week 3.2 criminal

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 1/23

A

Homeland Security: A New Criminal Justice Mandate Larry K. Gaines

lthough various forms of terrorism have existed for centuries (see Burgess, 2003), it did not become a national priority in the United States until the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade

Center in New York City and the Pentagon in northern Virginia. The attacks resulted in over 3,000 deaths and billions of dollars lost in the American economy. Previously, there had been other terrorist attacks on Americans and American interests, but the magnitude and brazenness of the 9/11 attacks by foreign terrorists shocked the American people. Homeland security and combating terrorism immediately became national priorities.

The attacks had a profound effect on the American populace. For example, in 2007, six years after the attacks, a survey on the fear of crime found that 36% of the population feared being a victim of a terrorist attack (University of Albany, 2007). The only fears that ranked higher in the survey were being a victim of a burglary and auto larceny. Crimes such as being a victim in a homicide and being sexually assaulted ranked lower in the survey, even though there are many more of these crimes reported. Even though the fear of being victimized by a terrorist attack has subsided, its residual effects remain. In 2011, ten years after 9/11, 30% of respondents in the fear of crime survey stated that they were fearful of being a victim of terrorism (University of Albany, 2012). The 9/11 attacks profoundly changed America. The most evident change has been the implementation of homeland security and its accompanying government apparatus.

Many believe that homeland security is exclusively a national imperative; however, it affects federal, state, and local criminal justice agencies. If a terrorist attack or event occurs, it is going to occur in a local community. As Carter (2004) notes, we must think globally, but act locally. When an event occurs, it

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 2/23

involves local and state public safety personnel. They will be the �irst responders. The 9/11 attacks and the recognition that homeland security is a priority have thrust local criminal justice agencies into the mix. They must be prepared to respond and be adept at gathering terrorist-related intelligence to help prevent attacks. Local agencies represent the �irst-line defense and response for any event, whether it is a terrorist attack or a natural disaster.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 3/23

5.1 The Back Story: What Is Homeland Security?

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is the federal department that is primarily responsible for the security of our homeland. As such, the DHS (2010) identi�ied �ive core homeland security mission areas, and these mission areas serve as a template for all agencies involved in homeland security. The �irst is preventing terrorism and enhancing security. There are internal and external terrorist threats to the United States. They are ideological, political, and religiously based. All terrorist threats must be identi�ied and actions taken to ensure that terrorists do not mount an attack on the United States or on American interests overseas. This means that an elaborate security apparatus must be developed and implemented. Second, we must secure and manage our rather porous borders. They must be controlled to ensure that terrorists, and other illegal immigrants, do not enter. Third, we must enforce and administer our immigration laws. The al Qaeda terrorists who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks slipped into the United States, but did so legally. They essentially remained here and were free to travel as a result of lax enforcement of immigration laws. In the past, the United States did a poor job of monitoring those who had visitor, work, or student visas. Our immigration policies and enforcement must be strengthened. Fourth, we must safeguard and secure cyberspace. Today, almost every facet of life involves cyberspace: banking, energy, industry, utilities, transportation, business, and leisure activities. Billions of dollars �low daily through the Internet. The Internet is used to control all sorts of industrial and public utility operations. Disruptions to these processes can have dire economic consequences, and in some cases result in loss of life or injuries to citizens. Finally, we must ensure our resilience to disasters. Whereas the DHS’s �irst core mission is to prevent terrorist attacks, this core mission refers to withstanding an attack and contains two primary dimensions: First, we must have a system where we rapidly and effectively respond to some type of event, which means having �irst responders and others properly trained and equipped; and second, it infers that we must be able to mobilize assets in a timely basis to minimize damage and disruption. We must have comprehensive operational response plans. The DHS elaborated a comprehensive plan for homeland security that maximizes protection and response.

Although the DHS core mission statements are straightforward, their implementation has not been consistent. Bellavita (2008) examined the homeland security literature and found a variety of de�initions. They included seven:

1. Terrorism—the prevention, response, and mitigation of terrorist acts by federal, state, and local governments.

2. All Hazards—prevent attacks, protect against natural and human-made disasters, and respond and recover from such incidents.

3. Terrorism and Catastrophes—efforts by the DHS and other agencies to respond to terrorist and catastrophes that affect security.

4. Jurisdictional Hazards—each political jurisdiction in the United States has homeland security priorities that focus on assets in a particular jurisdiction.

5. Meta Hazards—efforts to deal with threats to the American way of life, including global warming, shortages of water, shortages of petroleum, and so on.

6. National Security—efforts to protect the homeland, population, and critical infrastructure.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 4/23

7. Security Uber Alles—justi�ication by government of�icials to curtail American civil liberties with an emphasis on processes rather than outcomes.

The literature on homeland security shows substantial variation in its role, and to some extent, its ultimate implementation. The literature focuses on terrorism, disasters, and other catastrophes; global problems, such as energy; and changes in procedural law. These de�initions demonstrate that homeland security has become rather expansive with bureaucrats sometimes socially constructing it to meet the needs of the bureaucracy and political ideology.

Government actions and policies should be based on some theoretical perspective. For example, Tibbetts (2012) de�ined theory “as a set of concepts linked together by a series of statements to explain why an event or phenomenon occurs” (p. 2). Curran and Renzetti (1994) de�ine a theory as “a set of interconnected statements or propositions that explain how two or more events or factors are related to one another” (p. 2). In essence, theory focuses on an event or activity and attempts to identify the underlying causal factors. It guides responses.

Using Bellavita’s de�initions, homeland security is not grounded in theory. It essentially is reactive with government developing policies that target all possible alternatives or conditions, ranging from terrorist attacks to disasters or catastrophes. This is a shotgun approach where all strategies and tactics are implemented without regard to strategic importance, economy, or effectiveness. Moreover, this approach is opportunistic because all programs are implemented regardless of their utility or where they �it into a matrix of strategies. Implementation is based on available funding, which historically has been plentiful, resulting in duplication of target area and ineffectiveness.

