This report presents a comprehensive analysis of the tactical law enforcement capabilities within the United States federal government. It catalogs, evaluates, and ranks 25 distinct federal tactical teams based on a transparent methodology assessing their training, resources, and operational effectiveness. The findings reveal a complex and highly specialized ecosystem of teams, each tailored to the unique mission of its parent agency.

To facilitate a meaningful comparison, this report introduces a three-tiered classification system based on each team’s strategic role, operational scope, and resource commitment. Tier 1 comprises full-time, national or global response assets designed for counter-terrorism and other catastrophic events. Tier 2 consists of highly proficient, agency-specific teams that form the backbone of regional high-risk law enforcement. Tier 3 includes units with highly specialized or facility-specific missions.

The analysis concludes that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) is the preeminent Tier 1 unit, distinguished by its singular focus on domestic counter-terrorism, its full-time status, and its extensive training and operational history. Other Tier 1 teams, including the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC), the U.S. Marshals Service’s Special Operations Group (SOG), and the Department of State’s Mobile Security Deployments (MSD), represent the pinnacle of federal tactical capability, each with a global mandate and exceptionally rigorous standards.

A primary finding of this report is the bifurcation of the federal tactical landscape into two distinct models. A small, elite cadre of full-time teams, representing only about 31% of all federal tactical officers, is maintained at a high state of readiness for national-level crises.¹ The majority of federal tactical capability resides in a larger number of collateral-duty teams. This structure represents a strategic trade-off, balancing the immense cost of full-time units against the need for widespread tactical support for agency-specific law enforcement missions.

Key recommendations stemming from this analysis include the formal adoption of a tiered readiness model across the government to clarify roles and prevent mission creep, the enhancement of inter-agency training programs to improve interoperability, and the establishment of a recurring review process to ensure the federal tactical architecture remains adaptive to an evolving threat landscape. This report provides policymakers and agency leaders with an objective, data-driven framework for understanding and strengthening the nation’s specialized law enforcement assets.

Section 2: The Federal Tactical Landscape: An Overview of Specialized Law Enforcement

2.1 The Proliferation of Federal Tactical Teams

The United States government maintains a significant and diverse array of specialized law enforcement teams trained and equipped to resolve critical incidents beyond the capabilities of traditional officers. A 2020 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, which forms the primary basis for this analysis, identified 25 distinct federal tactical teams operating across 18 different agencies within the executive branch.² An earlier Congressional Research Service (CRS) survey identified a much larger number—271 tactical teams across 13 agencies—though this figure was heavily skewed by the inclusion of 145 distinct, facility-based teams within the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP).¹ The GAO’s more refined list of 25 represents distinct, centrally managed tactical

programs, providing a more accurate picture of the federal government’s specialized capabilities.

This proliferation of teams is accompanied by a wide variance in nomenclature. While the term “Special Weapons and Tactics” (SWAT) has become a generic descriptor in public discourse, the FBI is the only federal agency that formally designates its regional tactical units as SWAT teams.¹ More common designations include Special Response Team (SRT) and Emergency Response Team (ERT), used by agencies such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA). Other elite units carry unique monikers that reflect their specific mission, such as the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team (HRT), the U.S. Marshals Service’s Special Operations Group (SOG), and the U.S. Secret Service’s Counter Assault Team (CAT). This decentralized and agency-centric evolution of tactical capabilities has resulted in a complex ecosystem where each team’s mission, training, and resources are tailored to the specific mandate of its parent organization.

2.2 Defining Mission Categories

To conduct a nuanced and meaningful comparative analysis, it is essential to categorize these teams based on their primary operational function. Their missions are not monolithic; rather, they fall into several distinct categories that dictate their training, equipment, and metrics for success. This report utilizes the following four mission categories as an analytical framework:

• National-Level Counter-Terrorism & Hostage Rescue: This category includes a small number of elite teams with a national or global mandate to respond to the most complex and high-stakes threats, such as major terrorist attacks, international hostage situations, and other crises of national significance. Teams in this category, like the FBI’s HRT and the State Department’s Mobile Security Deployments (MSD), are expected to operate in any environment, often with limited support.
• High-Risk Criminal Law Enforcement: This is the most common mission set for federal tactical teams. Their primary function is to support their parent agency’s criminal investigations by executing high-risk search and arrest warrants, apprehending violent fugitives, conducting surveillance, and supporting undercover operations. The FBI’s regional SWAT teams, the ATF’s SRTs, and the DEA’s SRTs are archetypal examples of this category.
• Protective Operations: These teams are dedicated to the physical protection of high-level government officials, foreign dignitaries, or critical national infrastructure. Their role is often defensive, focusing on counter-assault, counter-sniper, and rapid response to attacks on a protected person or location. The U.S. Secret Service’s Counter Assault Team (CAT) and the Pentagon Force Protection Agency’s Emergency Response Team (ERT) are prime examples.
• Specialized Jurisdiction: This category encompasses teams whose missions are narrowly tailored to unique and challenging operational environments. Their training and equipment are highly specialized to contend with the specific threats found in their jurisdiction, such as maritime interdiction, correctional facility riots, or the protection of nuclear materials. Examples include the U.S. Coast Guard’s Maritime Security Response Teams (MSRT), the Bureau of Prisons’ Special Operations Response Teams (SORT), and the Department of Energy’s Special Response Teams (SRT).⁴

2.3 Introduction to the Tiered Ranking System

A simple, linear ranking of all 25 federal tactical teams would be analytically flawed, as it would compare units with vastly different missions, resources, and strategic purposes. Therefore, this report employs a three-tiered classification system. These tiers are not merely a ranking but a categorization of teams based on their strategic role, operational scope, and the level of institutional investment they represent. Ranking and scoring occur primarily within these tiers, allowing for a more accurate and context-aware assessment.

• Tier 1: Full-time, national and/or global response assets. These teams represent the highest level of federal tactical capability, are maintained at a constant state of readiness, and are resourced to deploy anywhere in the world to address threats to national security.
• Tier 2: Agency-specific or regional response teams. These units are highly proficient and form the core of the federal government’s response to high-risk law enforcement scenarios. They are often, but not always, staffed by collateral-duty officers and are primarily focused on supporting the mission of their parent agency within a domestic or regional context.
• Tier 3: Facility-specific or highly specialized units. These teams have a comparatively narrow mission focus, tailored to a specific jurisdiction (e.g., a prison, a nuclear site, a research campus) or a single operational capability (e.g., maritime security). Their effectiveness is measured by their ability to excel within these defined parameters.

