Impact of Terrorism on State Law Enforcement Discussion

INTRODUCTION

The occurrence of large-scale international terrorism in the U.S. revealed weaknesses in our policies and procedures, in regard to the elements needed to combat such events. Many state-level changes, like new programs, sprang up in an effort to alleviate or eliminate the weaknesses identified by this experience. Last week, we investigated the changes that terrorism brought to the federal government. This week we are examining the changes to state law enforcement.

As the captain of your local police municipality, the next step in your terrorism training and education for the chief is to address the impacts of terrorism on state law enforcement.

For your initial discussion post:

• Describe the failures in communication and cooperation between federal and non-federal law enforcement that allowed terrorist attacks to occur.
• Summarize two key goals for both the fusion centers and joint terrorism task forces.
• Determine how fusion centers and joint terrorism task forces overcome failures in communication and cooperation.
• Identify two resources that state law enforcement agencies contribute toward preventing or responding to terrorism.
• Describe an example of each of the ways resources that state law enforcement agencies contribute can be, or have been, used to successfully combat terrorism.

Answer:

Introduction:

The events of large-scale international terrorism in the United States exposed significant vulnerabilities in our policies and procedures, particularly regarding the coordination and cooperation between various levels of law enforcement agencies. While federal changes have been examined previously, this week focuses on the impact of terrorism on state law enforcement. As the captain of a local police municipality, it’s imperative to understand the failures in communication and cooperation between federal and non-federal law enforcement, the goals of fusion centers and joint terrorism task forces, and how state law enforcement agencies contribute to preventing or responding to terrorism.

Failures in Communication and Cooperation: The failures in communication and cooperation between federal and non-federal law enforcement were evident in instances where vital intelligence or information regarding potential terrorist activities was not effectively shared or acted upon. This lack of collaboration hindered the ability to connect the dots and prevent terrorist attacks, as seen in cases like the 9/11 attacks and the Boston Marathon bombing.

Key Goals for Fusion Centers and Joint Terrorism Task Forces:

1. Fusion Centers: Fusion centers aim to enhance information sharing and analysis among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement agencies. Key goals include integrating data from various sources to identify potential threats, facilitating collaboration between agencies, and providing actionable intelligence to support law enforcement operations.
2. Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs): JTTFs are multi-agency task forces comprising federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel, as well as representatives from other agencies. The primary goals of JTTFs include investigating and disrupting terrorist plots, sharing intelligence and resources, and coordinating responses to terrorist threats or incidents.

Overcoming Failures in Communication and Cooperation: Fusion centers and JTTFs overcome failures in communication and cooperation by serving as platforms for information sharing, coordination, and collaboration. They establish formalized channels for sharing intelligence and coordinating joint operations, facilitating real-time communication and response to emerging threats. By bringing together diverse expertise and resources, fusion centers and JTTFs bridge the gap between federal and non-federal law enforcement agencies, enabling a more unified and effective approach to counterterrorism efforts.

Resources Contributed by State Law Enforcement Agencies:

1. Intelligence and Information Sharing: State law enforcement agencies contribute intelligence and information gathered through their investigative activities, surveillance efforts, and community engagement initiatives. This includes sharing insights into local threat environments, suspicious activities, and potential terrorist threats.
2. Specialized Training and Expertise: State law enforcement agencies provide specialized training and expertise in areas such as counterterrorism tactics, bomb detection, crisis negotiation, and response to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) incidents.

Examples of Resource Contribution:

1. Intelligence Sharing: State law enforcement agencies shared critical intelligence with federal counterparts, leading to the identification and apprehension of individuals involved in terrorist plots. For instance, in the case of the thwarted Times Square bombing in 2010, information provided by a street vendor to the New York City Police Department (NYPD) led to the identification and arrest of the suspect.
2. Specialized Training: State law enforcement agencies have utilized their specialized training and expertise to enhance preparedness and response capabilities. For example, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) has trained its officers in recognizing signs of suspicious behavior during routine traffic stops, leading to the detection and disruption of potential terrorist activities along major highways.