Although homeland security is not grounded in theory as it is currently implemented, there is a potential for theory to guide its advancement. Threats are not equally distributed across the United States. First, terrorists are more likely to attack cities like New York City, Washington, DC, or Los Angeles as compared to cities, such as Wichita, Akron, or Birmingham. Second, some targets are more attractive to terrorists, and some targets are more amenable to certain types of attacks as compared to others. A hierarchy of targets can be estimated. Third, since the greatest terrorist threat to America today comes from Middle- Eastern communities, these terrorists need a signi�icant Muslim community to blend into and remain inconspicuous. This identi�ies areas with a higher probability of attack or areas from which some terrorist attacks may emanate. Fourth, we can limit the size of the target population by examining terrorist attacks in the United States and other countries to identify the types of targets that terrorists attack and their modus operandi. There certainly are other factors which help limit targets for terrorists, but the point is, we can begin to develop probability tables that theoretically rank potential targets. Although still broad in terms of potential targets, this process can help to better focus homeland security efforts and contribute to a theoretical foundation for such efforts.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 5/23

5.2 The Current State of Homeland Security

The USA PATRIOT Act

The USA PATRIOT Act was passed in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. It was designed to strengthen America’s ability to combat terrorism and other threats like transnational organized crime. The Act was fairly comprehensive addressing a number of areas, and as such, it amended a number of other federal statutes, ranging from the Bank Holding Act of 1956, to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Its comprehensiveness provided law enforcement and homeland security of�icers expanded authority to investigate and intervene in potential terrorist plots.

Some of the key provisions of the Act included providing agents with more latitude in collecting intelligence. A critical part of the intelligence collection provisions was the extension of surveillance to U.S. citizens with the procurement of a Federal Intelligence Surveillance court order. The Act also provided new powers to control money laundering. This provision was aimed at reducing terrorists’ access to funds. The Act also provided funding and enhanced border security by increasing funding to those agencies responsible for securing our borders (Doyle, 2002). The most controversial of the USA PATRIOT Act’s provisions is the enhanced surveillance of American citizens. Since the Act was signed into law, thousands of surveillance warrants have been issued. Many civil libertarians assert that this surveillance violates American citizens’ right to privacy.

Weapons of Mass Destruction Even though homeland security involves an “all hazards” approach where all sorts of catastrophes and disasters require a DHS response, the primary concern is weapons of mass destruction (WMD). They include biological, chemical, and radiological or nuclear weapons. Biological weapons consist of bacteria, viruses, and biological toxins. Bacteria of most concern include anthrax and the plague. Although bacteria are prevalent on the human body and in the environment, the vast majority do not pose a health risk. Viruses include diseases, such as Ebola, HIV, hepatitis, smallpox, avian in�luenza or H5N1 bird �lu, and SARS. They are the most dangerous since they can pass from one person to another. For example, if smallpox were introduced to a large crowd of people it potentially could spread throughout a large population. Also, scientists report that the H5N1 in�luenza has mutated and can rapidly contaminate humans. Viruses pose a signi�icant health problem, and if used as a weapon of mass destruction, could cause large numbers of deaths and illnesses.

Chemical weapons consist of a number of toxic chemicals that may be released on a large number of people. Various blood agents, choking agents, and nerve agents could be used. The DHS regulates security at high-risk chemical facilities to reduce the possibility that terrorists can obtain the chemicals necessary for a chemical WMD. As an example, the ammonium nitrate security program regulates ammonium nitrate, the chemical used to construct a bomb in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Nonetheless, since some chemical weapons can be easily constructed using a variety of chemicals, the current levels of security are of concern.

Finally, radiological weapons entail the use of nuclear or radiological materials by terrorists. These materials are highly restricted. Most American nuclear facilities have highly enhanced security, but small amounts of nuclear materials at university laboratories and other research facilities do not have this level

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 6/23

of security. Storage facilities with spent nuclear materials also have less stringent security. If terrorists build a nuclear bomb, and attempt to bring the materials into the United States, it would be dif�icult since DHS has nuclear sensors placed at ports of entry and in some cities. For example, the New York Police Department has equipped patrolling of�icers with personal radiological sensors, and the department has purchased a helicopter equipped with radiological sensing devices. Conceivably, terrorists could construct a dirty bomb and use a conventional explosion to spread nuclear materials over a large area, but again, access to the nuclear materials would be dif�icult.

Although weapons of mass destruction present a signi�icant danger, the probability of them being deployed is at a minimum because of the complicated process to develop and deploy these weapons. Gaines and Kappeler (2012) elaborate this intricate process: (a) have or obtain expertise to build a weapon, (b) acquire the materials, (c) develop a logistics and support network, (d) recruit a deployment team, (e) develop the weapon, (f ) develop a delivery system, (g) test weapon for functionality, (h) transport weapon and deployment team to target site, and (i) deploy the weapon. This is a complicated process where mistakes, such as biological or chemical spills, could occur during transportation and prior to deployment. The weapon must be transported over an extended distance, increasing the probability of detection especially considering that American and international intelligence agencies are constantly monitoring for such weapons and dozens of countries have deployed electronic sensors in an attempt to locate these weapons. Given this complicated and dangerous process, it is likely that terrorists will continue to resort to conventional bombs and improvised explosive devices, such as the ones used by alleged Boston Marathon Bombing suspects Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on April 15, 2013.

Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources The most signi�icant homeland security concern on American soil is our critical infrastructure and key assets. The DHS (2006b) in its National Infrastructure Protection Plan issued a plan for protecting our critical infrastructure and key resources (CI/KR). CI/KR consists of infrastructure that is vital to the safety and security of the United States, including assets that are of critical economic interest. The Plan identi�ied three major categories of CI/KR, comprising physical, human, and cyber.

Critical infrastructure assets were de�ined in the U.S.A. PATRIOT Act as, “Systems and assets … so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economy security, national public health and safety, or any combination of those matters” (U.S.A. PATRIOT Act, 2001). The list of these assets is expansive and includes assets such as telecommunications, chemicals, transportation, emergency services, shipping services, agriculture, water, energy, banking, national monuments and icons, and the defense industrial complex. This listing obviously includes thousands of facilities across the country. Priorities for securing facilities are based on the consequences of their destruction. For example, securing a nuclear facility has a much higher priority than for a public water facility in rural America.

Human assets essentially refer to large congregations of people. This includes dense population centers, shopping malls, and other similar venues where large numbers of people congregate, such as special and sporting events. An explosive device, or the introduction of a biological or chemical weapon on a large congregation of people, could result in hundreds, if not thousands, of casualties.

Finally, cyber assets refer to the hardware, software, Internet, and other platforms that facilitate cyber communications. The cyber world today is inseparable from the real world. It goes well beyond talking on cell phones, texting, or sur�ing the Internet; all walks of life are now affected or controlled through cyber assets and include activities such as banking, business, medicine, education, and so on. The destruction or

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 7/23

disabling of these assets can cause millions of dollars in economic losses, and in some cases, deaths and injuries. The problem goes well beyond identity theft or fraud. In 2010, the cyber worm “Stuxnet” was released targeting Iranian computers used in their nuclear development program. The worm eventually affected over 60,000 computers worldwide with more than half of them in Iran (Farwell & Rohozinski, 2011). It effectively set the Iranian nuclear program back several years as it destroyed computers and approximately 1,000 centrifuges. What is interesting about Stuxnet is that it was designed only to attack Iranian computers that were used in its nuclear development program. In 2012, it was made public that President Obama authorized the attack (Sanger, 2012). There have been other instances of cyberwar (see Gaines & Kappeler, 2012), but this was the most signi�icant, and it likely was a prelude to future devastating attacks both by countries and on countries across the globe.