Master Data Table: Catalog of Federal Tactical Teams

Team Full Name	Acronym	Parent Agency	Parent Department	Report Tier
Hostage Rescue Team	HRT	Federal Bureau of Investigation	Department of Justice	1
Border Patrol Tactical Unit	BORTAC	U.S. Customs and Border Protection	Department of Homeland Security	1
Special Operations Group	SOG	U.S. Marshals Service	Department of Justice	1
Mobile Security Deployments	MSD	Bureau of Diplomatic Security	Department of State	1
Special Weapons and Tactics Teams	SWAT	Federal Bureau of Investigation	Department of Justice	2
Special Response Team	SRT	Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives	Department of Justice	2
Special Response Team	SRT	Drug Enforcement Administration	Department of Justice	2
Counter Assault Team	CAT	U.S. Secret Service	Department of Homeland Security	2
Maritime Security Response Teams	MSRT	U.S. Coast Guard	Department of Homeland Security	2
Special Operations Response Team	SORT	Bureau of Prisons	Department of Justice	3
Special Response Team	SRT	Department of Energy (Multiple Components)	Department of Energy	3
Special Response Force	SRF	National Nuclear Security Administration	Department of Energy	3
Emergency Response Team	ERT	Pentagon Force Protection Agency	Department of Defense	3
Emergency Response Team	ERT	U.S. Secret Service	Department of Homeland Security	3
Counter Sniper Team	CS	U.S. Secret Service	Department of Homeland Security	3
U.S. Park Police SWAT Teams	SWAT	National Park Service	Department of the Interior	3
ERO Special Response Teams	SRT	U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement	Department of Homeland Security	3
HSI Special Response Teams	SRT	U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement	Department of Homeland Security	3
Maritime Safety and Security Teams	MSST	U.S. Coast Guard	Department of Homeland Security	3
Tactical Law Enforcement Teams	TACLET	U.S. Coast Guard	Department of Homeland Security	3
OFO Special Response Team	SRT	U.S. Customs and Border Protection	Department of Homeland Security	3
Rapid Protection Force	RPF	Federal Protective Service	Department of Homeland Security	3
Special Response Teams	SRT	National Aeronautics and Space Administration	NASA	3
Special Response Team	SRT	National Institutes of Health	Department of Health and Human Services	3
Special Operations Unit	SOU	Amtrak	Amtrak	3

Source: Team catalog derived from GAO-20-710.³ Tier classification is an analytical construct of this report.

Section 3: Tier 1 Federal Tactical Teams: National & Global Response Assets

The teams classified as Tier 1 represent the strategic apex of U.S. federal law enforcement tactical capability. They are distinguished from all other units by a combination of factors: a full-time operational status, a national or global deployment mandate, exceptionally demanding selection and training protocols, and a direct role in counter-terrorism and national security missions. The significant investment in these units underscores their function as the nation’s primary response force for the most complex and dangerous critical incidents.

3.1 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – Hostage Rescue Team (HRT)

• Mission & Scope: Established in 1983, the HRT is explicitly designated as federal law enforcement’s only full-time counter-terrorism unit. Its mission, encapsulated by the motto servare vitas (“to save lives”), is to provide a decisive tactical resolution to major terrorist incidents, hostage situations, and other high-threat crises throughout the United States and abroad. The HRT deploys under the direct authority of the FBI Director and operates as a central component of the Bureau’s Critical Incident Response Group (CIRG), which provides an integrated support structure of negotiators, surveillance assets, bomb technicians, and behavioral analysts.⁷
• Staffing & Selection: The HRT is composed entirely of experienced FBI Special Agents who serve on the team in a full-time capacity.¹ Candidates must volunteer for the assignment and pass a grueling two-week selection process that tests their physical fitness, marksmanship, and decision-making under extreme stress. The FBI actively seeks candidates with prior tactical experience through its Tactical Recruiting Program; approximately 80% of HRT candidates have a background in military special operations or police SWAT units, yet only about 10% of these tactically experienced agents who try out are ultimately selected for the team.
• Training & Resources: Upon selection, new operators undergo an arduous six-month initial training course at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia. This intensive program hones their skills in close-quarters combat, explosive breaching, advanced marksmanship, and air operations, including fast-roping and rappelling. As part of CIRG, the HRT has access to a dedicated fleet of tactical helicopters and other sophisticated resources that enable it to deploy to any environment or condition.⁷
• Operational Tempo: Since its inception, the HRT has deployed to more than 850 high-risk incidents. Its operational scope is global, with deployments to conflict zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan to conduct sensitive site exploitation, intelligence gathering, and protection of FBI personnel, in addition to its primary domestic counter-terrorism and hostage rescue missions.

3.2 U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) – Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC)

• Mission & Scope: Created in 1984 initially to quell riots in detention facilities, BORTAC has evolved into a globally recognized tactical unit with a formal mission “to respond to terrorist threats of all types anywhere in the world”. It serves as the U.S. Border Patrol’s elite rapid-response force for high-risk incidents. Its operational mandate is exceptionally broad, encompassing counter-narcotics and counter-terrorism operations, high-risk warrant service, foreign law enforcement capacity building, and dignitary protection, both within the United States and internationally.⁸
• Staffing & Selection: BORTAC maintains a cadre of full-time operators headquartered in El Paso, Texas, and is supplemented by part-time members dispersed throughout the Border Patrol’s sectors.¹ The unit’s Selection and Training Course (BSTC) is notoriously difficult, designed to mirror the selection processes of U.S. Special Operations Forces. The course, which can last over a month, begins with rigorous physical testing and culminates in weeks of intense training in small unit tactics, operational planning, and advanced weapons skills under conditions of extreme stress and sleep deprivation.⁹
• Training & Resources: BORTAC’s training unit is co-located with its headquarters at Biggs Army Airfield, providing access to extensive training facilities. The curriculum is comprehensive, covering airmobile operations, maritime operations, and precision marksmanship.⁹ As a component of CBP’s Special Operations Group (SOG), BORTAC operates with a high degree of autonomy and specialized equipment.
• Operational Tempo: BORTAC has a significant and varied operational history, having conducted missions in 28 countries and supported U.S. military operations such as Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Domestically, it has been deployed to a wide range of critical incidents, including the 1992 Los Angeles riots, the 2015 manhunt for escaped prisoners in New York, and, most notably, the 2022 tactical response to the Uvalde school shooting, where BORTAC operators breached the classroom and neutralized the shooter.

