Ill add the students reply plus the teacher in the drip box. Respond to two other students initial forum plus teacher is the first one at the top answers with a minimum of 150 words each. In your replies to classmates you may offer your opinion on
the topic of the week, substantially support or supplement another
student’s answer, or even politely disagree with or challenge their
forum answer (but do not ask your classmates questions, or do so only as
a last resort per the forum philosophy). You will also reply to my
follow up question in your own forum string, and also read and
acknowledge the Professor wrap up forum I post toward the end of the
week. Also, do not be afraid to respectfully disagree with the readings
or a classmate where you feel appropriate; as this should be part of
your analysis process and employs critical thinking and academic
freedom. Forum posts are graded on demonstrated knowledge of the lesson
and weekly readings, relevance, timeliness, as well as clarity and
quality of analysis and synthesis. Sources utilized to support answers
are to come from the weekly readings, but other credible and scholarly
sources may be used to supplement (but not replace) the assigned
readings. However, dictionaries, encyclopedias and Wikipedia are not
scholarly and are not acceptable sources in college level work. All
forum work must be completed within the academic week.
3_sudents.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Jeff teacher
Thanks for your post and let me expand more on the role of state and local law
enforcement with regard to homeland security intelligence. First, consider
some numbers — there are only about 120,000 full-time federal law enforcement officers
for the entire country, but state and local law enforcement officers number almost
800,000 combined (Reaves, 2012; Reaves, 2011). In fact, State, Local, and Tribal (SLT)
officers are one of the main “collectors” of intelligence and a great source for both the
DHS Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI), as well as the
FBI’s “Guardian” system (U.S. Department of Justice 2015; Durner, 2012).
I consider that it is possible some of the 9/11 hijackers that were already KNOWN to be
in the U.S at the time, could have been rolled-up during the multiple routine traffic stops
that occurred before that fateful September day an All-Points-Bulletin (APB) or Be-Onthe-Lookout for (BOLO) had been issued for these terrorists (Kobach, 2004, p.6). Of
course that would assume that the FBI and CIA other agencies shared intelligence with
each other on what they knew about AQ back then (as we have previously discussed).
However, this type of state and local intelligence work is very controversial for some,
which is best represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on their site
titled More About Fusion Centers as well as a more recent issues about state and
local fusion centers monitoring social media. In December 2016 “Twitter asked
Dataminr, a company that Twitter partly owns and provides a social media monitoring
tool for the platform, to stop allowing federally funded fusion centers (local information
centers that share threat-related data with the Department of Homeland Security)
access to Dataminr’s tool. Twitter did so after the ACLU of California found out that the
centers had access to Dataminr’s service and could use it to surveil users. Specifically,
Twitter ordered Dataminr to disallow access because Twitter prohibits any entity from
using Twitter’s data for surveillance purposes” (Rosbrow-Telem, 2016, para. 4).
So my follow up question relates to fusion centers. These centers give the government
(even state and local governments) the ability to ‘data mine’ about their own citizens
(driving records, tax records, vehicle and property records, etc, etc) and then also
enables them have access to federal intelligence information too. So with this in mind,
do you think that state and local agencies should have their own intelligence
“fusion centers” where they assemble and analyze threat information as well as
have access to citizen’s data?
Thanks, Jeff
P.S. I totally agree with your point on actionability and that was something I emphasized
in my PhD dissertation on this same topic.
Durner, C. (2012, January). eGuardian Gains Momentum. FBI Law Enforcement
Bulletin. https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/january/technology-update-eguardian-gains-momentum
Kobach, K. W. (2004, June). State and Local Authority to Enforce Immigration Law:
A Unified Approach for Stopping Terrorists. Center for Immigration
Studies. http://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2004/back604.pdf
Reaves, B. A. (2012, June). Federal Law Enforcement Officers. U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Justice
Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fleo08.pdf
Reaves, B. A. (2011, July). Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies.
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Justice
Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf
Rosbrow-Telem. L. (2016, December 16). Twitter stands alone as the one major tech
company that is defying Trump. Business Insider. Retrieved
from http://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-trump-muslim-registry-2016-12
U.S. Department of Justice, The Nationwide SAR Initiative. Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Office of Justice Programs. http://nsi.ncirc.gov/about_nsi.aspx
Justin May
Greetings class, this week I will discussing the role if any the intelligence should have supporting
state and local law enforcement. After reading and conducting my research, I believe that the
incorporation of intelligence departments supporting the law enforcement at the state level
and below is redundant.
In the Article, Improving Homeland Security at the State Level: Needed: State-level, Integrated
Intelligence Enterprises, Dr. Steiner explains the roles of the federal agencies regarding
intelligence support to the state and local law enforcement. He explains that having similar
organizations with the similar structures defeats the purpose of the federal agencies, also he
explains that the state agencies are not as proficient with handling intelligence. (Steiner, 2009,
para.5)
Although, Dr. Steiner brings us a great point regarding redundancy in the intelligence
organizations when mirrored at the stated and local law enforcement levels. There are
exceptions though, big major cities that have a multitude of interaction and tourism with
foreigners like New York City need additional support aside from the federal agencies.
The case of 9/11 is a drastic enough of an example that in bigger cities, it is impossible to fully
track every threat in the city and an intelligence department supplementing the federal
agencies may prove to be a boon.
