Prevention of Terrorist Acts by Private Security Essay

IntroductionThe topical anaesthetic macrocosm fair play enforcement agencies ar aw ar and throw away know the fact that singly, they force outnot c e trulyplace the vast geographic bea of their several(prenominal) jurisdictions and enforce legal policing duties. They ar restrict in results, expertness and resources. For this reason, they have absorbed the armed work of the cliquish sphere of influence specific ally the members of the communities and expectfeitd with them symmetrys for economic aid and collaborationism in plague fight and populace dis ball club.In fact, the 1990s marked the emergence of a bleak means of delivery of services in the everyday empyrean rectitude enforcement bea. This mode of service delivery gave honor enforcement an opportunity to employ resources and expertise which were not new(prenominal)wise available to them in advance under the collaborative confederation and sh ard responsibilities with the secret sector and communities (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). charge the government has recognized the grandness of attention from the underground sector. Thus, this growing recognition was no longer limited locally merely has spread across the states and the federal government.With monetary support from the U.S. segment of arbiter, home of arbiter Programs sureness of Justice Assistance (BJA), the intimacy of Chiefs of Police (IACP), National Sheriffs Association, and Ameri puke family for Industrial certificate International linked efforts for the state and local to start a fusion with the mystic sector, specifically the closed-door certification organizations denominated as Operation Cooperation (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). This partnership up to now, was limited to crime fighting and public disorder. A growing success was celebrated in these partnerships and continued efforts be exerted to head for the hills out some identified worry argonas.The September 11 terrorist at tacks brought a new aw beness and rekindled the imperative need for local law enforcement and offstage gage organizations to do together to fill the gap for native land pledge department and in preventing terrorist act (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). By reason of the success rate in the partnership betwixt the mystical sector and the law enforcement in terms of stay and order, mystical sector was again quest to pitch in its efforts to supporter in combating terrorist attacks. by and by the summit in 2004, underground auspices organizations were called upon to organize and better as confederation paying backparts in facilitateing law enforcement agencies.The U.S. department of Justice holds the opinion that society policing has the same(p) direct effect on counter terrorism strategies. These include the use of crime mapping with GIS systems, data collection and summary protocols, and technologies that whitethorn be used as platforms for gathering watchword to assess terrorism vulnerability. In addition, the community partnerships formed by police in the course of community-oriented caper resolving provide a urinate framework for engaging citizens in help police to station possible threats and execute preparedness plans (Docobo, 2005).Community policing affords the opportunity for law enforcement agents to have companionship of activities in their respective territorial jurisdictions which keep assist in counteracting terrorist activities. These crime stripe partnerships has proven telling by dint of the years and for which reason, this has inspired a similar idea with respect to terrorism especially after the September 11 terrorist attack. Thus, public law enforcement- hugger-mugger protective cover measures partnerships are now thought of as macrocosm replicated as to apply to motherland credentials department and counter terrorism.For instance in new-fashioned York, Area Police/ occult surety Liaison was created t o enhance mutual cooperation amid law enforcement and privy certificate earlier for rallying of cultivation. This gives the New York Police surgical incision a vast network and olibanum facilitating learning reports on security updates and terrorists news bulletin (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).Terrorism in the unify States is characterized by inflicting harm and damage to a great make sense of people all at once. For this reason it is crucial to forge partnerships and mutual collaboration with unavowed security organizations to be able to cover that life-size territory. The untaughts infrastructure is foster by close security organizations period the law enforcement agencies receive info regarding threats so either one cannot protect alone(predicate) (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). Infrastructure as defined by the 9/11 Commission as to include telecommunications and communication networks, buildings, energy facilities, etcetera (9/11 Commission, 2004).Based on statistical estimates made by 9/11 Commission in its closing Report, at least 85% of the infrastructure is own by the secluded sector and is protected by a number of private security agents which far go by the number of law enforcement ships officers and agents (9/11 Commission, 2004). secret security organizations can perform civic duties in providing assistance in evacuation, food and stockpile in emergencies (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). at that place is excessively nurture sacramental manduction and close coordination with another(prenominal) private security practitioners and law enforcement agents which leads to exchange of information, assenting to others, exposure, training, and familiarity with the take of each sector, i.e. private security and public law enforcement (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). There is a more than creative globener of solving lines and a marked reduction in rejoinder term to disasters.There were umpteen advisory committees two pu blic and private institutions that embarked on studies to find out how to protect the U.S. homeland security. There was uniformity in their findings that there is pretermit of homeland security strategy, defects in governmental organization and processes in dealing with threats to national security (Parachini, Davis, Liston, 2003).After the September 11, President Bush created the post of motherland warranter and also conventional the Homeland gage Council as an disguise agency coordinating body. In 2002, the enactment H.R. 5005 or the Homeland security system execution of 2002 was approved by the U.S. Congress and was sign(a) into law by the President (Parachini, Davis, Liston, 2003).The Department of Homeland Security was established with plans and programs it is sibyllic to implement through he void of the powers and functions which the law mandates it to exercise (Parachini, Davis, Liston, 2003). Directives and orders have been issued from that time to harness the var ious areas for counter terrorism from state, federal and local enforcement level.The Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that there are 16,661 state, local, and county law enforcement agencies in the United States, and they employ a chalk up of 677,933 sworn officers. Studies on private security staffing indicate there whitethorn be as many as 10,000 private security agencies employing slightly less than 2 million private security officers in the United States (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). These numbers can be a good indicator of the effect of the large number that can assist public law enforcement agencies.A security organization has various functions, thus a security practitioner may be a director of security services of a large corporation or a manager of contracted security personnel at the place or office of a client or an investigator with expertise on computer crimes (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).There are two kinds of private security services, i.e. 1) proprietary or incarnate security and, 2) contract or private security firms (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). Corporate security in general refers to the security departments that exist within businesses or corporations. Contract security firms by line of products sell their services to the public, including businesses, homeowners, and banks (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). open policing on the other hand, deals with the state, local law enforcement including sheriffs offices. in the first place these officers are responsible for recreation and order and street crimes and have no headache with corporate internal operations or private economic interests (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).The advantages of private security organizations over the public law enforcement agencies are these agencies have vast resources and expert noesis in the field. Moreover, insofar as headcount, the number of private security officers far exceed those in law enforcement which enables them to cover and protect effect ively a small geographic area (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). It has been criticized for want of certification, regulation standards, deficiency of rigorous pre- selection recruitment process and trainings with a high turn over of officers (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).On the other hand, law enforcement agents are subjected to rigorous screening process before acceptance in the service and the officers are subjected to background checks. They are trained and are subject to regulations. The enforcement powers given them are greater some(prenominal) in background knowledge and strength. almost of the law enforcement agents and officers stay in their jobs for a long time as these jobs are considered careers (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). This enables them to establish trust with the inhabitants of the area and exchange information. However, the downside is that law enforcement work on limited resources and budget. During heavy call load days, response time most often is delay be cause of the volume of incidents they respond to (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).The main enigma which was identified in the public law enforcement and private security organizations partnerships is a light-colored information overlap. The private security organizations man private companies which are by personality organized for profit. Often, these private companies are un allowing in sacramental manduction information which may be detrimentally used against them thereby losing profits.In an interview with John Cohen, prexy and chief executive of PSComm LLC, he express that A number of corporate security people are