The relationship between liberty and security is a tense one, as retaining or bestowing some liberties will lessen security. This claim, while it holds for some liberties, does not hold for all. Some liberties have a very low relationship with security, and some have no relationship at all. The tension in the relationship between liberties and security is caused by an attempt to strike a balance between the two by compromising one for the other. Both liberties and security have competing interests, which can be sentenced as commensurable values to provide a means of comparison to justify sacrificing one for the other. This allows the gain or loss of either liberty or security to be measured relative to each other to determine either event's advantage. The complication in deciding which to keep, liberty or security, exists due to the varying importance attributed to each concept. Each one's advantage is a subjective opinion as the weight attached to each concept by different persons is considerable. Thus, the political process weighs up the benefits and infringements of both liberty and security before enacting policies. In achieving this, security benefits are balanced against the losses to liberty by attributing values to the advantages each one offers (Allhoff, 2018).
Domestic Security and Disaster Response

Emergencies that are large or significant enough to be considered Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) incidents are generally multijurisdictional, state-wide, or multistate incidents that usually involve various governmental authorities at the local, regional, state, or federal levels. To address such emergencies, widespread coordination is required between intrastate, interstate, and federal level authorities. The nature of the incident can require other agencies such as private healthcare system entities to assist in the planning on how to address a CSC and execute the developed plan. Cooperation...…is needed for a situation. The set of requirements are very different after the situation has ended as the task environment changes. But still, preparing for a disaster is just as important as responding when a disaster occurs. This creates an important relationship between hazard mitigation, disaster preparedness, disaster response, and disaster recovery. Managing each of these task environments successfully necessitates a flexible leadership approach. Due to the changing nature of situations handled by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Charles Wise (2006) suggests a reduction in the DHS's limitations to take this into account. Even though a restructuring of the command and control structure will occur, the DHS will have more flexibility and ease in handling the department's varying task environments. Wise concludes that implementing adaptive management in the DHS will foster organizational learning and facilitate adaptation by advancing collaboration and information sharing.

References

Allhoff, F.…