3.3 U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) – Special Operations Group (SOG)

• Mission & Scope: Established in 1971, SOG is one of the oldest and most respected federal tactical units. Its mission is to provide a specially-trained, rapidly-deployable tactical element to conduct complex and sensitive operations on a global scale in support of the Department of Justice and the federal judiciary. SOG’s operational purview includes apprehending violent fugitives, securing high-threat federal trials, witness security operations, and responding to national emergencies and civil disorder.
• Staffing & Selection: SOG is composed of volunteer Deputy U.S. Marshals who must meet standards significantly higher than those for the agency at large. While many members serve on a part-time basis, the unit is managed by a full-time cadre of personnel assigned to the SOG Tactical Center (SOGTC) in Pineville, Louisiana, and a location in Springfield, Virginia.
• Training & Resources: SOG members receive extensive training in a wide range of tactical disciplines, including high-risk entry, explosive and mechanical breaching, sniper/observer operations, rural operations, and waterborne operations. The unit is supported by the broader USMS Tactical Operations Division (TOD), which provides critical resources such as mobile command vehicles and a robust Operational Medical Support Unit (OMSU). The OMSU consists of 125 tactical medics who provide advanced medical care during high-risk operations and training.
• Operational Tempo: SOG maintains a high operational tempo. In fiscal year 2024 alone, the unit dedicated 16,518 hours to high-level threat and emergency situations, demonstrating its constant state of readiness and frequent deployment in support of the U.S. Marshals’ most dangerous missions.

3.4 Department of State (State) – Mobile Security Deployments (MSD)

• Mission & Scope: MSD is the Diplomatic Security Service’s (DSS) premier tactical unit and serves as the Department of State’s 24-hour, on-call crisis response element. Its primary mission is to deploy globally, often on extremely short notice, to protect U.S. embassies, consulates, and diplomatic personnel during periods of heightened threat, political instability, or terrorist attack. MSD teams are uniquely capable of operating in non-permissive, high-threat environments with limited support. Their duties include augmenting the Secretary of State’s protective detail, providing counter-assault capabilities, and facilitating the re-establishment of a U.S. diplomatic presence after a mission has been evacuated.
• Staffing & Selection: MSD is composed of DSS Special Agents who volunteer for the assignment and serve on a full-time basis.¹ Candidates must successfully complete a six-month assessment and selection course known as “Green Team,” which is designed to prepare them for small-unit operations in austere environments. A 2018 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report noted that the unit, while authorized for 104 Foreign Service positions, was experiencing a 25% vacancy rate, highlighting potential staffing challenges.¹⁰
• Training & Resources: MSD training is exceptionally rigorous and diverse, including advanced tactical firearms, counter-terrorist driving, dynamic room entry, helicopter operations, and tactical medicine. The unit places a strong emphasis on interoperability and conducts joint training with U.S. Special Operations Forces and other federal tactical teams. As members of the Foreign Service, MSD agents also possess diplomatic skills, language capabilities, and cultural training that are unique among federal tactical units and essential for their international mission.
• Operational Tempo: MSD operators spend approximately half of their time on deployment. The unit has a proven track record of responding to global crises, having deployed to secure U.S. interests during civil unrest in central Africa, support evacuation efforts in Sudan, and protect the Secretary of State during multiple high-threat trips to Ukraine following the Russian invasion.

The defining characteristic that elevates these four teams to Tier 1 is their full-time operational status, which is a direct reflection of their national-level mission and the immense institutional investment they represent. While the vast majority of federal tactical officers serve on a collateral-duty basis, the government has made a strategic decision to fund this small, elite cadre of full-time units.¹ This commitment allows for a level of continuous, dedicated training, specialization, and readiness that is unattainable for part-time teams. It is this full-time status that directly enables their global operational mandate, establishing them as the nation’s strategic tactical reserve for the most critical threats.

Table 2: Ranking and Scoring of Tier 1 Teams

Scores are assigned based on the methodology detailed in the Appendix. A higher score indicates a greater capability to handle a wider range of more complex threats.

Rank	Team	Overall Score (out of 100)	Staffing Model	Mission Scope	Key Differentiator
1 (tie)	FBI HRT	99	Full-Time	Global/National	Domestic Counter-Terrorism Authority
1 (tie)	State MSD	99	Full-Time	Global	Expeditionary Diplomatic Security
3	CBP BORTAC	95	Full-Time Cadre	Global/National	Border Security & SOF-style Ops
4	USMS SOG	91	Full-Time Cadre	Global/National	Fugitive Apprehension/Judicial Security

Section 4: Tier 2 Federal Tactical Teams: Agency-Specific & Regional Response

Tier 2 teams constitute the primary tactical capability for most federal law enforcement agencies. These units are highly trained and equipped to handle dangerous situations that arise within their agency’s specific mission set. While some are full-time, many operate on a collateral-duty basis, where team members perform their primary investigative or law enforcement roles when not actively training or deployed. This model represents a strategic balance between maintaining a robust tactical capability and managing the significant costs associated with full-time teams.

4.1 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) Teams

• Mission & Scope: The FBI’s regional SWAT teams are the most frequently utilized tactical first-response units within the Bureau and are designated as a Tier 1 response asset by the U.S. Attorney General, signifying their high level of capability and importance.¹¹ Their primary mission is to provide tactical support to FBI field office investigations by resolving high-risk situations, including serving warrants on violent offenders, rescuing hostages, pursuing dangerous fugitives, and assaulting fortified positions.⁷
• Staffing & Selection: The FBI maintains a dedicated SWAT team at each of its 56 field offices, creating a nationwide tactical footprint. Team members are all volunteer Special Agents who perform SWAT duties as a collateral function; they continue their regular investigative work when not on a tactical assignment.¹¹ Teams can have as many as 42 members and often include operators with specialized skills such as explosive breaching, tactical medicine, and precision marksmanship (snipers).¹¹
• Training & Resources: SWAT candidates must pass a demanding selection process that evaluates their physical fitness, marksmanship, decision-making under pressure, and ability to work within a team structure.⁷ Once selected, they must complete the FBI’s basic SWAT training program. As an integral part of the FBI, these teams have unparalleled access to the Bureau’s vast intelligence, investigative, and technological resources.⁷

4.2 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) – Special Response Team (SRT)