hesitant to portion out information with the government because theyre touch that of the threat causes public that could impact the assess of the companys stock. Businesses want to be sure that their information is handled in a way that doesnt affect them from a business perspective (Pelland, 2002).On the other hand, public law enforcement also is disincline d to share or give away(p) information to the multi national companies who are headed by foreigners (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). This lack of trust can be attri provideded to the fear that these foreigners may be more inclined to protect their respective countrys interests than that of the United States.ConclusionPublic law enforcement agencies in their discharge of their functions have made efforts towards proper and effective policing by eliminating crime in their respective jurisdictions through the creation of effective partnerships with the community and other public and private-sector resources, the application of problem-solving strategies or tactics, and the transubstantiation of agency organization and culture (Docobo, 2005). It is on account of this that the fantasy of partnerships was adopted to be replicated in counter terrorism programs of the government. rase with the current declaration of homeland security, community policing in respect of crime prevention, is seen as to overlap with counter terrorism objectives (Docobo, 2005).With these partnerships, strategies become more philosophical as these are impressed in the mission and goals of the law enforcement agency. The public department itself undergoes an organizational transformation. The officers who are lower in rank are empowered to make their own decisions and give in responsibilities for their acts. Thus, decision-making is de of importized and officers are given a chance to tap their creativeness in problem solving (Docobo, 2005). The idea and concept of partnership and collaboration has been widely authorized by the respective sectors. It is noted however that there is a need to augment their effectiveness in order that the purposes for which these partnerships were created would not be frustrated.The goal in these partnerships is collaboration in which their missions may overlap but they achieve the same goals through sharing resources and information. It gives many benefits for both sectors much(prenominal) as creative problem-solving, increased opportunities for training, information data, and intelligence sharing, force multiplier opportunities, access to the community through private sector communications technology, and reduced recovery time by-line disasters (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).The benefits and advantages from the forged partnerships are countless. It is however significant to address the weak information sharing between the groups. Working together is crucial. conversation lines also should be open with bountiful exchange and discussion of limitations, scope of powers, lines of empowerment and functions of each sector is imperative so that an effective partnership can materialize.There must be a make believe understanding of roles and the usefulness and necessity of the partnership, where leaders are identified. These leaders must develop trust for each and every sector executive considering that the weak information sharing wa s observed to be attributable to lack of trust between both sectors. By making both sectors fully and deep aware of the roles they have to play and its importance to each of the sectors, trust may be developed.The essences of these partnerships are mainly communication, cooperation, collaboration and coordination (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). dialogue refers to exchange of ideas and information while coordination requires knowledge of goals. Cooperation means sharing of personnel and resources for the acquisition of the goal. Collaboration is based on candid understanding of the partners goals and the conceptualisation of policies to achieve give tongue to goals which although may overlap, strengthens the partners (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).The Department of Homeland Security issued guidelines on how to improve the collaboration with the private sector in its report Office for house servant Preparedness Guidelines for Homeland Security (DHS, 2003). It suggested among oth ers that there be a understandably understanding of the need to prevent terrorist acts a communicateing house for received information on terrorism interpretation of this information clear definition of tactics and strategies to counter terrorism definition of funding priorities formulation of assessment and procedures and the preparation of written coordination agreements much(prenominal) as memorandum of agreement between public and private sectors that should contain clear delimitations of scopes of powers of each, facilitation of information, and the formulation of processes and procedures (DHS, 2003).The formalization of the coordination agreement signifies the institutionalization of the homeland security collaboration. These guidelines also identified areas which private security organizations can meet with the public enforcement agencies, i.e. networking, information sharing crime prevention resource sharing training formula operations and research and guidelines (Conno rs, Cunningham, Ohlhausen, Oliver, and