An exploration of the use of tactical officers in three Canadian police services
| Author | Bryce Jenkins,Tori Semple,Laura Huey,Craig Bennell |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X20962833 |
| Published date | 01 December 2021 |
| Date | 01 December 2021 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
2021, Vol. 94(4) 515 –538
Article
An exploration of the use
of tactical officers in three
Canadian police services
Bryce Jenkins , Tori Semple and Craig Bennell
Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada
Laura Huey
Department of Sociology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
Abstract
In order to better understand the use of tactical police resources in Canada we inter-
viewed patrol and tactical officers (N¼28) from three Canadian police services. A
thematic analysis indicated that tactical officers are primarily responding to calls beyond
the capabilities of patrol to resolve optimally which included high-risk calls as denoted by the
presence of risk-factors and calls unfolding in special environments. Further, tactical officer
response is thought to result in a reduced threat to officer and public safety. Our findings
suggest that in contrast to previous claims, tactical officers are often responding to calls
where significant risk is present.
Keywords
Police, police militarization, police tactical units, Canada
Police tactical units (e.g., Special Weapons and Tactics [SWAT] teams) were originally
developed in response to high-profile situations resulting in the death of civilians
(Brooks, 2010). Previously, the police were ill-equipped to deal with such high-risk
incidents and the development of these teams of officers with specialized training and
equipment were a way for the police to minimize the likelihood of harm to both the
public and officers (Klinger and Rojek, 2008). However, over time, the use of such teams
Corresponding author:
Bryce Jenkins, Department of Psychology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S
5B6, Canada.
Email: bryce.jenkins@carleton.ca
The Police Journal:
Theory, Practice and Principles
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0032258X20962833
journals.sagepub.com/home/pjx
516 The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles 94(4)
has become increasingly controversial, as scholars have argued that they are the catalyst
of a concerning trend of police militarization, which may expose the public to more
aggressive policing, including the use of lethal force (Delehanty et al., 2017). Further,
despite their intended use for rare, high-risk events, more recent research across North
America has seen the increased use of tactical teams for what some are considering more
‘routine’ calls (e.g., traffic stops, mental health calls, warrant executions; Kraska, 2001;
Roziere and Walby, 2018).
Given the potential consequences of the increased use of tactical teams, it appears
more important than ever to gain an understanding of the circumstances under which
these teams are being used in order to facilitate evidence-based decision making around
the use of tactical resources in contemporary society. Previous research on the topic in
Canada is limited to the use of call for service data that relies solely on call type (e.g.,
domestic disturbance; Roziere and Walby, 2018, 2020) and contains substantial amounts
of missing information (e.g., related to risk factors associated with the calls; Jenkins et
al., 2020), both of which may result in erroneous conclusions. Therefore, this exploratory
study aims to provide more context to the circumstances under which tactical police
resources are used in Canada by interviewing officers from three police services. In order
to set the context for the current study, we will review the literature pertaining to the use
of tactical teams and perceptions regarding their use.
Literature review
The use of police tactical units
In both the United States (US) and Canada, the use of tactical units has rapidly expanded in
the past few decades (e.g., Alvaro, 2000; Kraska, 2001; Kraska and Kappeler, 1997).
Coinciding with this increase in the use of tactical units is the apparent expansion of their
mandate such that tactical units are no longer reserved for infrequent high-risk calls such
as hostage takings, but are instead incorporated into mainstream policing as they fre-
quently conduct warrant executions and proactive patrol (e.g., Alvaro, 2000; Kraska and
Kappeler, 1997). Recently, when reviewing Canadian police services’ operational files
relating to the use of tactical resources, Roziere and Walby (2018, 2020) similarly con-
cluded that tactical officers in Canada are frequently responding to ‘routine’ calls such as
mental health calls, domestics, and noise complaints. Considering the assertion made by
some that tactical teams are the embodiment of police militarization, due to their use of
specialized equipment, military tactics, and aggressive appearance (Hill and Beger, 2009;
Scobell and Hammitt, 1998), all of which are in line with Kraska’s (2007) indicators of
police militarization, their use during such calls is suggested to not only traumatize the
public but also aggravate the situation, potentially resulting in the use of force (Roziere
and Walby, 2018). Roziere and Walby (2018) condemn the use of tactical resources in this
fashion and suggest this practice should be ‘scaled back immediately’ (p. 46).
While the approaches to research described above provide an initial understanding
regarding the use of tactical resources, there are some notable limitations associated with
this research that may potentially result in erroneous concl usions. Most problematic
perhaps is using the original call type (e.g., robbery) to determine how tactical teams
2The Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles XX(X)
To continue reading
Request your trial