• Mission & Scope: ATF SRTs are elite tactical groups formed to manage the significant risks associated with investigating and apprehending some of the nation’s most violent criminals, particularly those involved in firearms trafficking, explosives, arson, and organized crime.¹² Their operational duties include executing high-risk search and arrest warrants, supporting undercover “buy/bust” operations, and providing protective services.
• Staffing & Selection: The ATF fields five SRTs strategically located in Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, and Washington, D.C., allowing for nationwide coverage. The program comprises 160 members who serve in both full- and part-time capacities.¹² The teams are multi-disciplinary, incorporating not only tactical operators but also 40 crisis negotiators, 60 tactical medics, and specialized tactical canine teams.¹²
• Training & Resources: Special agents must have at least three years of experience to be considered for the SRT. Selected candidates attend a 15-day SRT Basic Training School where they learn advanced skills in marksmanship, tactical movement, and breaching.¹³ A unique asset of the ATF SRT program is its in-house tactical canine program, which trains dogs to work in conjunction with the teams to clear buildings and locate hidden suspects.¹²
• Operational Tempo: ATF SRTs are highly active, averaging between 115 and 200 activations per year to support high-profile cases and investigations across the country.

4.3 Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) – Special Response Team (SRT)

• Mission & Scope: The DEA’s SRTs function as the agency’s primary tactical units, specializing in high-risk operations directly related to narcotics enforcement. Their core missions include executing dangerous search and arrest warrants against heavily armed drug trafficking organizations, conducting vehicle interdictions, and providing close protection for undercover agents, informants, and high-profile defendants.
• Staffing & Selection: A key distinguishing feature of the DEA’s tactical program is its staffing model. Unlike many of its Tier 2 counterparts, all DEA tactical officers serve on their teams on a full-time basis.¹ This commitment reflects the high-threat nature of the DEA’s mission and the agency’s belief that a full-time cadre is necessary to maintain the required level of proficiency and readiness.
• Training & Resources: The full-time status of DEA SRT operators allows for a continuous and intensive training regimen. While specific details of their training pipeline are not extensively covered in open-source documents, their mission requires a high degree of expertise in close-quarters combat, breaching, and vehicle assault tactics. They operate in direct support of the broader DEA mission to dismantle major narco-terrorist and drug trafficking organizations.¹⁴

4.4 U.S. Secret Service (USSS) – Counter Assault Team (CAT)

• Mission & Scope: The CAT is a specialized tactical unit of Secret Service Special Agents whose mission is fundamentally different from most law enforcement tactical teams. While they provide tactical support for the Presidential Protective Division, their primary role is not defensive but offensive.¹⁵ In the event of a complex ambush on a protectee, the CAT is trained to engage and neutralize the attacking force, deliberately drawing fire and creating a tactical diversion so the close protection detail can evacuate the principal to safety.¹⁵
• Staffing & Selection: The CAT is comprised of approximately 105 Special Agents who have already served several years with the Secret Service.¹⁵ Selection is extremely competitive, with only about 10% of applicants being chosen.¹⁵
• Training & Resources: Following selection, operators attend an additional seven-week specialized training course focused on counter-ambush tactics, close-quarters combat, and heavy weapons proficiency.¹⁵ CAT members are equipped with SR-16 rifles, a SIG Sauer P229 pistol, and other specialized equipment necessary to overwhelm a determined attacking force.¹⁵ They deploy globally in support of the presidential mission.

4.5 U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) – Maritime Security Response Teams (MSRT)

• Mission & Scope: The MSRT is one of the Coast Guard’s premier Deployable Specialized Forces (DSF) and one of only two USCG units with a direct counter-terrorism mission.⁵ The MSRT is trained to be the nation’s first-response unit for maritime terrorist threats. Its capabilities include advanced interdiction, hostage rescue, tactical facility entry, and conducting the most dangerous and complex non-compliant vessel boardings (Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure Level IV).
• Staffing & Selection: MSRT operators are highly experienced maritime law enforcement personnel, often selected from the ranks of other specialized Coast Guard units like the Maritime Safety and Security Teams (MSSTs) and Tactical Law Enforcement Teams (TACLETs).⁵
• Training & Resources: The MSRT’s training regimen is exceptionally advanced and is designed to ensure interoperability with the Department of Defense’s elite units. MSRT assault teams train extensively in advanced close-quarters combat and combat marksmanship alongside U.S. Navy SEALs, Marine Corps Force Recon, and Army Special Forces.⁵ They are proficient in various insertion methods, including fast-roping from helicopters onto vessels at sea.⁵

The prevalence of the collateral-duty model in this tier, particularly within the large FBI SWAT program, is a clear indicator of a government-wide strategic choice. This approach allows an agency to establish a broad tactical presence across the country without incurring the substantial expense of maintaining full-time operators in every location. The direct consequence of this resource allocation strategy is an inherent trade-off between cost-efficiency and maximum readiness. An officer serving on a collateral-duty basis has fundamentally less time available for dedicated, unit-level training compared to a full-time operator. This can impact team cohesion and proficiency in the most complex and perishable tactical skills. This reality creates a de facto tiered readiness system across the federal government, where a few Tier 1 teams are held at peak readiness for national crises, while these capable Tier 2 teams provide robust, but less continuously trained, support for agency-specific missions. The DEA’s decision to field a full-time SRT force stands as a notable exception, signaling that the agency perceives the risk in its daily operations to be high enough to warrant the greater investment in a constant state of readiness.¹

Table 3: Ranking and Scoring of Tier 2 Teams

Scores are assigned based on the methodology detailed in the Appendix. A higher score indicates a greater capability to handle a wider range of more complex threats.

Rank	Team	Overall Score (out of 100)	Staffing Model	Mission Scope	Key Differentiator
1	USCG MSRT	91	Full-Time	National Maritime CT	Direct maritime counter-terrorism mission
2	USSS CAT	82	Full-Time	Global Protective Ops	Offensive counter-assault mission
3	DEA SRT	80	Full-Time	Nationwide LE	Full-time status for narcotics enforcement
4	ATF SRT	72	Hybrid (Full/Part-Time)	Nationwide LE	Integrated Medics, Negotiators, Canines
5	FBI SWAT	66	Collateral Duty	Regional LE	Nationwide footprint (56 field offices)

Section 5: Tier 3 Federal Tactical Teams: Specialized & Facility-Specific Units

Tier 3 encompasses a diverse group of tactical teams whose missions are defined by a high degree of specialization or are geographically constrained to specific facilities or jurisdictions. Their training, equipment, and operational focus are narrowly tailored to address the unique threats within their designated area of responsibility. While they may not possess the broad, all-encompassing capabilities of Tier 1 or Tier 2 units, their effectiveness is critically important and must be assessed based on their fitness for their specific purpose.