The DHS attempted to compile a database of critical infrastructure assets by querying industries and the states, but it proved to be a daunting experience. The DHS did try to provide guidelines, such as list re�ineries with a capacity of 225,000 barrels of oil per day, commercial centers with the potential loss of $10 billion, or population gatherings of 35,000 or more. These DHS guidelines provided little structure in reality. For example, Indiana had more assets than California, Texas, or New York, which are much larger in terms of infrastructure. North Dakota submitted more banking facilities as compared to New York (Moteff, 2007). Our identi�ication of these critical assets must be re�ined. Strides have been made in airline security and to a much lesser extent, other types of transportation. DHS and the Department of Energy have strict security standards for nuclear facilities, and the DHS has issued guidelines for chemical facilities. Nonetheless, much of America’s infrastructure remains unprotected and without federal security guidelines.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 8/23

5.3 Challenges of Homeland Security: The Homeland Security Apparatuses

There are a number of agencies involved in homeland security. The most prominent agency is the DHS. The DHS was created in the wake of the 9/11 attacks by moving 22 agencies from other federal departments into the DHS. Some of the agencies moved to DHS include the secret service, customs and border protection (CBP), immigration and customs enforcement (ICE), transportation security administration (TSA), federal emergency management (FEMA), and U.S. Coast Guard. After the DHS was created, it became the third largest department in the federal government with 180,000 employees (DHS, 2008a), with a diverse workforce and organizational mission. The 2012 budget for the DHS was $57 billion (DHS, 2012).

Problems in Administering the DHS There is substantial criticism of the initial setup, organization, and operation of the DHS. For example, Shapiro (2007) argues

Policy discussions of homeland security issues are driven not by rigorous analysis but by fear, perceptions of past mistakes, pork-barrel politics, and insistence on an invulnerability that cannot possibly be achieved. It is time for a more analytic, threat-based approach, grounded in concepts of suf�iciency, prioritization, and measured effectiveness.… homeland security should evolve from a set of emergency measures into a permanent �ield of important government policy that, like any other, must justify its allocation of taxpayer funds through solid analysis. (pp. 1–2)

Gaines and Kappeler (2012) point out that many of the agencies within the DHS suffered from mission distortion; speci�ically, referring to the fact that prior to the reorganization, they had a number of responsibilities. When they were moved to the DHS, counterterrorism objectives were added to existing responsibilities. Many of these agencies did not receive additional personnel to perform these new duties, and it was unclear as to which of these tasks should receive the highest priority. For some agencies, this problem still exists today. Some agencies likely focus on their traditional responsibilities and perhaps neglect some of the new ones since of�icers assigned to these agencies seldom encounter anything relating to terrorist activities.

FEMA deserves special consideration here. As Bellavita (2008) noted the response to disasters and catastrophes appears in a number of the operational de�initions for homeland security, and it is one of the core mission areas within the DHS. This largely is due to FEMA being a part of the DHS. FEMA responds to terrorist events, a part of the DHS’s mandate, but it also is the primary federal agency for providing assistance when there is any other type of disaster or catastrophe in the United States. For example, in 2011, FEMA responded to 99 major disaster declarations, 29 emergency declarations, and 114 �ire management assistance declarations (FEMA, 2012). The presence of FEMA in the DHS contributes to additional mission distortion. Some have suggested that FEMA be removed from the DHS, noting that it would clarify both the DHS and FEMA’s mission objectives (Perrow, 2002).

Another problem with the DHS and homeland security in general is that there are approximately 80 different committees and subcommittees in Congress that oversee various aspects of homeland security.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2a… 9/23

The committees have overlapping authority over homeland security, often resulting in the interjection of politics into policy decisions. Frequently, committee chairs are unwilling to defer to the decisions and dictates of other committees, and hearings and decisions are not coordinated. The White House is also involved in formulating policy for the DHS. Again, some initiatives and priorities are driven by politics, which further complicates the homeland security enterprise.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 10/23

5.4 The Current Status of Homeland Security

As noted, the DHS is involved in a number of activities, and in some cases works with agencies outside the department. An overview of these various activities is provided here.

Transportation The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is the agency primarily responsible for safeguarding America’s transportation system. The TSA’s activities are most evident in airports where TSA of�icers screen passengers for weapons and contraband. In terms of airport security, the TSA is also responsible for screening checked luggage and packages that are shipped using commercial aircraft. This mandate generally is accomplished by x-raying luggage and packages. The TSA also attempts to ensure that �lights are secure by providing �light crew members with self-defense training and through the U.S. air marshals’ program where armed air marshals are randomly placed on �lights.

Additionally, the TSA is responsible for rail, pipelines, subway, bus transportation, and highway and trucking security. In other words, as terrorist actions are not limited to airplanes, the TSA is responsible for safeguarding our transportation system beyond air travel. In 2007, terrorists in London detonated a bomb on a bus killing 13 people. The DHS provides grants to bus companies to improve security. The rail and trucking industries carry substantial quantities of hazardous materials. Security and tracking systems are being implemented to enhance the security of these materials. Passengers using some of our subway systems are now subject to searches and screening, and over time, more of these security measures will be implemented. These areas are provided security through partnerships with other law enforcement agencies, and TSA of�icers, in order to ensure security, also provide random inspection of facilities and the people who work or use these transportation facilities.

Border Protection There are two DHS agencies involved in protecting our borders. First, the U.S. Coast Guard is the nation’s primary maritime law enforcement agency. It has a number of responsibilities, including protecting U.S. �ishing interests, drug and other contraband interdiction, and enforcing immigration law at sea. The coast guard’s authority extends to our shores and includes intercostal waterways. The coast guard interdicts contraband and illegal immigrants before they reach our shores, which generally is accomplished by monitoring and inspecting ships and boats in U.S. waters.

The Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) has the responsibility of securing our borders and ports of entry. The agency has of�icers stationed on our northern and southern borders as well as our ports of entry, including international airports and maritime ports of entry. These agents screen people and goods and materials coming into the United States. They ensure that people entering the United States have proper immigration papers and visas, and they inspect goods to collect federal taxes and to interdict drugs and other contraband, such as counterfeit merchandise. On a typical day, the agency processes 932,456 people at entry points, processes 64,483 truck, rail, and sea containers, makes 932 arrests, and seizes 13,717 pounds of drugs (U.S. CBP, 2012). These agents also deploy sensors at ports of entry and border crossings to screen for nuclear materials being smuggled into the United States.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 11/23

During the 1990s, border security tactics were altered. Of�icers were placed as close to the border as possible to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the United States. This change ultimately resulted in fewer apprehensions, which brought swift criticism from conservatives who viewed the reduction in apprehensions as lax border enforcement (Bach, 2005). Politicians evaluated border security by numbers of apprehensions, an inaccurate methodology. This criticism resulted in border patrol agents being stationed further from the border even though prevention as opposed to apprehension was a more effective tactic in reducing the number of illegal immigrants coming to the United States. However, today border security is being pushed back closer to the border in some cases to reduce the number of illegal entries. The recession in the 2010 decade resulted in almost zero net illegal entries, because fewer people attempted to enter the United States unlawfully, and many returned south of the border because of a lack of employment opportunities.

In 2006, the CBP awarded a contract to the Boeing Company to construct the �irst phase of the Secure Border Initiative (SBInet) on the Arizona Mexican border. As planned, the SBInet consisted of an integrated system of radar, sensors, and video to monitor the border for illegal immigrants crossing the border. An electronic barrier was seen as more economical as opposed to human staf�ing in these expansive areas. Although Boeing installed hundreds of miles of fences and numerous vehicle barriers, and after spending over $3.7 billion, the company was not able to integrate the equipment in an effective manner. The program constantly suffered cost overruns and missed deadlines. The project was cancelled in 2011. The failed program demonstrates the dif�iculty in devising effective border security measures. Today, human resources and fencing are the primary immigration security measures being used.

Immigration Enforcement Whereas the coast guard and customs and border agency protect and safeguard the borders, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) is responsible for immigration enforcement in the interior of the United States. These agents apprehend and deport illegal immigrants from the United States. In 2011, ICE removed 180,699 people. Of that total, 77,830 were repeat immigration violators and 18,699 were fugitives (ICE, 2012a). The number of repeat immigration violators indicates that large numbers of illegal immigrants who are removed subsequently return. The numbers also show that ICE is removing a signi�icant number of immigrant criminals. Even though ICE agents removed over 180,000 people in 2011, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates that there are approximately 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States (Bahrampour, 2010).

There is substantial controversy surrounding ICE’s operations. Some parties complain that ICE of�icers apprehend working immigrants with families instead of concentrating on criminal immigrants. In some cases, this criticism intensi�ies when anchor babies (i.e., children born in the United States to immigrant parents) and children are involved; parents are deported, resulting in American citizens having to leave the country or remain in the United States without their parents. In other cases, young children, adolescents, and young adults have been deported who were brought to America by their parents when they were very young and lived here for most of their lives. A second controversy involves state and local law enforcement. Several states passed anti-immigration laws where police of�icers are directed to check the status of persons who appear to be in this country illegally. One result of these laws, affecting primarily Hispanic persons, is racial pro�iling, even though there are large numbers of other ethnic groups in the United States illegally. Another result of these laws is the harassment of many Hispanic citizens by the police.

A growing problem within ICE’s purview is human traf�icking. Human traf�icking is not only an international problem, but it is increasing in the United States. Some recent examples of ICE investigations

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 12/23

include 15 members of a traf�icking organization that were charged with forcing at least 17 young Mexican women into prostitution in New York, and 34 members of a Somali gang were charged with sex traf�icking seven young girls in Minnesota and Tennessee (ICE, 2012b). Raymond and Hughes (2001) estimated that 50,000 women and children are traf�icked in the United States each year. Many of them end up in the sex business as street prostitutes or working at massage parlors, after-hours clubs, and escort services and in immigrant worker camp brothels. It is interesting to note that a study of con�irmed cases found that 83% of the victims in sex traf�icking cases were American citizens (Banks & Kyckelhahn, 2011). This is a growing problem, and it should have a higher priority within ICE and other law enforcement agencies.

Although the federal government provides funding to a variety of entities, including law enforcement and victim advocacy groups to help combat the problem, it appears that the investigation of human traf�icking for sexual purposes has received a low priority. Banks and Kyckelhahn (2011) advise that state and local police agencies are the lead agencies in 92% of human sex traf�icking cases and only seven percent of the cases were opened by federal agents, speci�ically ICE of�icers. Federal agents were more likely to open cases for labor-related human traf�icking. Given that human traf�icking is a growing problem and it falls within the authority of ICE, it is apparent that ICE of�icers should expend more effort to investigate and prosecute these types of cases. Human traf�ickers are dangerous criminals and as such should receive a high priority status within ICE.

Financial and Identi�ication Crime Financial crime and identity theft, although a problem before the 9/11 attacks, became a major home-land security issue because of the possibility of terrorist �inancing though �inancial crimes and the use of identity theft for fraudulent purposes and for illegal entry into the United States. The agency primarily responsible for investigating �inancial fraud is the U.S. Secret Service. Its other primary responsibility is executive protection.

One area of great concern is counterfeiting. The American dollar is the world standard in terms of currency; commodities across the globe are traded in U.S. dollars. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (2004) there is about $667 billion in currency in circulation with 60% of that amount held overseas. The bank estimates that 0.01% or $6.67 billion is counterfeit. Counterfeiting by individuals and organized crime groups is a problem since there are sophisticated photocopier machines that can copy detail and in color. However, this is not the primary problem. For example, in 2004, FBI and Secret Service agents began operations on the east and west coasts of the United States that resulted in the seizure of several million dollars in counterfeit $100 bills. The money was counterfeited by the North Korean government (Mihm, 2006). The United States is not the only country with a counterfeit money problem. Rama Lakshmi (2012) reported that counterfeit money in India increased 400% in one year. The fake money was produced in Pakistan, and the Indian government has accused the Pakistani government with complicity in the problem. Indian of�icials see the counterfeit bills as a terrorist attack and economic sabotage. Sums of counterfeit money have been found in the hands of several terrorist groups in India. It is dif�icult for criminals and organized crime to counterfeit today’s money given the watermarks, composition of the paper, special ink, and other special unique characteristics. However, many nations have the capacity to produce high quality counterfeit bills from other counties, and this is now becoming a form of state-sponsored terrorism.

Identity theft is a major homeland security issue. Terrorists attempt to obtain false identities to avoid travel watch lists, obscure their locations, and gain unauthorized access to other countries. If terrorists can assume new identities, it can lead to catastrophic problems. They can move from one country to another without detection, and thus possibly perpetrate terrorist acts.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 13/23

One way terrorists and criminals gain new identities is through the use of breeder documents. A breeder document is a form of identi�ication used to obtain other forms of identity. The more common breeder documents include social security cards, drivers’ licenses, passports, and birth certi�icates. Once one of these documents is obtained, it can be used to secure other documents with the new identity. Congress passed the Real ID Act that requires drivers’ licenses to contain certain information like photo IDs and requires certain identi�ication documentation prior to issuance, but several states failed to comply because of the costs associated with the new drivers’ licenses. This failure makes it easier for terrorists and criminals to procure false identi�ication.

