You just might be faced with a weapon such as this at some point in your career, and I am willing to bet my next paycheck that if the time comes when you're staring one of these down, you won't be saying something like "if more law-abiding people could carry then maybe this guy wouldn't be brandishing a Street Sweeper in my face."

And as far as it being better to "have it and not need it than to need it and not have it," that's rather short-sighted; you're forgetting about training and insight. Just because you may be allowed to have a weapon doesn't necessarily mean that you should have one. Firearms are analogous to alcohol: just because you're over the age of 21 doesn't necessarily mean that you have achieved a healthy respect for alcohol and doesn't necessarily mean that you should engage in alcoholic consumption; therefore, just because you can carry doesn't necessarily mean that you should. Nine times out of ten, it's the yahoo who pulls out his weapon without thinking who gets popped in the street.

[STAT213 332]

FF Lieu what you clearly fail to understand is that the Clinton "assault" weapons ban was an utter failure. It did nothing.

These weapons exist. Do you REALLY think that someone intent on killing lots of other people is going to pay attention to some violation or misdemeanor level offense related to what kind of weapons they are going to use when committing murder? C'mon.

No one needs a street sweeper. But don't you tell me for a second that I cannot protect my family with whatever means I deem necessary from that punk with the street sweeper. And don't tell me to wait for the professionals to show up, cause we've seen how well THAT works.

And seeing as you want to point out your version of statistical fun...take a brief look at countries that have significantly restricted firearms and what it has done to their levels of violent crime. Then, take a look at what has happened in states that have passed good concealed carry laws.

Gun control laws are by and large feel good laws for politicians to say they have done something about crime when in fact they do not work.

And, just where did you come up with that line about nine times out of ten the yahoo who pulls his weapon getting popped.

[ny10570 745]

A few things, gun control does not increase or decrease crime. Look at Baltimore and DC. Statistically 2 very similar cities until DC instituted their weapons ban. Shortly after there was big spike in a variety of violent crimes. At the same time Baltimore went through nearly identical increases. So was it the weapons ban or was it something else?

The assault weapons ban was about accessories to guns. High capacity magazines, pistol grips, etc. Fully automatic weapons are still illegal. The AR-15 was still legal to own under the ban and most semi automatic riffles can fairly easily be converted to full auto.

In those two incidents NYPD ESU even if they weren't distracted by MVA's and crane collapses still wouldn't have made a difference. The damage was done before the officers on scene knew what they were into.

Edited April 6, 2009 by ny10570

[weaselff 6]

No, because 2 of the officers killed in Oakland were SWAT/ESU anyway, the officers in Pittsburgh were responding to a simple domestic...no need to send ESU to that and Binghamtom is to small/poor of a city to have 24/7 SWAT/ESU.

[x635 4,066]

One of the benefits of ESU is that they are always on the road, with all the tatical equipment they need. They constantly monitor the radio, and assign themselves to a majority of jobs, or at least start rolling that way.

In many instances, it seems Police Officers are outgunned, at least to me. The LAPD North Hollywood shootout in 1997 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout ) was a turning point in LAPD history, and led to them staffing SWAT better and patrol units with better weapons.

I believe that more federal funding should go towards funding the "Tatical ESU" model in cities with high violent crime rates. I know many situations that Yonkers PD ESU and Mount Vernon PD ESU have put an end quickly to situations that could have turned deadly with equipment and training the patrol officers didn't have.

Westchester County PD should also have a 24/7 ESU team, especially for the central and northern parts of the county. I know they have SWAT, but I am talking ESU staffed 24/7. Maybe they could respond from Westchester County Airport, that way, if need be, they can be flown to scenes in the region.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Westchester County PD should also have a 24/7 ESU team, especially for the central and northern parts of the county. I know they have SWAT, but I am talking ESU staffed 24/7. Maybe they could respond from Westchester County Airport, that way, if need be, they can be flown to scenes in the region.

Since my tax dollars already pay for this level of service, i would like to thank you for suggesting that the highest taxed county in the U.S. should charge more in taxes to cover communities that do not support this level of service.

Maybe those living in Tx. should pay for No. Westchester. I hear the taxes are low there.

[x635 4,066]

Another thought I had.......are the calltakers under any scrutiny during these incidents? Did they ask if there were any weapons, or possibility that these suspects potentially had weapons?

How would that affect staging? Would officers wait for a SWAT team if the caller said the the perp was heavily armed? If so, how would response time affect the situation?

[Guest]

The officers staged in Binghampton because there was a known shooter, but he was not actively shooting upon arrival, so it depends on the situation. Even if SWAT had been there soon I doubt they would have run right in, I can't imagine it would have saved a huge amount of time.

[helicopper 1,050]

I think these are two different questions.

What, if anything, could have been done to prevent the recent shootings of police officers? and What is the benefit of an on-duty ESU type tactical entity versus the on-call type team?

First, I'm not sure anything could have been done to prevent these shootings (Oakland and Pittsburgh). In both cases they were essentially assassinated in an ambush by a well-armed and focused perpetrator. It is very hard to defend against these types of incidents in our litigious society - imagine if everyone stopped for a traffic offense was ordered out of their vehicle at gunpoint by police officers concealed behind their vehicle? Perhaps more realistic and more frequent training to help combat complacency and maintain proficiency would be a positive outcome of these tragedies but it may not prevent the next one.