5.1 Correctional Environment: Bureau of Prisons (BOP) – Special Operations Response Team (SORT)

• Mission: BOP SORTs are the primary tactical response element within the federal prison system. Their mission is to restore order and resolve high-risk situations inside federal correctional facilities, which can include riots, large-scale inmate disturbances, hostage situations, forced cell extractions of violent inmates, and the high-security movement of dangerous prisoners.⁴
• Staffing & Training: SORT operators are selected from the existing staff of the correctional facility where the team is based and serve on a collateral-duty basis.⁴ This model ensures that operators have an intimate knowledge of the facility’s layout and population. All federal correctional complexes are required to maintain a SORT.⁴ To ensure a baseline of capability and interoperability should teams from different institutions need to work together, the BOP maintains a standardized SORT Guidebook for training.¹⁸ Teams are required to train a minimum of 8 hours per month, though many facilities dedicate 16 or more hours to honing skills in defensive tactics, less-lethal munitions, and emergency procedures.⁴

5.2 Nuclear Security: Department of Energy (DOE) – Special Response Teams (SRT) & NNSA Special Response Force (SRF)

• Mission: The DOE’s SRTs and the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) SRF are charged with one of the nation’s most critical security missions: protecting nuclear weapons, special nuclear materials, and vital national security assets at DOE facilities. Their mission is to resolve incidents that require force options exceeding the capabilities of standard protective force officers. They are trained and equipped to interdict, neutralize, and defeat a sophisticated and heavily armed adversary attempting to steal or sabotage nuclear assets, and to conduct operations to recapture or recover any compromised materials.
• Staffing & Training: These teams are composed of highly trained, full-time federal agents and security police officers who undergo a rigorous screening and training process.¹ The NNSA’s Office of Defense Nuclear Security oversees this comprehensive program, which integrates physical security systems, advanced tactical training, and regular, demanding performance testing to ensure the protective forces can meet and exceed the threat posed by a designated “composite adversary”.²⁰

5.3 Protective & Facility Security

A number of Tier 3 teams are dedicated to the protection of specific, high-value government facilities or personnel.

• Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) – Emergency Response Team (ERT): This full-time team is responsible for the immediate tactical response to any critical incident at the Pentagon and other designated DoD facilities in the National Capital Region.¹ The ERT’s mission is to rapidly deploy to contain, control, and neutralize threats such as active shooters, terrorist attacks, or hostage situations. The unit is a comprehensive tactical element, incorporating its own Counter-Sniper Unit (CSU) and Counter Assault Team (CAT).
• U.S. Secret Service (USSS) – Emergency Response Team (ERT): Distinct from the Special Agent-staffed CAT, the USSS ERT is a specialized unit within the Uniformed Division.²² Its mission is to provide full-time tactical support and robust middle-perimeter security for the White House Complex, the Vice President’s residence, and other protected venues. They are trained to initiate a coordinated tactical response to external penetrations of these secure perimeters.²³
• U.S. Secret Service (USSS) – Counter Sniper Team (CS): The CS team provides global long-range observation and precision rifle support for Secret Service protective details.²⁵ A recent OIG report highlighted significant challenges for this critical unit, finding that it was chronically understaffed and had to rely on extensive overtime and personnel from other DHS components to meet its mission requirements. The report also found instances where operators who had not met mandatory weapons requalification standards were nonetheless deployed on protective missions, indicating a tangible capability gap.²⁶
• National Park Service – U.S. Park Police (USPP) SWAT: The USPP operates SWAT teams to provide a tactical response capability in the National Park Service areas it patrols, primarily in the dense urban environments of Washington, D.C., New York City, and San Francisco. Established in 1975, the team is proficient with a variety of tactical weapons, including assault rifles and sniper rifles, to address high-risk incidents on federal park lands.

5.4 Other Specialized Teams

• Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Response Teams (SRT): ICE maintains two distinct SRT programs. The Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) SRTs support the ERO mission of identifying, arresting, and removing noncitizens who pose a threat to public safety. The Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) SRTs are tactical teams that support criminal investigations by executing high-risk search and arrest warrants and providing security for National Special Security Events, such as the Super Bowl.
• U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) – MSST & TACLET: The Maritime Safety and Security Teams (MSSTs) are proactive anti-terrorism and force protection units that safeguard the nation’s ports, waterways, and maritime facilities. The Tactical Law Enforcement Teams (TACLETs) are specialized, deployable teams whose primary mission is counter-drug and maritime law enforcement interdiction. They frequently deploy in small detachments (LEDETs) aboard U.S. Navy and allied vessels around the world.
• National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) – Special Response Teams (SRT): Also known as Emergency Response Teams (ERT), these units are responsible for the tactical protection of NASA’s high-value assets and personnel, specifically at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Their mission is to respond to crises such as active shooters, terrorist attacks, or other security threats on the sprawling 144,000-acre complex.
• National Institutes of Health (NIH) – Special Response Team (SRT): The NIH Police Department maintains an SRT to protect the 300-acre NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland. This is a critical mission, as the campus includes the world’s largest hospital dedicated to research and high-containment laboratories (BSL-3 and BSL-4) that work with dangerous pathogens.
• Amtrak – Special Operations Unit (SOU): The Amtrak Police Department’s SOU is a tactical unit with squads located in Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York, and Los Angeles. Their mission is to protect the nation’s passenger rail system through proactive security measures such as uniformed and plainclothes station surges, baggage screening operations, and counter-surveillance patrols.

The extreme specialization of Tier 3 teams makes direct comparison between them, or with teams from other tiers, inherently difficult. A BOP SORT’s proficiency is measured by its ability to control a prison riot using primarily less-lethal tactics, a skill set that is entirely different from that of a DOE SRT, which must be prepared to use deadly force to defeat a commando-style assault on a nuclear facility. Their respective definitions of “effectiveness” are dictated by their unique operational environments. This mission specificity is the defining characteristic of Tier 3. Consequently, these teams must be evaluated not against a universal standard, but on their demonstrated capacity to fulfill their specific, designated purpose. The documented staffing shortfalls of the USSS Counter Sniper team serve as a critical reminder that even the most specialized and theoretically capable unit is rendered ineffective if it cannot sustain its operational readiness under real-world demands.²⁶

Table 4: Ranking and Scoring of Tier 3 Teams

Scores are assigned based on the methodology detailed in the Appendix, relative to each team’s specialized mission.

