An Exploratory Analysis of Terrorism Prevention and Response Preparedness Efforts in Municipal Police Departments in the United States: Which Agencies Participate in Terrorism Prevention and Why?
| DOI | 10.1350/pojo.2013.86.2.618 |
| Published date | 01 June 2013 |
| Date | 01 June 2013 |
| Author | Blake M. Randol |
| Subject Matter | Article |
BLAKE M. RANDOL
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF
TERRORISM PREVENTION AND
RESPONSE PREPAREDNESS
EFFORTS IN MUNICIPAL POLICE
DEPARTMENTS IN THE UNITED
STATES: WHICH AGENCIES
PARTICIPATE IN TERRORISM
PREVENTION AND WHY?
In the post 9/11 era of homeland security in the United States,
American local law enforcement agencies are expected to play
an integral role in terrorism prevention and response. Liter-
ature suggests that local police agencies are more likely to
engage in terrorism response activities than prevention activ-
ities because: (1) policymakers place greater emphasis on
response, and (2) the prevention component of homeland
security is incompatible with traditional policing functions.
Missing from the literature is an explanation of why some
agencies engage in terrorism prevention activities whereas
others do not. To address this research question and other
issues concerning terrorism prevention efforts, this study
evaluates data from the United States Bureau of Justice Statis-
tics’ 2003 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative
Statistics Survey. Results show that agencies engaged in terror-
ism prevention activities were more likely to invest in a few
areas of terrorism response preparedness, but they were not
more likely to be engaged in terrorism response planning
activities. Findings from the structural equation model (SEM)
reveal that high levels of violent crime are a strong correlate of
agency activities in terrorism prevention activities.
Keywords: homeland security policing; terrorism preven-
tion; terrorism intelligence; terrorism response planning
Introduction
In the aftermath of the recent Boston Marathon bombing
observers can’t help but be impressed by the rapid, coordinated
and collaborative responses made by first responders, includ-
ing Boston residents, the Boston Police Department, local
158 The Police Journal, Volume 86 (2013)
DOI: 10.1350/pojo.2013.86.2.618
paramedics and the Boston Fire Department. The fact that law
enforcement agencies were successful at identifying, stopping
and apprehending the suspected perpetrators, including 26-year-
old Tamerlan Tsarnaev and 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev,
within four days of the bombing incident demonstrates the
central and integral role that local law enforcement agencies play
in American homeland security. Although these rapid and co-
ordinated responses of law enforcement to the Boston Marathon
bombing incident were impressive, some can’t help but ask
whether there is any way that this bombing could have been
prevented. Shortly after the Boston Marathon bombing, members
of the United States House and Senate raised concerns about the
Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) scrutiny of one of the
bombing suspects, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who was suspected of
being involved with radical Islamists and was interviewed by the
FBI prior to the bombing incident. In response to this informa-
tion, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham stated that the
American homeland security system ‘dropped the ball’ (Sherer,
2013). The pre-investigation issues surrounding the Boston
Marathon bombing allude to broader questions concerning the
capacity and efficacy of America’s national terrorism prevention
system.
Although an increasing number of local law enforcement
agencies are making progress in the area of terrorism response
preparedness (Donnermeyer, 2002; Giblin et al., 2009; Marion &
Cronin, 2009; Randol, 2012; Schafer et al., 2009; Stewart &
Morris, 2009; Thacher, 2005), evidence suggests that local
police agencies have made limited progress in implementing
adequate terrorism prevention measures (Carter & Carter, 2009;
Pelfrey, 2009: 261). Scholars have hypothesised that local police
agencies are less likely to make progress in the area of terrorism
prevention because policymakers and local officials place greater
emphasis on response than prevention, and because prevention is
arguably much more incompatible with traditional policing func-
tions than terrorism response preparedness activities (Bellavita,
2005; Pelfrey, 2009; Shernock, 2009).
The capacity of our ‘national terrorism prevention system’,
which heavily relies upon the efforts of state and local law
enforcement agencies, is challenged by a variety of factors and
contains many ‘inherent flaws’ (Pelfrey, 2009: 261). Investigat-
ing the capacity of America’s national terrorism prevention
system is of critical importance because terrorism prevention
efforts empower local law enforcement agencies to intervene and
mitigate terrorism related threats before they become reality.
The Police Journal, Volume 86 (2013) 159
To continue reading
Request your trial