However, after reading about law enforcement intelligence and its purpose to anticipate
crime. The idea of intelligence driven investigations aiding law enforcement to accurately and
applicably attribute justice with respective crime makes perfect sense. The idea that
intelligence can complete a picture is misleading, and it is understandable why investigators
often look at the intelligence community discarding the importance. (Gerringer and Bart, 2017,
p. 322)
The redundancy of the State and local law enforcement mirroring the federal intelligence
organizations along with the law enforcement intelligence providing a misleading concept of a
complete picture can cause issues with intelligence dissemination. I can see both sides to the
argument that it should be present and not be, however, there is still a need for the intelligence
to be collected. In my opinion, as long as the information is collected and disseminated
appropriately and timely is the heart of the matter. The understanding of the intelligence and
its actionability is what really matters.
I look forward to everyone’s feedback.
Sincerely, Justin
Gerringer, A. E. and Bart, B. (2017). Law Enforcement Intelligence. (Pages 321-325 in AFIO’s
Guide to the Study of Intelligence). Retrieved April 22, 2017 from
http://www.afio.com/publications/AFIO’s_Intelligence_Study_Guide_ver1_for_public_r
elease_2017Jan01.pdf
Steiner, J. E. (2009). Improving Homeland Security at the State Level: Needed: State-level,
Integrated Intelligence Enterprises. Studies in Intelligence. Retrieved April 22, 2017 from
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csistudies/studies/vol.-53-no.-3/improving-homeland-security-at-the-state-level.html
Ray Hinojosa
How should State and Local Law Enforcement be utilized, if at all, in homeland security
intelligence?
The state and local law enforcements (as well as the privates sector) need to be utilized in the
gathering of homeland security intelligence. The responsibility of keeping America safe is the
responsibility of all governments, not just the federal government. This is why fusion centers
were created after the 9/11 commission report. A fusion center is a source of gathered
information that is shared with the federal government from state and local law enforcement in
an effort to stop terrorism.
Without state and local law enforcement as well as the private sector reporting possible terror
acts to the proper authorities, it would be nearly impossible to prevent lone wolf terror attacks.
As we are all aware, a lone wolf terror attack is just as it sounds, a person commenting a terror
attack by themselves without any outside aid (Bershidsky, 2016). Although a lone wolf may not
be on the “radar” of homeland security that does not mean the people around that lone wolf may
not report something to deem to be suspicious. The term “people” would include neighbors, law
enforcement and the general citizens that see something they deem to be suspicious. That one tip
alone could be the beginning to an investigation that could lead to a terror attack being
halted. To recap, the state and local law enforcement (as well as the private sector) should be
utilized to report information (intelligence) to homeland security when the opportunity presents
itself. This can be done by the use of the Fusion centers that were created post 9/11.To think this
should not be done would be opting to not use a strong resource to prevent terrorism from
spreading and occurring.
References
Department of Homeland Security, Our mission 2014. Retrieved from http://www.dhs.gov/ourmission
Terrorism, The Only Way to Prevent Lone Wolf Attacks. Authored by Leonid Bershidsky, July
19, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-07-19/the-only-wayto-prevent-lone-wolf-attacks
Steiner, J. E. (2009). Improving Homeland Security at the State Level: Needed: State-level,
Integrated Intelligence Enterprises. Studies in Intelligence. Retrieved from
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csistudies/studies/vol.-53-no.-3/improving-homeland-security-at-the-state-level.html
Steven Sanzaro
How should State and Local Law Enforcement be utilized, if at all, in
homeland security intelligence?
State and local law enforcement play a vital role in homeland security
intelligence procedures. Speaking from personal knowledge at the state
level of law enforcement, federal agencies rely heavily on their state and
local counterparts to perform their job functions. A huge reason behind this
is the fact that federal agents are not intertwined with members of the
community due to being from the federal level. State and locals operate in
the communities in uniformed and plain clothes assignments on a daily
basis. This allows them to get a much better understanding of what the
community is doing plus it builds relationships with those community
members.
Federal agencies benefit greatly from deputizing state and local
officers and granting them federal authority. I myself was a Title 19 Task
Force Officer (TFO) with Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) for a couple
of years while serving in a previous assignment. We worked drug and
money laundering investigations, but the premise was the same. I received
the authority to charge individuals federally, I could swear out warrants with
federal magistrates, and my authority stretched outside of my normal state
jurisdictional limits. HSI was then able to pull from my agencies resources
of informants, manpower, on-view arrest authority, and contacts. You learn
how the federal agency wants investigations to be conducted, you adapt to
their requirements, and you bring your experiences and resources with
you. It is a win-win.
This type of relationship can be the same when dealing with
intelligence instead of drug violations. Fusion centers are a great example of
state, local, and federal authorities working together. I have personally
used fusion centers for assistance in several states and have noticed a
difference in the quality and options available from state-to-state. You’d be
surprised what some states could access and what others could not.
I can also attest to what happens to the state agencies if the federal
government pulls out of a fusion center. A short time ago, the FBI pulled
out of one of our fusion centers and it almost crippled the center. The
federal government brings huge resources, most importantly their check, to
the table. State and locals need to know where the federal government
stands with their involvement in these partnerships. This is highlighted in
Eack’s (2009) State and Local Fusion Centers: Emerging Trends and Issues,
“The federal government has not clearly articulated the long-term role it
expects to play in sustaining fusion centers. It is critical for center
management to know whether to expect continued federal resources, such
as personnel and grant funding, since the federal government, through an
information sharing environment, expects to rely on a nationwide network of
centers to facilitate information sharing with state and local governments”.
Reference:
Eack, K. (2015, January 23). State and Local Fusion Centers: Emerging
Trends and Issues. Retrieved April 26, 2017, from
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Recent Comments