Rank	Team	Overall Score (out of 100)	Mission Focus	Staffing Model	Key Differentiator
1	DOE SRT / NNSA SRF	85	Nuclear Security	Full-Time	Protection of nuclear weapons and materials
2	PFPA ERT	83	Facility Protection	Full-Time	Immediate tactical response for DoD HQ
3	USSS ERT	81	Facility Protection	Full-Time	Middle-perimeter security for the President
4	USCG TACLET	75	Maritime LE	Full-Time	Global drug interdiction mission
5	USCG MSST	73	Maritime Security	Full-Time	Proactive port security & anti-terrorism
6	ICE HSI SRT	65	Criminal LE / NSSE	Collateral Duty	Supports HSI criminal investigations
7	USSS CS	64	Protective Support	Full-Time	Precision rifle overwatch (noted staffing issues)
8	ICE ERO SRT	62	Immigration LE	Collateral Duty	Supports high-risk removal operations
9	NASA SRT	60	Facility Protection	Collateral Duty	Protection of critical space assets
10	BOP SORT	58	Correctional Riot Control	Collateral Duty	Less-lethal tactics in a correctional setting
11	USPP SWAT	55	Facility Protection	Collateral Duty	Law enforcement in high-traffic federal parks
12	Amtrak SOU	52	Infrastructure Protection	Collateral Duty	Proactive security on passenger rail
13	NIH SRT	50	Facility Protection	Collateral Duty	Protection of biomedical research facilities
14	CBP OFO SRT	48	Port of Entry Security	Collateral Duty	Tactical response at ports of entry
15	FPS RPF	45	Facility Protection	Collateral Duty	General federal building security

Section 6: Comparative Analysis of Core Competencies

Synthesizing data across all three tiers reveals overarching trends in how the federal government structures, trains, and deploys its tactical assets. This comparative analysis focuses on three core competencies—training doctrine, operational tempo, and resourcing—to identify systemic patterns and strategic choices that define the federal tactical landscape.

6.1 Training Doctrine: Standardization vs. Specialization

The training pipelines for federal tactical teams exhibit a vast range, reflecting the diversity of their missions. The GAO report noted that initial tactical training courses for new team members ranged from as short as one week to as long as ten months.² This disparity is not arbitrary; rather, it demonstrates a direct correlation between a team’s strategic tier and the level of investment in its training.

At the highest level, Tier 1 teams feature the longest and most comprehensive selection and training programs. The FBI HRT’s six-month initial training course and the State Department MSD’s six-month “Green Team” selection are designed to forge operators capable of performing complex missions autonomously in any global environment. This substantial front-end investment in human capital is a prerequisite for their national-level responsibilities.

In contrast, Tier 2 teams typically have shorter, though still rigorous, initial training programs. The ATF’s 15-day SRT Basic Training School, for example, provides the core tactical skills necessary for the team’s domestic law enforcement mission.¹³ The focus is on mastering the fundamentals of high-risk warrant service and close-quarters combat.

Tier 3 teams often have the most specialized and narrowly focused training. A BOP SORT operator, for instance, concentrates on skills relevant to a correctional setting, such as cell extractions and less-lethal force options, during their required monthly training sessions.⁴ Similarly, a USCG MSRT operator’s training is heavily weighted toward advanced maritime boarding techniques, a skill set irrelevant to most other federal teams.⁵

Sustainment training requirements show a similar pattern, ranging from a modest 40 hours per year to an intensive 400 hours per year.² This divergence underscores a fundamental principle of the federal system: the investment in training is a direct function of the mission’s complexity and the anticipated level of risk. A global counter-terrorism mission requires a far greater initial and sustained training investment than a facility-specific security mission.

6.2 Operational Tempo: The Experience Factor

Operational tempo, measured by the frequency and nature of deployments, serves as a critical proxy for a team’s effectiveness and real-world experience. The data reveals a wide spectrum of activity across the federal system. From fiscal years 2015 through 2019, the number of reported deployments per team ranged from zero to over 5,000.²

Teams focused on high-risk criminal law enforcement missions tend to have the highest operational tempo in terms of sheer numbers. The ATF’s SRTs, for example, average approximately 200 activations annually, primarily in support of warrant services and undercover operations. The FBI’s 56 regional SWAT teams are similarly active, supporting thousands of investigations across the country. This high frequency of deployments makes these units exceptionally proficient at their core task: dynamic entry and the securing of suspects and evidence.

However, the nature of these deployments must be distinguished from the missions undertaken by Tier 1 teams. While a Tier 1 team like the FBI HRT may have fewer total deployments than a busy regional SWAT team, its missions are of a different magnitude of complexity and consequence. A high number of warrant services builds deep expertise in one specific tactical area, but that experience does not necessarily translate to the unique skill sets required for a complex, no-fail hostage rescue or a counter-terrorism operation in a foreign country. The USMS SOG, for instance, logged over 16,000 hours on high-threat missions in a single fiscal year, a metric that captures the intensity and duration of its deployments rather than just the raw number of activations.

The deployment data also highlights the role of tactical teams in responding to widespread civil unrest. In May and June of 2020, 16 of the 25 teams identified by the GAO were deployed in response to nationwide protests, demonstrating their utility as a rapidly deployable federal response force for domestic crises.²

6.3 Resourcing & Capabilities: Full-Time vs. Part-Time Divide

The most significant factor influencing a team’s resources, training, and readiness is its staffing model. The federal government has made a clear strategic choice to rely on a small core of full-time tactical teams while maintaining a much larger number of collateral-duty units. According to CRS data, only 906 of 2,888 federal tactical officers (31%) were assigned to a team on a full-time basis.¹

This division is not evenly distributed. The agencies with the most dangerous and specialized missions have invested in full-time teams. All members of the FBI’s HRT, CBP’s BORTAC, and the tactical teams within the DEA, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Pentagon Force Protection Agency, and National Nuclear Security Administration serve full-time.¹ This concentration of resources in a handful of elite units represents a calculated, government-wide risk management strategy.

