In this course, you have learned that there are two basic methods to fight terrorism: response and prevention. For the most part, the initiatives and programs developed through federal, state, and local law enforcement deal primarily with responding to terrorism by limiting damage, by actual engagement of the actors at the time of the attack, or by thwarting a planned attack. In recent years, there has been a move towards the actual prevention of radicalization and concepts that attempt to address the root causes of domestic terrorism and stop it before it even starts.
- Response: Initiatives that improve law enforcement’s response to, and investigation of, terrorist acts. This also includes the stopping of planned attacks before they occur.
- Prevention: Many of us think of prevention as making the target harder to get to or increasing police presence. For purposes of this discussion, we will discuss prevention as the avoidance of a person becoming radicalized.
As the captain of your local police municipality, in this week’s command staff forum, you wish to discuss what the best terror policy is for your department to undertake. The chief definitely wants to start the COP program. Should it stop there? Should your policy deal primarily with response? Should it deal primarily with prevention? Would an integrated program including both initiatives be the best route?
For your initial discussion post:
- Illustrate three initiatives associated with response to terrorism.
- Explain the prevention initiative covered in the course that proposes counter-radicalization.
- Determine whether or not an integrated initiative that utilizes elements of response and prevention is the best idea to combat terrorism.