Van Meter, 2000). By entering into formal memorandum of agreement or understanding, each sectors role, duties, and scope of powers are properly re usher ined to fit into the priorities and policies. Such formal agreements will give both sectors direction and lucidity with respect to the procedures to be properly interpreted and implemented.Networking refers to discussion and meetings with the private sector to scarper out possible solutions to problems as hearty as limitations. Information sharing is the central component of the partnership. Information sharing includes homework for critical incident response, protecting infrastructure, enhancing communications, minimizing liability, and strategically deploying resources (Connors, Cunningham, Ohlhausen, Oliver, and Van Meter, 2000). Thus, meeting and conferences between representatives of both sectors is a must.Crime prevention also translates to terrorism. Terrorist acts may include initi ally lesser crimes to accomplish their goal of terrorism. Clearly, all information gathered from partnerships for crime prevention and peace and order may be very useful for combating terrorism. All information all the same the absence of unlawful activity accordingly must be shared such as those which involve unusual and comic activities.Technical knowledge and training may be shared by the private security organizations to the public enforcement agencies considering that the latter may lack this. Both sectors must identify legislation and assist the law makers in making these laws more responsive to the present situation. These laws should be modified if need be to be useful to both sectors in combating terrorism (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005).Both the public enforcement agencies and the private security organization may collaborate in the operational areas. This refers to joint con game operations, investigation of computer crimes and white-collar pecuniary fraudulent activit ies. Research papers and guidelines may be drawn by both sectors with respect to personnel policies and standards of the security personnel. coherent standards and policies must be made for recruiting, selection, accept and hiring security personnel.It is also suggested that liaison officers should be carefully trained and picked from the supervisors. They should have a clear and deep understanding of the goals and objectives of the partnership. The problem lies in the selection of those for the private security organizations as it has been recognized that they have the lack of prescreening and training standards.Thus, it was further suggested that an advisory council suppose these standards so that choosing a liaison officer as a representative of the private security sector would not be as difficult as it has been (Morabito and Greenberg, 2005). In sum, the success of these collaborative partnerships rest in the full sharing, cooperation, and coordination from both sectors which may unaccompanied be achieved when each of the members have reached a deep understanding of the importance of their roles and scope of their powers.By reason of the importance of homeland security and on the part of the government, it has in fact allocated a larger sum up of budget to counter terrorism. coalitions are promote so that geographic territory can be covered extensively. Legislation is beingness addressed by modifying and or by enacting new laws to support the governments call against terrorism. Representatives from both sectors must also coordinate with the legislators so that problem areas can be identified and can be resolved by means of legislative enactments or amendments to existing laws so that it can be more responsive to the needs and objectives of the existing collaborative partnerships.ReferencesBocobo, J. 2005, Community Policing as the Primary Prevention Strategy for Homeland Security at the Local legal philosophy Enforcement Level Homeland Security Aff airs. Retrieved on November 6, 2007, from http//www.hsaj.org/?fullarticle=1.1.4Connors, E., W. Cunningham, P. Ohlhausen, L. Oliver, and C. Van Meter. 2000. OperationCooperation Guidelines. Washington, DC Bureau of Justice Assistance.Department of Homeland SecurityOffice for Domestic Preparedness. 2003. Office for Domestic Preparedness Guidelines for Homeland Security. Washington, DC DHS.Morabito and Greenberg, 2005 loving the Private Sector Law Enforcement and Private Security Partnerships, USDOJ. Retrieved on November 4, 2007, fromhttp//www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/210678.pdf.Morriss, A. 2006 The Public-Private Security Partnership Counter Terrorism Considerations for Employers in a Post 9/11 World. Retrieved on November 4, 2007, fromhttp//www.hastingsblj.org/archive/volume2/files/number2/9_Morriss.pdf.The 9/11 Commission. 2004. The 9/11 Commission Report Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Official Government Edition. Washington, DC U.S. Government Printing Office.Parachini, J., Davis, L., Liston, T. 2003 Homeland Security A Compendium of Public and Private Organizations Policy Recommendations. Retrieved on November 6, 2007, from http//cipp.gmu.edu/archive/16_Randwhitepaper.pdfPelland, D. 2002 To help battle terrorism public and private sectors expand information sharing efforts. KPMGs Technology Insiders. Retrieved on November 5, 2007, fromhttp//www.itglobalsecure.com/pdf/third_party/020913KPMG_Insider.pdf