Identity fraud has become a monumental problem. Identity fraud is where a false identity has been assumed, typically to fraudulently obtain money, access resources, or obtain credit and other bene�its. This crime is now much more prevalent with the increased commerce conducted on the Internet. In 2011, the Consumer Sentinel Network of the Federal Trade Commission (2012) received over seven million complaints for fraud (55%), identity theft (15%), and other types of complaints (30%). The most common form of identity theft was government documents and bene�its fraud. Kane and Wall (2005) examined possible terrorist connections to fraud and found that terrorist groups were using a variety of fraudulent activities to avoid detection or identi�ication and to procure funds. In some cases, they obtained welfare and unemployment bene�its and attempted to procure many other types of government bene�its.

Cybersecurity President Obama noted that “cyber threats is one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation” and “America’s economic prosperity in the 21st century will depend on cybersecurity” (White House, 2009). As discussed above, there are numerous types of threats to our cybersecurity, including cyberwarfare, fraud, identity theft, and malicious hacking. Most problematic are the attacks that can disable our cyber infrastructure or steal critical military or industrial secrets.

The Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative is the policy that provides structure to our cybersecurity. It attempts to merge U.S. government systems into one system with limited and secure access. It also deploys sensors to detect unauthorized intrusions and the deployment of intrusion prevention systems. The Initiative essentially centralizes the federal government’s efforts to secure its cybersystems. As a result of this Initiative, the Einstein program was deployed to monitor the system for intrusions and to disable them when detected. For example, Bullock, Haddow, and Coppola (2013) report that Einstein sensors registered 5.4 million attempted intrusions in 2010. This illustrates the magnitude of the attacks on our government’s cybersystems. Most of these efforts focused on the federal government’s computer systems.

Intrusions into private computer systems, such as industry, banking, public utilities, and so on, were not included in these numbers. All of these systems have not received the needed security attention since intrusions into some of these systems can have catastrophic results. Congress continues to debate mandated legislative computer system security requirements for the private sector. However, such requirements have not been enacted due to resistance from the business community. The private sector remains a prime target for domestic terrorism, and more importantly, these systems often contain critical classi�ied information that should not fall into the hands of terrorists or other governments.

There are a number of federal agencies involved in cybersecurity. First, the DHS, through its National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, monitors cyber operations for malicious intrusions. It is responsible for warnings or alerts about intrusions and coordinating response. The U.S. Cyber Command is under the aegis of the Department of Defense and is responsible for protecting

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 14/23

cyberspace in terms of security and cyberwar. The Cyber Command researches and implements defenses for the Department’s cyber networks. It also works with the DHS and the private sector to support cyber critical infrastructure. Finally, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is responsible for investigating cyberattacks perpetrated against the public. This is accomplished through a two-pronged approach: the Bureau’s Cyber Action Teams travel around the world to respond to cyberattacks, and its Computer Crimes Task Forces are responsible for investigating Internet scams and fraud:

Terrorist Financing and Money Laundering Terrorist �inancing is a critical component in combating terrorist threats. One control approach is to “starve the beast.” Since acts of terrorism consume large amounts of money, and if that money is eliminated or restricted, then it reduces a terrorist groups’ options or ability to conduct terrorist acts. Another approach is to follow the movement of money. In some cases, this is a successful way to identify terrorist groups and plots by tracking the funding. Conspicuously, terrorist money laundering and corruption can undermine the foundation of government in countries. The International Monetary Fund (2012) summarizes the caustic nature of terrorist funds as it applies to countries:

Money laundering and terrorist �inancing activities can undermine the integrity and stability of �inancial institutions and systems, discourage foreign investment, and distort international capital �lows. They may have negative consequences for a country’s �inancial stability and macroeconomic performance, resulting in welfare losses, draining resources from more productive economic activities, and even having destabilizing spillover effects on the economies of other countries. In an increasingly interconnected world, the problems presented by these activities are global, as are the links between �inancial stability and �inancial integrity. (p.1)

The U.S.A. PATRIOT Act amended the Bank Secrecy Act after the 9/11 attacks. Essentially, the PATRIOT Act required �inancial institutions to institute measures that facilitate the prevention, detection, and prosecution of international money laundering and terrorist �inancing. Some of the provisions required the reporting of suspicious activities, the reporting of all transactions in excess of $10,000 in currency, verifying the identity of customers, and the gathering of information on international transactions. These provisions facilitated the gathering of information about terrorist �inancing, and they helped to thwart the �low of monies to terrorist groups.

It is important to control the �low of funds to terrorist organizations. If a terrorist group does not have the �inancing, it cannot conduct a terrorist attack, or at the least must scale back the magnitude and number of attacks. Terrorist attacks, by themselves, are fairly inexpensive. For example, it is estimated that the 9/11 attacks cost between $400,000 and $500,000 (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, 2004). Other attacks were conducted without great expense (e.g., London transportation system attacks, GBP £8,000, Madrid train bombings, $10,000, USS Cole attack, $10,000, and the East Africa embassy bombings, $50,000; Financial Action Task Force, 2008).

Even though these attacks were conducted without substantial costs; the costs behind any terrorist attack are signi�icant. In other words, an enormous amount of capital is required to maintain terrorist organizations that perpetrate attacks. Terrorists have to pay their leaders and �ighters’ salaries, including when they are inactive; terrorists and their families must have shelter and food. The logistics of maintaining and operating multiple training camps are momentous and expensive, not to mention the travel costs as well as the costs to purchase false documentation to ensure safety and unobtrusiveness. Additionally, there are the expenses required to purchase weapons, ammunition, and explosives. In some

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 15/23

cases, bribes to government of�icials to allow them to operate unfettered must be included. Irrefutably, to some extent terrorist organizations are bureaucratic with substantial expenses beyond the expenses associated with conducting terrorist attacks.

