250 word discussion response patrick 1

Instructions: Fully utilize the materials that have been provided to you in order to support your response. Responses should be a minimum of 250 words and include direct questions. You may challenge, support or supplement another student’s answer using the terms, concepts and theories from the required readings. Also, do not be afraid to respectfully disagree where you feel appropriate; as this should be part of your analysis process at this academic level.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
250 word discussion response patrick 1
Just from $13/Page
Order Now

Forum posts are graded on timeliness, relevance, knowledge of the weekly readings, and the quality of original ideas. Sources utilized to support answers are to be cited in accordance with the APA writing style by providing a general parenthetical citation (reference the author, year and page number) within your post, as well as an adjoining reference list. Refer to grading rubric for additional details concerning grading criteria.

Respond to Patrick:

Intelligence-led Policing

Intelligence-led policing (ILP) is the concept of collecting information and analyzing the information to identify threats (Carter & Carter, 2009). Once the threats are identified, law enforcement can develop preparedness or response plans to mitigate or prevent the threat from occurring (Carter & Carter, 2009). ILP emerged from the new era of homeland security that came in the aftermath of 9/11. In the 2002 meeting of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, they recommended all levels of law enforcement adopt/develop an intelligence capacity (Carter & Carter, 2009). Intelligence has become the center of homeland security that influences the development of security/counterterrorism policies and military/ law enforcement operations both domestically and internationally.

Pros to ILP

Similarly to our discussion last week on community-led policing, local police officers are the ones out every day in the community and responding to various crimes and providing public safety. Police officers can provide first-hand information that they have witnessed and information provided to them by the community. Their involvement in the intelligence collection process is vital in preventing future acts of terrorism. The information they provide may appear mundane or irrelevant but analysis can potentially connect the dots. The intelligence analysis, “provides the decision-maker with a timely and accurate understanding of criminal threats and the components of the operational environment” (Alach, 2011, p.77). Advocates of ILP argue that the collected information can better identify threats which can influence policy decisions and allocation of resources (Alach, 2011). ILP also encourages the sharing of information which is a problem that has plagued law enforcement and intelligence agencies since inception (Carter & Carter, 2009).

Cons to ILP

ILP does not have a universally accepted definition across U.S. law enforcement agencies which effects how it is being implemented (Carter & Carter, 2009). Policing intelligence lacks a framework in which it can be defined and generally understood (Alach, 2011). The impact of 9/11 revitalized this practice across local police forces without knowing how effective it is and evidence to support its success (Alach, 2011). The concept is not new to police as they take action based upon available information everyday but the formal analysis process is not something they regularly utilize (Alach, 2011). Without a conceptual framework, police units would have to develop their own ILP standard operating procedures. Local police are tasked with responding to events happening in real time 24/7 and cannot be expected to analyze small pieces of information. This concept becomes more complex when made specific for terrorism and how law enforcement is to carry out their additional counterterrorism responsibilities.

Despite the misunderstanding of ILP, state and local law enforcement should develop a program that mirrors the intentions of ILP. Law enforcement naturally collects information in their daily duties and ILP frameworks look for a way to gather and analyze that information into intelligence reports. Analyzing information/intelligence reports for patterns and relevant information would require specific training and additional personnel. I don’t believe community police officers have the time to dedicate to intelligence analysis.

References

Alach, Z. (2011). The Emperor is Still Naked: How Intelligence-Led Policing has Repackaged Common Sense as Transcendental Truth. Police Journal, 84(1), 75–97. doi:10.1350/pojo.2011.84.1.523

Carter, D. & Carter, J. (2009, September). Intelligence-led policing: Conceptual and functional considerations for public policy. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20(3), 310-325. doi: 10.1177/0887403408327381