Instead of funding all 25 tactical programs as full-time entities—an approach that would be prohibitively expensive—the government concentrates its resources on the teams it designates as the strategic reserve for “worst-day” scenarios. These Tier 1 and select Tier 2/3 teams are maintained at the highest possible state of readiness to confront threats to national security. The much larger number of collateral-duty teams, such as the FBI’s regional SWAT teams and the BOP’s SORTs, are tasked with handling the more routine high-risk operations of their respective agencies. This is a deliberate acceptance of a lower state of constant readiness for the majority of teams in exchange for significant cost savings and a broader geographic footprint. This structure effectively underwrites a degree of risk, relying on the ability of the elite, full-time teams to respond to any crisis that exceeds the capabilities of the collateral-duty units.

Section 7: Strategic Implications and Recommendations

The analysis of the 25 federal tactical teams reveals a capable but highly decentralized system. While individual teams are generally well-suited to their specific missions, the overall architecture presents opportunities for enhanced efficiency, interoperability, and strategic alignment. This section outlines the key implications of the report’s findings and offers recommendations for strengthening the federal government’s collective tactical response capability.

7.1 Capability Gaps and Redundancies

The current landscape exhibits both potential redundancies and identified gaps. Within the Department of Justice, four separate components (FBI, DEA, ATF, USMS) field their own highly capable tactical teams. While each is tailored to its agency’s unique investigative mission and legal authorities, the overlap in core capabilities—such as dynamic entry and high-risk warrant service—is significant. This raises questions about potential efficiencies that could be gained through the consolidation of training programs, joint procurement of specialized equipment, and the establishment of common standards for core tactical skills. A more integrated approach could reduce costs and enhance interoperability for multi-agency operations.

Conversely, the analysis identified a critical and officially documented capability gap. The 2025 Department of Homeland Security OIG report on the U.S. Secret Service’s Counter Sniper Team found the unit to be chronically understaffed to the point that it could not always meet its mission requirements without extensive overtime and augmentation from other DHS components.²⁶ Such a shortfall in a unit tasked with protecting the nation’s highest leaders represents a significant vulnerability that requires immediate attention.

7.2 Optimizing the Tiered System

The de facto tiered system of readiness and capability that exists across the federal government should be formalized to improve clarity and effectiveness.

• Recommendation 1: Formally Adopt a Tiered Readiness Model. The Departments of Justice and Homeland Security should jointly develop and adopt a formal tiered classification system for federal tactical teams. This would clearly define the roles, responsibilities, and expected capabilities of teams at each level (e.g., Tier 1 for national/global response, Tier 2 for regional/agency support, Tier 3 for facility/specialized response). A formal system would help ensure that teams are deployed appropriately, preventing “mission creep” where a Tier 3 team might be tasked with a crisis beyond its training and equipment, and would help reserve Tier 1 assets for true national-level contingencies.
• Recommendation 2: Mandate and Fund Increased Inter-Agency Training. Congress should authorize and appropriate funding for a dedicated joint training program for federal tactical teams. Priority should be given to exercises that integrate Tier 1 and Tier 2 teams, allowing the advanced skills and procedures of the national-level units to disseminate to the regional teams they would likely work with during a major crisis. Joint training between teams with overlapping missions, such as the various DOJ SRT/SWAT units, would build rapport and streamline operational procedures, leading to greater effectiveness and safety during multi-agency responses.

7.3 The Future of Federal Tactical Operations

The threat landscape facing the United States is constantly evolving. The rise of sophisticated domestic terrorism, the potential for complex cyber-physical attacks on critical infrastructure, and the persistent threat of weapons of mass destruction require that the nation’s tactical capabilities adapt accordingly.

• Recommendation 3: Establish a Recurring Review of Federal Tactical Capabilities. To ensure the federal tactical architecture remains aligned with current and future threats, the Government Accountability Office should be directed to conduct a comprehensive review, modeled on its 2020 report, on a recurring basis (e.g., every five years). This review should assess the composition, training, funding, and operational tempo of all federal tactical teams. It should evaluate whether the current allocation of resources—particularly the balance between full-time and collateral-duty teams—is appropriate for the contemporary threat environment and provide recommendations to Congress and the executive branch for necessary adjustments. This continuous assessment process would transform the current, largely static system into a dynamic and adaptive one, ensuring that the “tip of the spear” remains sharp.

Appendix: Ranking Methodology

A.1 Guiding Principles

The scoring and ranking methodology used in this report is guided by two core principles designed to ensure an objective and contextually relevant assessment:

1. Mission-Based Assessment: Teams are evaluated relative to the complexity, scope, and risk associated with their primary mission. A team designed for global counter-terrorism will inherently require a higher level of capability across all metrics than a team designed for facility-specific security. Therefore, scores reflect a team’s fitness for its designated purpose within the tiered framework. A higher overall score indicates a greater capacity to handle a wider range of more complex threats.
2. Data-Driven Proxies: Direct, granular data on specific team budgets, equipment inventories, and operational success rates are not available in open-source reporting and are often classified. To overcome this limitation, this methodology employs justifiable, data-driven proxies derived from the available research. For example, a team’s “Staffing Model” (full-time vs. collateral duty) serves as a powerful proxy for its level of funding, resource allocation, and sustained readiness. All proxies are explicitly defined and defended based on the source material.

A.2 Scoring Framework

Each team is scored on a scale of 1 to 100, with points allocated across four weighted pillars. The weighting reflects the relative importance of each category in determining a team’s overall capability.

Pillar 1: Training & Selection (35% Weight)

This pillar assesses the investment in a team’s human capital, which is the foundation of its capability.

• Metric 1.1: Selection Rigor (10 points): Scored based on the length, intensity, and nature of the team’s selection process. A multi-week or multi-month course modeled on special operations forces selection (e.g., BORTAC, MSD) receives the highest score. A process based on internal review and basic physical tests receives a lower score.
• Metric 1.2: Initial Training Pipeline (15 points): Scored based on the duration and comprehensiveness of the basic qualification course required for new operators. A pipeline of six months or longer (e.g., HRT) receives the maximum score. A course of a few weeks (e.g., ATF SRT) receives a moderate score ¹³, while shorter or less-defined programs receive fewer points.
• Metric 1.3: Sustainment Training (10 points): Scored based on the documented annual requirement for ongoing team training. Teams with requirements exceeding 400 hours per year receive the highest score, while those at the lower end of the 40-400 hour range noted by the GAO receive fewer points.²

Pillar 2: Resources & Capabilities (30% Weight)

This pillar evaluates the institutional support and tangible assets available to a team.

