Has terrorism as a crime be committed domestically has changed policing? How? Why?
In my opinion, I will definitely concur domestic terrorism has changed our policing. The most obvious alert for the need of the changes would be the incident of September 11. The federal government has greatly increased terrorism prevention and response efforts. However, a large degree of responsibility for dealing with these threats and for alleviating citizen fear rests at the local level. To some degree, the majority of local police departments in the United States have worked to reduce the fear of future terrorist attacks and to prevent and plan for attacks. Law enforcement officials are strategically rethinking public security procedures and practices to maximize the potential of their resources. Community policing involves broadening the nature and number of police functions compared to traditional policing models. It emphasizes organizational change, active problem solving, and external partnerships to address issues that concern both the police and citizens. In recent years, the philosophy of community policing appears to have been adopted to differing degrees by a large number of law enforcement entities in the United States. For example, a 2001 U.S. Department of Justice report indicates that from 1997 to 1999, departments employing personnel designated as community police rose from 34% to 64%. In addition, the absolute number of community policing officers rose from 21,000 to 113,000. However, ...
Domestic Intelligence Operations
Over the past 10 years, each state and local government have implemented information and intelligence sharing policies and practices, including the creation of one or more state-level fusion centers, in an effort to create a seamless, interactive system of information sharing to counter the terrorist threat. The systems in place vary from state to state based upon their perceived need, pre-existing law enforcement practices and constructs, legal frameworks, and financial capabilities. The efficacy of state fusion centers has been extensively researched. Numerous academic papers have been written exploring the sharing of information between local, state and federal authorities. Despite enormous financial investments, many argue that the current constructs remain inadequate or, conversely, are overblown given the domestic threat profile.
In this assignment, you will outline the current information and intelligence sharing construct between local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies in the state of your choosing. Describe its evolution since 9/11 (explaining pre-9/11 constructs as appropriate). You will then draft the strategic plan based on your evaluation of the current strengths and weaknesses of, and investment in the states' information-sharing capabilities.
What are the key federal agencies that engage in domestic intelligence operations? Briefly describe each.
What are each of their primary areas of responsibility? Explain.
Briefly describe the purpose of the National Counter-Terrorism Center (NCTC).
What agencies are assigned to the NCTC?
How does the NCTC interact with state fusion centers? Explain.
Describe the efforts undertaken by the FBI during the Counter Culture Movement of the 1960s and 1970s to infiltrate prominent protest organizations and the changes that have been implemented (e.g., legislative, structural, agency policy) since then, resulting in today's FBI.
Select a state of your choice within the United States for your strategic plan
How has its intelligence-sharing construct between local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies evolved since 9/11 (explaining pre-9/11 constructs as appropriate)? Explain in detail.
Does the system in the jurisdiction you selected to provide a platform for rapid, comprehensive information sharing? Explain in detail.
How will you modify the existing policy of the chosen state to improve the efficacy of its information-sharing operations? Use the following questions to guide your policy recommendations:
What successes have been achieved? Explain.
How can the lessons learned from these successes be applied to other components of the system? Explain.
What opportunities to improve exist? Explain.
Is the investment being made in this system justifiable (e.g., too much, too little)?
Conclude your policy recommendation with a summation of your major points.