As for 24/7 ESU/SWAT - there is obviously a benefit to the reduced response time of tactical assets (as with any other specialty resource - didn't we just have quite a lively debate about the response times of firematic specialty teams? - but the two tactical operators can not function as a complete SWAT team by themselves. So, unless we're going to staff the same way NYC does (25 or so fully equipped REP's and Trucks plus specialty units), we're going to have delays.

On the subject of dispatchers and call-takers, they could definitely benefit from more realistic and more frequent training. I know alot of PD's provide no in-service training to their communications people. Once they're trained they're supposed to know everything forever! But as we've discussed before, the information going out is only as good as the information coming in so if they suspect is calling police to stage his own ambush and suicide by police, nothing will protect the responding officers. And the Oakland cops were gunned down on a car stop so there was no dispatch involvement prior to the murders.

Sadly law enforcement remains an incredibly dangerous profession that is used as a pawn in political and budgetary games.

[HazMatHarry 0]

When I was in Long Island the other week, I saw a nassau county ESU truck operating at a rollover and providing extrication.

I found more info on their website today - their ESU is actually called BSO - Bureau of Special Operations - http://www.police.co.nassau.ny.us/bso.htm

pictures of NCPD - BSO in action - http://billbennettphoto.com/NASSAUPOLICE.aspx

Close but not quite. Nassau's ESU is actually part of the Highway Patrol Bureau and can provide initial SWAT response but is primarily focused on rescue related activities (lock outs, wild animals, extrication, lockouts, hazmat, etc.) ESU will usually wait for BSO's SWAT operators to make an entry, especially for the heavy stuff. ESU and BSO work closely together but are seperate units with seperate purposes. When not acting as a SWAT team, BSO mostly does anti-crime undercover work.

[tjdeputy 0]

These shootings all have direct ties to 2004 when Bush decided to let the ban on assault weapons expire. Pretty much every single major shooting since that time has involved - in some way, shape, or form - firearms that, as far as I am concerned, have no place in society except for maybe the Army. Everyone jumped on Obama for his views on gun control, and in light of the events 2 weeks ago in Oakland, 2 days ago in Binghamton, and yesterday in Pittsburgh, can anyone really blame him for wanting to curtail access to firearms?

As far as the instant topic, I don't believe that the presence of ESU/SWAT would have prevented any deaths, unfortunately

you are so wrong in so many ways guns dont kill people people kill people and if they inforced the laws we have maybe there would be less shootings maybe not. You cant just blame it on the guns.

[antiquefirelt 994]

These shootings all have direct ties to 2004 when Bush decided to let the ban on assault weapons expire. Pretty much every single major shooting since that time has involved - in some way, shape, or form - firearms that, as far as I am concerned, have no place in society except for maybe the Army. Everyone jumped on Obama for his views on gun control, and in light of the events 2 weeks ago in Oakland, 2 days ago in Binghamton, and yesterday in Pittsburgh, can anyone really blame him for wanting to curtail access to firearms?

As far as the instant topic, I don't believe that the presence of ESU/SWAT would have prevented any deaths, unfortunately.

You've evidentially not really looked at the statistics which actually show the opposite is true. Now, the media has played up the assault rifle/semi-auto weapons whenever they had the chance, making you more aware of these types of weapons when their used. But in fact the use of these weapons in violent crime has not increased since the sunset of the Brady Bill.

You need to remember along with all the other libs, that murder is a crime more serious than a gun violation, so a criminal with intent will not hesitate to carry a weapon regardless of the law. On the other hand, law-abiding citizens have their defensive capability limited by the Brady bill, while proving there are not enough LEO's to have an adequate and rapid response to violent crimes. Waiting 10 minutes for LE when someone breaks into your house may not be in your best interest. Do you know how many times a year private firearms are used to prevent a crime from happening? The statistics themselves are incomplete as many go unreported, due to fear of legal action from the use of the firearm in a defensive posture.

On the type of weapon? Guns are inanimate objects with no feelings, they don't commit crimes, people do. Thus far in my life I've proven capable of owning a rocket launcher or ICBM, why not? I've owned plenty of firearms, never used them irresponsibly. In one local paper they note the Pittsburgh shooter had a high-power assault rifle. An AK-47? Not really a high power cartridge, I own hunting rifles of far greater power than 99% of assault weapons. They just don't look as scary.

Why not make all vehicles utilize a breathalyzer before operation? Wouldn't this save more lives than banning assault weapons? Drunk drivers kill thousands of people and the technology exists to prevent or limit this, but we don't infringe on everyones rights, right? How about cars that go over the speed limit? No need to own one period, right? How is a Ferrari any different than an AK-47? Both on their own pose zero threat. Of course I cannot support the NRA as they take things too far on the other side. I'm all for registering my weapons, I have no reason not too. The concern that the government will someday come take my guns is just a little too far out for me. Though Nagin pulled that crap in New Orleans so maybe they're on to something.

I agree that LEO need better protection, information and weapons to ensure they've got the upper hand. This must include putting people in jail for a long time or killing them. Along with some reduction in sniveling about every police procedure by lawyers and liberals out to make money when cops do their jobs.