• Metric 2.1: Staffing Model (20 points): This is the most heavily weighted metric in this pillar and serves as a primary proxy for funding and readiness. Teams composed entirely of full-time operators (e.g., HRT, DEA SRT, MSD) receive the maximum score.¹ Teams with a full-time command cadre and part-time operators (e.g., BORTAC, SOG) receive a high score. Teams operating on a purely collateral-duty basis (e.g., FBI SWAT, BOP SORT) receive a lower score.¹¹
• Metric 2.2: Specialized Organic Capabilities (10 points): Points are awarded for the documented existence of integral, specialized assets within the team’s structure. This includes tactical medics, explosive breachers, precision marksmen/snipers, dedicated tactical aviation, maritime assets, and tactical canine units.

Pillar 3: Effectiveness & Operational Scope (25% Weight)

This pillar assesses a team’s mission and its demonstrated experience in executing it.

• Metric 3.1: Mission Scope & Complexity (15 points): Scored based on the team’s designated area of responsibility and the complexity of its mission set. A global counter-terrorism and crisis response mission (e.g., HRT, BORTAC, MSD) receives the highest score. A nationwide high-risk law enforcement mission (e.g., ATF SRT) receives a moderate score. A facility-specific defensive mission (e.g., NIH SRT) receives a lower score.
• Metric 3.2: Operational Tempo (10 points): Scored based on publicly available data on deployment frequency and duration. Teams with a high number of annual activations (e.g., ATF SRT’s 200+) or a significant number of hours deployed on high-threat missions (e.g., USMS SOG’s 16,000+) receive the highest scores. Teams with a lower or undocumented operational tempo receive fewer points.

Pillar 4: Strategic Value (10% Weight)

This pillar captures intangible factors that contribute to a team’s overall importance.

• Metric 4.1: Interoperability (5 points): Points are awarded for documented evidence of joint training and operations with U.S. military Special Operations Forces, other federal tactical teams, or international partners. This indicates a high level of proficiency and trust from other elite units.
• Metric 4.2: Uniqueness of Capability (5 points): Points are awarded to teams that provide a critical capability not replicated elsewhere in the federal government. Examples include the HRT’s role as the sole domestic federal counter-terrorism team, MSD’s unique mission at the intersection of diplomacy and tactical operations, and the DOE SRT’s singular focus on protecting nuclear assets.

A.3 Data Sources and Limitations

This analysis is based exclusively on publicly available, open-source information, primarily from official government reports (GAO, CRS, OIG), agency websites, and official publications. The primary source for the catalog of teams is the 2020 GAO report Federal Tactical Teams: Characteristics, Training, Deployments, and Inventory (GAO-20-710).

This methodology is subject to the inherent limitations of open-source analysis. Key data points, including specific annual budgets, detailed tables of organization and equipment (TO&E), classified after-action reports, and precise operational success/failure rates, are not publicly available. The use of justified proxies is intended to mitigate these limitations, but the resulting scores and rankings should be understood as well-informed estimates based on the best available unclassified data.

Works cited

1. SWAT – Wikipedia, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWAT
2. Federal Tactical Teams: Characteristics, Training, Deployments, and Inventory | U.S. GAO, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-710
3. Tackling Cyber Crime With DEA’s Special Ops – Get Smart About Drugs, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.getsmartaboutdrugs.gov/tackling-cyber-crime-deas-special-ops
4. OIG-17-22-DHS Lacks Oversight of Component Use of Force (Redacted), accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2017/OIG-17-22-Jan17.pdf
5. Amtrak Police Department Jobs, accessed September 7, 2025, https://careers.amtrak.com/go/Amtrak-Police-Department-Jobs/400408/
6. UNKNOWN ENTITIES: NASA SWAT TEAMS – WHAT ARE THEY? (Episode 1) – YouTube, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fj4Kns74k4
7. Mobile Security Deployments – Wikipedia, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Security_Deployments
8. NTOA TROS 2023, accessed September 7, 2025, https://ntoa.org/pdf/TROS.pdf
9. War Comes Home | American Civil Liberties Union, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-law-reform/war-comes-home
10. Inside the NYPD Emergency Service Unit (ESU) – YouTube, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fa2zdO6ihhQ
11. National Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) Study, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.theiacp.org/resources/document/national-special-weapons-and-tactics-swat-study
12. It’s Past Time to End the Federal Militarization of Police | American …, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/its-past-time-to-end-the-federal-militarization-of-police
13. MSSTs and MSRTs — forged in the crucible of 9/11 – MyCG.uscg.mil – Coast Guard, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.mycg.uscg.mil/News/Article/4067812/mssts-and-msrts-forged-in-the-crucible-of-911/
14. Subdivisions – California Highway Patrol – Google Sites, accessed September 7, 2025, https://sites.google.com/view/calirp-chp/subdivisions
15. FBI Special Weapons and Tactics Teams – Wikipedia, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI_Special_Weapons_and_Tactics_Teams
16. Law Enforcement Support Office (LESO) – TN.gov, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.tn.gov/generalservices/vam/leso.html
17. SWAT Team Weapons and Equipments | Blauer, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.blauer.com/dispatch/swat-team-weapons-and-equipments
18. Secret Service Counter Assault Team – Wikipedia, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Service_Counter_Assault_Team
19. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 7, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWAT#:~:text=Many%20SWAT%20units%20also%20have,on%20an%20ad%20hoc%20basis.
20. Special Agent – DEA.gov, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.dea.gov/careers/special-agent
21. ACLU’s Report on Police Militarization Finds Weapons and Tactics of War Used Disproportionately Against People of Color, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclus-report-police-militarization-finds-weapons-and-tactics-war-used
22. Police Officer (Uniformed Division) Emergency Response Team – USAJOBS – Job Announcement, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/PrintPreview/834023100
23. Special Operations Division: Counter Sniper Team (CS) – Secret Service, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.secretservice.gov/careers/uniformed-division/CS
24. www.americanspecialops.com, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.americanspecialops.com/photos/law-enforcement/nasa-swat.php#:~:text=The%20Emergency%20Response%20Team%20is,ground%20covered%20by%20the%20complex.
25. A Multi-Method Study Of Special Weapons And Tactics Teams – Office of Justice Programs, accessed September 7, 2025, https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/223855.pdf
26. D.E.A. Special Agents brochure – Program in Criminal Justice, accessed September 7, 2025, https://crimjust.rutgers.edu/images/stories/Jobs/DEA.pdf