Leadership and Management of a Security and Law Enforcement - Essay Example

U.S SECURITY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT By Presented to The United States has a high level of security agencies that collaborate with the private agencies in maintaining law and order within the states. There are distinct policies that are drawn on how to handle the duties in various areas, in the country, in order to have smooth working sequences. Security and Law Enforcement Office has the mandate of developing procedures, standards and policies that govern personal security, infrastructure protection and law enforcement programs. (Jim, 2009) These programs are created precisely to protect veterans, visitors, grounds and staff on facilities of the department. The department’s primary goal is to deliver professional services of high quality in law enforcement, ensuring the maintenance of law and order. It oversees protecting the persons and property on campuses and making safe buildings under the jurisdiction of the department. (Congress, 2004) The police service is composed of four divisions. The law enforcement oversight and criminal investigation department handles the day to day security details in the country ensuring everybody is secure in doing his business. It also investigates for any preempt security details and inform the responsible department to take action in ensuring security. (Ronczkowski, 2012) Executive protection division is mandated for high level of security planning, coordination and management to clients who require personal protection, which does not, impede on the clients lifestyle. The other divisions are infrastructure protection and criminal predictive analysis. Currently, many crimes in the U.S are associated with computer crimes because they are assisted by computer technology. This crime affects all the components of law enforcement organizations. It affects the organizations dealing with child exploitation, street gang, theft identity, laptop theft, terrorist organizations, and cyber-attacks on corporate or government networks. (Leipnik & Albert, 2003) The joint dependence of law enforcement and private security organizations is apparent at the national, international and local categories. Therefore, the matter is not lacking enough personnel with skills of addressing high-tech crimes but it is the technicality in keeping up with the cyber attackers. This becomes technical and difficult because the cyber attackers develop traditional software methods and business practices that are hard to crack. A number of the criminals do not just stage computer attacks but sell attack kits and phishing kits over the internet. The kits can be used by the users thereby facilitating the crime for them. The action to facilitate the crime is taken by the client without his or her realization. (Larence, 2009) The action makes it more complicated for the law enforcement parties. They need private security resources to combat high-tech crimes, and private security. They also need legal authority in law enforcement and investigative skills to counter criminals whose threaten networks security through their attacks. Hence undermine public confidence in companies. The involvement of private security helps in resolving unknown numbers of cases without the involvement of law enforcement. The possibility is not through financial losses that are not below a certain threshold and the business, nor do the public not expect remedies from criminal justice system. In this scenario the petty thief or embezzler is fired. In some instances the victim of credit card theft, for example, is reimbursed and a new card issued to him. (Lewis, et al., 1997) At some point, there is no persecution for the criminals, but joy to the victims through immediate solution; therefore, the law enforcement does not have to spend resources. However, this practice does not apply to complex financial crimes that have more obvious impact on the public. Financial crimes that support criminal organizations and terrorist networks are handled by destroying the entire system. The nation’s fastest growing financial crime known as Identity theft can be meth-addicted dumpster diver or cyber-attack mastermind. This crime can be done individually or as a corporate. The collaboration of law enforcement with private security on financial crime investigates this crime ranging from stolen laptop recovery to prosecution of egregious cases at the federal and investigation levels. Moreover, the law now requires the law enforcement agencies to take identity of the theft reports. (White, 2014) The individual victims can access the most of financial remedies to which they are legally entitled to through the theft reports. In the United State, intellectual property crime security is upheld strongly. This crime involves counterfeiting of goods for sale without the consent of the rightful owner. These products of human creativity are protected by four distinctive areas of the federal law: trademarks, patents, trade secrets and copyrights. The individuals or groups that violate these laws inflict harm to businessmen, artist, scientists and investors. This crime results to sickening of people and death as a result of ingested low quality products into the market. The product may look like the original product, but they may be contaminated with toxins and have no active ingredients in reality. (Taylor, et al., 