Terrorists use a variety of methods to raise funds. A number of terrorists resort to common criminality to raise funds for their terrorist cell. These crimes include robbery, burglary, extortion, and kidnapping. For example, in 1996, a number of Saudis met in Paris to conspire to bribe al Qaeda, and Osama bin Laden by paying them to not mount attacks in Saudi Arabia (Lee, 2002). Drug traf�icking is considered to be the most lucrative source of money for some terrorist groups. Many speculate that al Qaeda and the Taliban, as well as other terrorist groups, raise funds through drug traf�icking. The FBI (2002) maintained that al Qaeda raised millions of dollars smuggling heroin through central Asian countries to countries in East Africa. In 2007, the DEA arrested Mohammad Essa for conspiring to import $25 million worth of heroin to the United States from Afghanistan and Pakistan. His traf�icking organization was loosely af�iliated with the Taliban (MacKinzie-Mulvey, 2007). In another report, Hutchinson (2001) states that 70% of the world’s heroin now comes from Afghanistan, with much of it under the control of the Taliban and other terrorist groups.

Some of the crimes committed by terrorists to raise money are fairly mundane. Horwitz (2004) reported that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives had 300 open cases involving cigarette smuggling with many cases associated with Hezbollah and al Qaeda. The smugglers bought cigarettes in states like North Carolina and Virginia where the taxes are low, and then smuggled them into states like Michigan, Maryland, New York, and New Jersey and sold them without paying the higher tax. The smuggling operations reaped millions of dollars for terrorist organizations.

A principle method used by terrorist groups to receive funding is through donations to charities. One of the �ive pillars of Islam is almsgiving or zakat, and as such, all Muslims are obligated to donate. Although a substantial amount of charitable giving goes to the needy, some of this money is siphoned off to terrorist groups. When the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Treasury agents were investigating the Dallas- based Holy Land Foundation, they found that it funneled money to the terrorist group Hamas. It was estimated that in the year 2000 alone, the organization raised $13 million in the United States for Palestinian relief (Looney, 2006). Many charities in the Middle East and throughout the world raise millions of dollars each year in support of terrorist groups.

In some cases, terrorist groups are involved in legitimate businesses. Miller and Gerth (2001) found that al Qaeda had been involved in mining, diamonds, trading �irms, construction companies, agriculture, and honey exports. Such businesses not only make money for the terrorists, but they also provide fronts for them to move money from one location to another. It is important for terrorist groups to move money to their terrorist training camps, fund operational cells, and fund ongoing terrorist conspiracies. They also use diamonds, gold, and works of art as a way to transmit and launder money.

Terrorist �inancing is a complicated, multipronged process making it dif�icult for authorities to inter-cede. Nonetheless, it is important to stem the �low of money to terrorist groups, since intervention weakens these groups and ultimately reduces the number and magnitude of terrorist attacks. Whereas this section examined some of the primary responsibilities under the homeland security umbrella, the following section details the response to terrorist attacks and other critical incidents.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 16/23

5.5 Responding to Terrorist Attacks and Other Critical Events

One of the core missions for homeland security is to ensure our resilience to disasters; whether from terrorist attacks, or natural or man-made disasters, such as hurricanes or explosions at chemical plants or oil re�ineries (DHS, 2010). Resilience infers two critical activities, prevention and mitigation. In terms of prevention, we must develop systems that prevent attacks on our critical infrastructure, and we must also deploy systems that enable them to better withstand any kind of attack or disaster. When there is some sort of an event, mitigation is enhanced when there is a rapid and effective response. In order to increase the likelihood of an effective response, the DHS developed the National Response Framework (Department of Homeland Security, 2008b) and the National Incident Management System (Department of Homeland Security, 2008c).

National Response Framework The National Response Framework represents a layered response to critical incidents. All incidents, whether they are a terrorist attack or a natural disaster, occur in a local jurisdiction. This means that local �irst responders initially attend to the situation. When local communities cannot handle the situation, state resources are called, and if the state and local resources are unable to mitigate the incident, federal resources are summoned to the scene. Local resources include law enforcement, public health, medical facilities and personnel, �ire, local disaster relief, waste management, and so on.

Federal assistance to an incident is dictated by the Stafford Act. The Stafford Act essentially directs that federal assistance can come only after presidential approval. The governor in the affected state requests assistance from the state’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) who advises FEMA’s administrator, who noti�ies the president of the incident. If the incident and the resulting damage are signi�icant, the president issues a declaration of emergency and federal resources are mobilized. The primary federal disaster response agency is FEMA, but other federal agencies may also be placed in service, depending on the nature of the emergency. For example, in 2005, when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, President George W. Bush dispatched 20,000 active military personnel to assist local authorities.

The National Response Framework establishes that agencies must prepare for disasters. This includes comprehensive planning across all agencies involved in a response. Their roles and responsibilities must be identi�ied. Second, personnel must be organized, trained, and equipped. The DHS makes a number of grants available to the states for equipment and training. Third, they must exercise and practice their response plans. They must use mock drills to test all agency responses in order to ful�ill planned expectations. Finally, the drills must be evaluated and, where applicable, responses must be improved. These preparations are intended as a continuous process.

Once an incident occurs, there are a number of immediate actions that must be taken to enhance safety and mitigate the situation. The Framework identi�ies them as

Those injured must be evacuated.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 17/23

People in convalescent homes and hospitals must also be evacuated.

Safe shelters for victims and those who are evacuated from the affected area must be identi�ied and made ready.

Arrangements for food and water must be made.

Search and rescue operations must commence immediately to reduce the incidence of injuries and fatalities.

Treatment facilities for the injured must be established.

Hazards, such as �ires or contamination, must be contained.

In some cases, quarantines must be established and maintained.

Arrangements must be made to ensure the safety and health of the �irst responders.

Information must be provided to the public.

In terms of recovery after a situation, both short-term goals as well as long-term goals must be identi�ied. Immediate needs include the restoration of transportation, food and water, shelter, and government programs. Long-term goals refer to the complete restoration of social functioning of the affected community. Agencies at all levels must be prepared to take action to mitigate the problem.

National Incident Management System Whereas the National Response Framework provided guidelines for preparing to respond to an incident, the National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides information on the structure of the response. Essentially, the NIMS standardizes responses so when an agency becomes involved, its personnel follow this standard routine. The NIMS ensures that everyone knows their responsibilities and roles.

The �irst step is to administer communications and management. This is usually accomplished by establishing a command center or emergency operations center where the commanders of all the agencies involved in the response coordinate the agencies’ activities. Once established, all activities emanate from the center. This is to ensure that all activities and personnel are coordinated. The command center warrants that all actions as identi�ied in the National Response Framework are addressed. Responses are less chaotic when the command center is used.

Once an incident occurs, responders must acquire equipment and materials used in the recovery, resource management. The �low of activities for resource management is (a) identify requirements, (b) order and acquire equipment and materials, (c) mobilize resources, (d) track and report activities and expenditures, (e) recover and demobilize, (f ) reimburse for expenditures, and (g) inventory remaining materials. All sorts of materials must be acquired, e.g., heavy equipment like bulldozers, food and water, construction materials, temporary shelter for displaced victims as well as those working the disaster site, electrical generators, and so on. The required materials are based on the nature and scope of the disaster, and they must be purchased and there must be an accounting of the costs.

