Homeland Security
How does the creation of the Department of Homeland Security affect resources traditionally designated for local criminal justice organizations?
The Resource Imbalance caused by formation of HLS
The Department of Homeland Security controls a lot of resources. The significant among these are 40,000 coast guard members, 13,000 immigration law enforcement officers, 50,000 TSA screeners, 40,000 border patrol customs and 4000 Secret Service agents (Jaffe, 2015). These resources are immense and seriously affect the remainder, meant to be used by other law enforcement units. In 2012, the police were in dire need of ammunition while DHS had purchased up to 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition and added 2.717 Mine Resistant Armored Protection; the latter being vehicles that were previously used for counterinsurgency operations in Iraq (Bell, 2013).
Are there too few resources to fight both terrorists and traditional criminals?
Stressed State Police
Lack of funding has led to budget cuts in many police departments. In Baton Rouge, for instance, lack of funding and the resultant budget cuts has necessitated a reduction of police troopers in the Louisiana area. We now see 575 troopers deployed for work that was originally meant for 650 troopers. The state police commander in Louisiana expressed his wish to have a police academy established to deploy new trained personnel. However, he cited lack of funding to be the main obstacle for failing to achieve these noble goals. The American public will increasingly become insecure with reduced police officers. The fact that DHS takes about 57 billion dollars is evidence that they are taking away resources from the local criminal justice system. Although the DHS budget is huge, there is no justification to claim that resources are' sufficient to take care of both terrorism threats and homegrown crime. The concern lies in the allocation of the resources. The question is whether DHS needs $57 billion to operate? Could a portion of the resources be shared with the police department?
Such government resources should be combined with grants from various organizations to combat terrorist crime. MacArthur Foundation is known to make such contribution.
Implications of taking Osama Bin Laden Alive
Ideally, Osama bin laden should have been apprehended by the Seal commandos of the U.S. on 2nd May and consequently put on trial for his role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks and other crimes. However, Osama, while in his Abbottabad hideout, met a cruel form of sentence. If Osama would have been captured alive from Pakistan, the first burning question would have been that of jurisdiction. He planned his crimes from Afghanistan but attacked the U.S., UK, Yemen, Kenya Indonesia and Spain. If he had been flown to Guantanamo Bay, he would have been put under trial by a military tribunal. However, such a move would have triggered a barrage of complaints and outcries by his supporters who would claim that he was not getting justice; courtesy, the wavering, unstable credibility of the system. If he would have been subjected to a U.S. federal court process, it would have been a nightmare to raise jurors to hear and decide his fate. The security logistics of the process would have been overwhelming. It is even doubtful whether it would have been possible to find 12 unbiased jurors. Suppose Osama would have chosen to deny all the accusations against him, would it have been possible to adduce credible evidence against him to lead to conviction? Although some of the Al-Qaida leaders such as Khalid Sheikh Mohamed have been apprehended, owing to the circumstances under which evidence was extracted from them, such evidence has been put under scrutiny and bears signs of inadmissibility; it was extracted under duress.
Although Osama…