1998) The security agencies help in seizing the illicit products. Lack of investigative resources and the complexities in tracing the money flow in these fields derails the works of private industries and law enforcement. It is essential to have extensive LE-PS collaborations to help in prosecuting the most egregious offenders in the future. The increased use of proven private security technology is proving to be beneficial for the law enforcement parties. For instance, the installation of new CCTV products and systems in the downtown business improvement districts, in distinctive event venues, shopping malls and other strategic sites have resulted to efficient security and law maintenance. It is necessary for both private security and law enforcement to keep abreast of any array of technologies for preventing and solving crimes. The essence of collaboration with LE-PS is to provide a means of sharing information about technologies such as object and behavior recognition software; interactive audio surveillance; radio frequency identification tagging and gunshot recognition technology among many others. (Seigel, 2009) In the current state, the nation is vulnerable to faces of disasters like tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, bridge collapse and many others other than terrorism. These events results to multiple casualties. These hands-on-desk situations require the response of both private security and surviving citizens. This should be followed immediately by the police and emergency medical services personnel. Therefore, it is essential for the law enforcement to empower private and public sectors through education on how they should respond and communicate. This helps in disseminating information from the scene. All-hazards planning approach has to be developed for critical incident protocol initiatives similar to those that are getting technical support from University of Michigan State. (Shelly, et al., 2008) The law facilitation of private security’s access to public health, fire protection, public works and other government and non -profit partners to improve exercise coordination was through law enforcement. There is need for consideration for partnership in core components of community policing. The private securities are an indispensable partner for law enforcement together with the private sectors. The vital in problem solving guides for addressing certain crimes in business. It assists in examining the link among community policing, accident planning and response and homeland security critically and create changes where necessary by the policy makers. The partnership should focus on crime in BIDs and other urban areas through direct link between community policing and LE-PS collaboration. (Ellis, 2007) It is essential to have high-level of quality in training opportunities as a major motivator for law enforcement and private security so that they can stay involved. Security and law enforcement professionals are forming effective person-to-person liaisons and relationships. However, changing crime patterns and increasing difficult problems of high-techs and high crime in urban areas necessitate different approaches and activities of the group. Both law enforcement and security are required to be involved in homeland security programs at all levels in order to combat these threats effectively. The formation of Operation Cooperation project in the year 2000 resulted to embraced partnership between the executives in security and law enforcement and practitioner. (Penn, 2007) Private security is gaining recognition as a vital partner in community policing. Law enforcement has a greater awareness of private security’s increasing growth and vast resources. References Congress, U. S., 2004. Congressional Record V. 150 PT. 13. 1st ed. Washington D C: United States Government Printing Office. Ellis, J. W., 2007. Police Analysis and Planning for Homicide Bombings: Prevention, Defense and Respose. 2nd ed. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher Limited. Jim, S., 2009. A Law Enforcement and Security Officers Guide to Responding to Bomb threats. 2nd ed. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publishers limited. Larence, E. R., 2009. Federal Law Enforcement Retirement: Information on Enhanced Retirement Benefit for Law enforcement Personnel. 1st ed. United States: G A O. Leipnik, M. R. & Albert, D. P., 2003. GIS in Law Enforcement: Implementation Issues and Case Studies. 1st ed. New York: Taylor & Francis. Lewis, L., Farris, E. & Greene, B., 1997. Campus Crime and Security at Postsecondary Institutions. 1st ed.United States: U.S. Government Printing Offices. Penn, E. B., 2007. Homeland Security and Criminal Justice. 1st ed. New York: Routledge. Ronczkowski, M. R., 2012. Terrorism and Organized Hate Crime: Intelligence Gathering Analysis and Investigations. 3rd ed. United States: CRC Press. Seigel, L., 2009. Criminology. 10th ed. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth. Shelly, G., Cashman, T. J. & Rosenblatt, L. J., 2008. Systems Analysis and Design. 7th ed. Boston: Thomson Course Technology. Taylor, M. J., C.Epper, R. & Tolman, T. K., 1998. State and Local Law Enforcement Wireless Communications and Interoperability: A Quantitative Analysis. United States: U.S.Printing Office. White, J. R., 2014. Terrorism and Homeland Security. 8th ed. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Read More