How the Events of September 11 Impacted Law Enforcement and Security Initiatives in the United States

In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,

The primary concern of this paper is to establish the impact of the USA Patriot Act on local law enforcement and its potential for net widening. This paper will cover three primary areas to provide a proper public safety case analysis. First the paper will describe the public safety agency and its roles in relation to the USA PATRIOT ACT. Then the paper will provide a detail explanation of the leadership, management, and administration roles of the public safety agency chosen. Finally this paper will cover the importance of efficient administration in public safety.

Today, domestic terrorism is one of the major threats to the national security of the US. Since 9/11, the US intelligence services and law enforcement agencies viewed international terrorism as the major threat to the public security of the US but the threat of domestic terrorism has been underestimated. At any rate, American law enforcement agencies conduct active campaigns to prevent international terrorism but domestic terrorism become a serious threat to the national security of the US. In such a way, the US needs to develop effective strategies to prevent the rise of domestic terrorism. Otherwise, the US may face a threat of the consistent growth of domestic terrorism as do some European countries, such as the UK, for instance. Therefore, law enforcement agencies should focus their attention on the prevention of domestic terrorism because, even though domestic terrorism is unseen, it may be even more dangerous than international terrorism. Domestic terrorists undermine the country from within, while international terrorists attack the US from the outside and the US can raise barriers to protect Americans from the foreign threat, while domestic terrorism needs effective work of law enforcement agencies nationwide. Therefore, domestic terrorism is a serious threat to the national security of the US and American law enforcement agencies along legislators and the public have to unite their efforts in the struggle against domestic terrorism.

Policing has changed since 9/11. They wanted different ways to detect terrorist actions and criminal acts. So community policing was implemented. The government has provided money and has been supportive in agencies efforts to participate in community policing. “For example, the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), a branch of the Department of Justice, provide funding to local police agencies to hire 100,000 new community policing officers in the 1990s” (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000 as cited in Chappell, 2009, 6).

Each year citizens die in encounters with law enforcement officers. It is reported that “Americans are eight times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist” (Rucke, 2013). Although there is no official data base tracking these occurrences it is estimated that between 500 and a 1,000 people are killed by police officers each year. To put this in greater perspective this number equals approximately 5,000 since the 9/11 terror attack which is roughly the same number as U.S. soldiers who have been killed in the line of duty in Iraq (Rucke, 2013). This statistic is justifiably concerning. The cause of police related killings are multifold and cannot be attributed to only one factor. Many deaths may be unavoidable and perhaps, dependent on the situation, necessary. I contend, however, that many of these deaths may very well be preventable.

Law enforcement response to counter-terrorism fundamentally changed as a result of the unprecedented events of September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington (Kaldas, 2002, p61-62). This essay will examine how law enforcement has evolved in response to the changing nature of terrorism, with an emphasis on how this has impacted Australia. An analysis of arrests and subsequent

This paper presents the topic selected for the final Public Safety Case Analysis Project, an overview of the USA Patriot Act, its impact on local law enforcement, and the potential for net widening. Congress reacted to the violation to our country on September 11, 2001 by passing the USA Patriot Act into law on October 26, 2001. (USA Patriot Act, 2001). Since its enactment, the USA Patriot Act has both validated and victimized the American public in the name of securing our Nations freedom.

In 2010, Secretary Janet Napolitano led the completion of the first-ever Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR), which established a unified, strategic framework for homeland security missions and goals. Subsequently, DHS conducted a Bottom-Up Review (BUR) to align our programmatic activities and organizational structure to better serve those missions and goals. The QHSR reflects the most comprehensive assessment and analysis of homeland security to date. DHS worked closely with the White House, National Security Staff, other Federal departments and agencies, and our state, local, tribal and territorial partners to represent the whole-of-government approach to national security envisioned by the Administration.

9/11 forever changed the United States Criminal Justus System. Most notably the mission forever changed for the State, city and local police departments. With the exception of large cities, police department were not trained or equipped to handle terror attacks of any scale. In the aftershock of 9/11, police departments of all sizes realized the developing terrorism threats would require participation of local police as well as larger agencies to not only respond to attacks but potently stop them. 9/11 also produced U.S. citizen sympathizers or “homegrown terrorists” complicating the definition of what we thought Terrorism is. The Aurora, Colorado Theater shootings, Fort Hood, Texas shootings, and South Carolina church shootings are all active

Terrorism has never been in the States; only in third world countries. Since 9/11-2001 is has been a reality and ongoing nightmare and hit close to home. The attack on the World Trade Centers in New York was a wakeup call. United States has been on high alert ever since, waiting for the next possible Terrorists attack. This paper will explain why terrorism is a law enforcement concern as well as how terrorism is considered a crime. At last the paper will state some recommendations that the American Criminal Justice should do, to better prepare for future crimes.

The devastating events of 9/11 provided a forewarning to our country concerning the dangers of terrorism. However, it has created a particularly greater impact on the duties and standards expected of law enforcement agencies on all levels (local, state, and national). Law enforcement has begun implementing new tactics in an effort to prevent future terrorist attacks from threatening our national security. One aspect of policing in which terrorism has brought about is the process of information sharing between all levels of law enforcement. Our nation has also witnessed a change from traditional policing to that of a militarized one. Furthermore, after the incidents of September 11th, the

There have been a number of changes within the legal and criminal justice system in the last 3-4 decades. History remembers, for example, the Kent State and Chicago Democratic Convention riots in 1968, and since then, a number of criminologists and political scientists have been asked about the use of force, rights-based policing, community involvement, and crime prevention (Russell 2005). The Red Cross and Amnesty International, for instance, have endorsed a rights-based policing model. This idea tempers all police activity with the basic tenet of human rights and rights under the Constitution. Central to this argument is the nature of the relationship between the community and the Criminal Justice System. Local law enforcement bond with community members to implement the day-to-day needs of that community. The idea centers around a basic philosophical tenet: use less force, communicate more, pay attention to human rights, and work to dialog and prevent, not to punish and incarcerate (Williamson 2008).

A paradox has always exists between the issue of civil liberties and national security. Democracy creates civil liberties that allow the freedom of association, expression, as well as movement, but there are some people use such liberal democracy to plan and execute violence, to destabilize State structures. It illustrates the delicate balance existing between reducing civil liberties to enhance security in a state. States have detained suspects for years and have also conducted extensive privacy incursions as strategies to combat terror, however it risks violation of civil liberties. This essay discusses the extent to which a state should be allowed to restrict civil liberties for the enhancement of national security and not abandon democratic values. It looks at aspects of the legal response to terrorism in the United States after the 9/11 attack.

“Things will never be the same.” (Miller, Stone & Mitchell, 2002, p. 3) Law enforcement has undergone dramatic changes as a result of the devastating events in the United States on 11 September 2001 (9/11). This essay will examine how law enforcement, specifically within Australia, has shifted its policies and strategies to fight the post-9/11 terrorist threat. An analysis of police actions towards terrorist related incidents since 9/11, displays how law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their

“local police departments must balance the competing challenges that urban counterterrorism initiatives raise from security, law enforcement, intelligence and civil liberties perspectives” (Silber, 2013, p. 150).