Homeland Security
How does the creation of the Department of Homeland Security affect resources traditionally designated for local criminal justice organizations?
The Resource Imbalance caused by formation of HLS
The Department of Homeland Security controls a lot of resources. The significant among these are 40,000 coast guard members, 13,000 immigration law enforcement officers, 50,000 TSA screeners, 40,000 border patrol customs and 4000 Secret Service agents (Jaffe, 2015). These resources are immense and seriously affect the remainder, meant to be used by other law enforcement units. In 2012, the police were in dire need of ammunition while DHS had purchased up to 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition and added 2.717 Mine Resistant Armored Protection; the latter being vehicles that were previously used for counterinsurgency operations in Iraq (Bell, 2013).
Are there too few resources to fight both terrorists and traditional criminals?
Stressed State Police
Lack of funding has led to budget cuts in many police departments. In Baton Rouge, for instance, lack of funding and the resultant budget cuts has necessitated a reduction of police troopers in the Louisiana area. We now see 575 troopers deployed for work that was originally meant for 650 troopers. The state police commander in Louisiana expressed his wish to have a police academy established to deploy new trained personnel. However, he cited lack of funding to be the main obstacle for failing to achieve these noble goals. The American public will increasingly become insecure with reduced police officers. The fact that DHS takes about 57 billion dollars is evidence that they are taking away resources from the local criminal justice system. Although the DHS budget is huge, there is no justification to claim that resources are' sufficient to take care of both terrorism threats and homegrown crime. The concern lies in the allocation of the resources. The question is whether DHS needs $57 billion to operate? Could a portion of the resources be shared with the police department?
Implications of taking Osama Bin Laden Alive
Ideally, Osama bin laden should have been apprehended by the Seal commandos of the U.S. on 2nd May and consequently put on trial for his role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks and other crimes. However, Osama, while in his Abbottabad hideout, met a cruel form of sentence. If Osama would have been captured alive from Pakistan, the first burning question would have been that of jurisdiction. He planned his crimes from Afghanistan but attacked the U.S., UK, Yemen, Kenya Indonesia and Spain. If he had been flown to Guantanamo Bay, he would have been put under trial by a military tribunal. However, such a move would have triggered a barrage of complaints and outcries by his supporters who would claim that he was not getting justice; courtesy, the wavering, unstable credibility of the system. If he would have been subjected to a U.S. federal court process, it would have been a nightmare to raise jurors to hear and decide his fate. The security logistics of the process would have been overwhelming. It is even doubtful whether it would have been possible to find 12 unbiased jurors. Suppose Osama would have chosen to deny all the accusations against him, would it have been possible to adduce credible evidence against him to lead to conviction? Although some of the Al-Qaida leaders such as Khalid Sheikh Mohamed have been apprehended, owing to the circumstances under which evidence was extracted from them, such evidence has been put under scrutiny and bears signs of inadmissibility; it was extracted under duress.
Although Osama…
They were mostly former soldiers from Iraq, called in to help with the relief ops. Those supporting the use of the National Guard in these types of actions point out that "the National Guard already has a significant emergency response capability and the Constitution of the United States establishes the authority to employ the National Guard in significant and leading domestic roles against terrorism." (Oates, 2002) on the other
TERRORISM COUNTER-TERRORISM AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Counter-terrorism is popular as antiterrorism and incorporates techniques, practices, strategies, and tactics that militaries, governments, corporations and police departments adopt in attacking terrorist threats and acts either real or imputed. Both governments and insurgents use terror tactics. It is clear that some insurgents do not terror as tactics while others opt not to apply as other tactics have better outcomes for their particular contexts.
S. DHS "Strategic Plan," 2008, http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/strategicplan/) Realistically acts of terrorism, domestic or foreign are exceedingly rare, though slightly more common than they have been in the past and at least marginally more violent in nature, they occur very, very rarely. (Lewis, 2000, p. 201) Though maintaining serious preparedness the mitigation of natural disasters, most which cannot be avoided is an issue needed to be addressed almost yearly, on both small
Corrections Principal Directorates of Department of Homeland Security Border and Transportation Security The largest component of the Department of Homeland Security is the Directorate of Border and Transportation Security (BTS). This division is responsible for maintaining the security of the nation's borders and transportation systems. BTS employees about 58% of DHS's total employees, has nearly half of its operating budget, and includes what was formerly TSA, Customs, the border security functions of INS,
Is the �System Under Stress�? Book Review of Kettl�s Homeland Security and American PoliticsIntroductionThis review covers Kettl�s (2007) System Under Stress: Homeland Security and American Politics, published by CQ Press in Washington, D.C. (pp. 151). The book is relevant because it addresses the need to assess the status of the Department of Homeland Security in light of the various stresses it encounters. It frames that discussion within the scope of
One of the most important security-related pieces of legislation recently passed in Congress is the H.R. 1731: the National Cybersecurity Protection Advancement Act of 2015, also known simply as the Cybersecurity Act of 2015. The Act has widely been considered a “landmark cybersecurity information sharing legislation,” (Abascal, Archie, Crawford, et al., 2016) and “the most significant piece of federal cyber-related legislation enacted to date,” (Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 2015, p.
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now