If the incident is signi�icant in size, the command center has several functional supervisors. The incident commander makes all decisions relative to the response, takes command of all resources, and coordinates the activities of all the agencies involved in the recovery. This involves working with the agency commanders. A public information of�icer is responsible for providing information to the public. This not only includes the news media, but this of�icial is responsible for providing information and guidance to

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 18/23

victims. During Hurricane Katrina, if people had been provided with information about when and where to evacuate, there would have been fewer deaths. Providing information to citizens about what they should do is critical. The command center has a safety of�icer who is responsible for ensuring that responders use safe work habits to reduce injuries to victims and responders. A liaison of�icer maintains communications among the commanders and supervisors of the agencies involved in the response. This of�icer attempts to ensure there is maximum cooperation and coordination among the agencies. Often, there are also operations section chiefs. If an incident is substantial in size, it may be divided into parts or geographical areas, with teams responsible for each part or section. The section chiefs supervise the activities in these parts or sections. A planning section chief plans the response or provides a roadmap for each of the operations section’s activities. A logistics section chief ensures that victims and responders have the equipment and materials needed for an effective response. Finally, a �inance/administration section chief provides an accounting of the materials and costs of the recovery efforts; at some point, the bills must be paid requiring an accurate accounting.

This discussion centers on FEMA and other emergency responders. However, there are specialized disaster response units that are also important. First, the National Disaster Medical System is designed to have outside medical personnel at a scene within 12 to 24 hours (Knouss, 2001). Disasters, especially those involving weapons of mass destruction, can quickly outstrip the capacity of local medical facilities. The National Disaster Medical System can mobilize disaster medical assistance teams, national medical response teams, burn teams, pediatric teams, crush medicine teams, international medical-surgical teams, mental health teams, veterinary medical assistance teams, and disaster mortuary teams. Additionally, the military and other federal agencies provide teams available to respond to radiological, biological, or chemical incidents. These teams monitor the magnitude of the affected area, assist with evaluation, help treat victims, and assist in mitigating the problem.

The National Response Framework and the National Incident Management System are key tools in responding to threats of homeland security. These two of�icial documents provide primary guidance when there is a signi�icant incident by establishing procedures for ensuring that a response is rapid and effective.

The Police and Homeland Security The police play a vital role in homeland security. Generally, they are the �irst to arrive at the scene of an incident, and as �irst responders, police of�icers coordinate initial actions to mitigate problems associated with the incident. As such, police of�icers must be properly equipped and trained to respond to a variety of disasters whether they are terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or man-made disasters. Unfortunately, most police of�icers are often not prepared to respond to these types of disasters. The problem lies in the nature of police work. Police of�icers have a multitude of tasks and responsibilities that inherently require an immediate response; consequently, preparing for incidents or disasters often becomes neglected as a result of resource and time constraints.

A second issue is that even though numerous departments provide of�icers with emergency response training, the acquired skills become stale over time, and a measure of effectiveness is inevitably lost. This can be partially overcome through exercising or mock disaster drills, but large scale exercises are expensive, and few departments have the resources to conduct them with any frequency. This remains a problem without a workable solution. Perhaps the best solution is to ensure that federal and state disaster relief personnel arrive as quickly as possible.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 19/23

Identifying essential key infrastructures remains a critical homeland security task for local police departments. They must survey their jurisdictions and identify potential terrorist targets. Once potential targets have been identi�ied, of�icials must develop emergency response plans for each potential target. If one of the targets is attacked, or a critical incident occurs at a site, departments require a response plan ready to implement. These plans should include all agencies with expected involvement in a �irst response. This reduces confusion and increases response effectiveness.

One way to better secure critical infrastructure is to develop partnerships with local private security �irms. Many critical infrastructures employ private security to safeguard assets. Because these �irms generally concentrate on access control, their security personnel can observe activities in and around the facilities. A working relationship can result in police noti�ication when there are any incidents of suspicious persons or activities. This is important since much of this infrastructure is viewed as prime targets for terrorists. As an example, the Las Vegas Police Department has monthly meetings with security personnel to discuss problems or unusual activities (Morabito & Greenberg, 2005). These partnerships increase the police presence. Responding to incidents is not the only role played by law enforcement in homeland security. Police of�icers are also an important source of intelligence. Police of�icers patrol, investigate crimes, and work with citizens throughout a jurisdiction to solve problems and to respond to crimes and disorder. Consequently, they are in a position to gather information about suspicious activities and persons. Since terrorists attempt to blend into a community, positive working relationships with the public increase the probability that of�icers discover suspicious persons and activities or plots. For example, the New York City Police Department sponsored a cricket league to develop better relations with some Middle Eastern groups. A number of police departments now have programs designed to foster better relations with Arab communities (see Lyon, 2002). Moreover, some signi�icant terrorist cases have been solved by citizens providing information to the police. Some examples of cases solved with the public’s assistance include: the John Allen Muhammad and John Lee Malvo random shooting spree in the Washington, DC, area was solved by information provided by citizens (Brown, 2007); the Times Square bomber was captured as a result of citizen information (Newman & Moynihan, 2010); and a conspiracy by Muslims to attack soldiers at Fort Dix was cleared through citizen information (Russakoff & Eggen, 2007). After the 9/11 attacks, there was some discussion in the policing arena that of�icers should abandon community policing and move back to more of a law enforcement orientation in order to ferret out terrorists. However, working relationships with the community often result in the police gaining more intelligence information that can assist in a terrorist investigation.

When police of�icers collect intelligence about possible terrorist activities, it is of little value if it is not used. To ensure that intelligence is used and shared with all the concerned agencies, a number of police departments now are involved in fusion centers. Fusion centers serve as focal points within the state and local environment for the receipt, analysis, gathering, and sharing of threat-related information between the federal government and state, local, tribal, territorial, and private sector partners. They centers normally are headed by FBI agents with local, state, and other federal law enforcement of�icials participating. In addition to law enforcement, other partners include public health, hospital personnel, security and others representing critical infrastructure, �ire services, and homeland security. The fusion center acquires information from all of these entities in an effort to determine if terrorist activities are occurring in the community. For example, public health of�icials are included since they may see an increase in diseases possibly caused by a biological weapon. Fire of�icials are included since they may encounter suspicious �ires or chemicals in the community. The fusion centers attempt to collect all sorts of information, collate it, and determine if terrorist activities are occurring.

The fusion centers in turn coordinate with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF). The JTTFs are organized regionally across the country. They are composed of representatives from federal law

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 20/23

enforcement and intelligence agencies as well as local law enforcement. Their purpose is to coordinate intelligence among the various agencies. They receive intelligence from all agencies, including the fusion centers. In turn, when a JTTF receives information about a threat in a local community, the fusion center or local law enforcement is noti�ied. The matrix of JTTFs and fusion centers represents a network where intelligence is shared with all agencies potentially involved in investigating or responding to a terrorist attack.

The fusion centers are not without criticism; Monahan and Palmer (2009) identi�ied a number of problems associated with them. First, they are ineffective considering the costs and improbability of a terrorist attack. Moreover, they consume substantial local resources as local personnel are necessarily included. Second, there is the potential for mission creep. Since terrorist attacks and encounters with possible terrorists is a very low probability, fusion centers may expand their purview into other areas, and in the process neglect homeland security and terrorism. Finally, they note that some activities performed by fusion centers may violate civil liberties, and fusion center personnel may spy on ordinary Americans who are not deemed a security threat.

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 21/23

Conclusion

This chapter provides an overview of homeland security. It identi�ies the principle players or agencies, their primary responsibilities, and some of the problems associated with homeland security today. As noted, there is some confusion about the DHS’s mission since FEMA, one of DHS’s primary agencies, is involved in responding to natural and manmade disasters as well as responding to terrorist attacks. The merging of a number of agencies from different federal departments into the DHS initially caused mission distortion. These agencies retained a number of nonhomeland security responsibilities, and there were growing pains as these agencies assimilated their new homeland security responsibilities. Today, the DHS is the third largest department in the federal government.

The DHS has a number of primary responsibilities directly pertaining to homeland security. First, the DHS is responsible for security of the nation’s critical infrastructure. The most obvious evidence of this responsibility is the TSA, which is charged with safeguarding air travel. This agency is also responsible for other travel-related infrastructure, such as buses, subways, trains, and energy pipelines. In many cases, policies are promulgated requiring security measures. The DHS has three primary agencies involved in border security. They include CBP, U.S. Coast Guard, and ICE. These agencies attempt to secure our borders keeping illegal immigrants and terrorists from entering the United States. ICE is also responsible for deporting illegal immigrants. Another responsibility of the DHS is the investigation of �inancial crimes and identity theft. These are important areas for homeland security since �inancial crimes and identity theft are used by terrorists: the former to fund their activities, and the latter to remain undiscovered when attempting to carry out a terrorist act. Cybersecurity is an important DHS objective as intrusions into our cyber networks can result in catastrophic problems within the economy and cause serious physical damage to our critical infrastructure. Along with a number of other federal agencies, the DHS is responsible for combating terrorist money laundering. We can adversely affect terrorist organizations if we can limit their access to resources.

The DHS developed two major protocols for responding to terrorist attacks and other disasters. The �irst is the National Response Framework. The Framework establishes protocols for responding to events. The second is the National Incident Management System. These two planning documents outline how agencies at all levels are to cooperate and respond to a disaster. By providing a measure of uniformity, these documents help ensure that responses are timely, organized, and effective.

Finally, the police play a key role in homeland security. Since they operate in most jurisdictions on a 24- hour basis, come into contact with large numbers of people, and are �irst responders when an event occurs, they are in position to gather information about terrorists and suspicious activities in a community. Moreover, by engaging in community policing and developing good relations with citizens, police of�icers are in a better position to receive intelligence information about suspicious persons or activities. In this sense, the police play a key role in intelligence. Many departments participate in fusion centers, which in turn work with joint terrorism task forces to ensure that information is shared across agencies.

Finally, as mentioned above, there is a need for theory development in the homeland security arena. Theory would not only result in more measured decision making, but it also would result in cost reductions as resources are expended for programming that provides more utility and makes us safer. We currently spend an astronomical amount on homeland security. Mueller and Stewart (2011) point out that

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 22/23

the federal budget for homeland security has increased by $360 billion since the 9/11 attacks; state and local governments and the private sector have increased their homeland security budgets by $100 billion; and we are spending $110 billion more in intelligence to combat terrorism. Spending more money on home-land security does not necessarily make America safer. We must identify those programs that ful�ill home-land security needs and requirements. This means that expenditures must be grounded in theory and we must begin to prioritize needs and implement programs that effectively satisfy those identi�ied needs. This means developing theories that explain how the homeland is best protected.

KEY TERMS

All hazards (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key01)

Biological weapons (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key02)

Chemical weapons (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key03)

Critical infrastructure (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key04)

Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/30#key05)

Cyber assets (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key07)

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/31#key08)

Fusion Centers (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/31#key10)

Human assets (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key11)

Identity fraud (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/30#key12)

Identity theft (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/30#key13)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/30#key14)

Jurisdictional hazards (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key16)

Meta hazards (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key17)

National Incident Management System (NIMS) (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/31#key18)

National security (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key20)

Radiological weapons (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key21)

Security uber alles (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key22)

Terrorism (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key23)

1/28/2019 Print

https://content.ashford.edu/print/Mallicoat.2240.17.1?sections=26,27,28,29,30,31,32&content=all&clientToken=08a7ed4a-3342-1575-40e8-61a63a2… 23/23

Threats (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/27#key24)

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/30#key25)

U.S.A. PATRIOT Act (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key27)

Weapons of mass destruction (http://content.thuzelearning.com/books/Mallicoat.2240.17.1/sections/28#key28)

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What is homeland security? Do you think the Department of Homeland Security effectively addresses the many threats to homeland security?

2. There are various categories of critical infrastructure. Which types of infrastructure should receive the most attention as we attempt to prevent terrorist attacks?

3. Border security is a critical part of homeland security. How should border security affect immigration policies?

4. What is the relationship between drug traf�icking and terrorism?

WEBSITES FOR ADDITIONAL RESEARCH

Department of Homeland Security: http://www.dhs.gov/ (http://www.dhs.gov/)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement: http://www.ice.gov/ (http://www.ice.gov/)

Text of the Homeland Security Act of 2002: http://www.house.gov/legcoun/Comps/HSA02.PDF (http://www.house.gov/legcoun/Comps/HSA02.PDF)

PBS: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/terrorism/homeland/securityact.html (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/terrorism/homeland/securityact.html)

Text of the U.S. PATRIOT Act of 2001: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107pub156/pdf/PLAW- 107pub156.pdf (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107pub156/pdf/PLAW-107pub156.pdf)

National Public Radio (NPR): http://www.npr.org/news/specials/patriotact/patriotactprovisions.html (http://www.npr.org/news/specials/patriotact/patriotactprovisions.html)

American Civil Liberties Union: http://www.aclu.org/ (http://www.aclu.org/)