Executive Briefing Summary
Introduction
January 6, 2021 marks a cataclysmic event in American history. The visual of combative mobs fighting their way into the Capitol and invading sacred hallways in American democracy will be a permanent engravement in American minds for years to come. Although this catastrophe is horrific, these assaults did not come completely unexpected. Attacks had been openly discussed on various social media websites in preceding weeks before the attack actually transpired. The Capital siege represents a culmination of political tension that is lasting.
Domestic extremism has been witnessed at a remarkable growth distinguished from foreign extremism which involves Jihadist groups. This term includes an array of ideologies and groups such as conspiracy theorist, and anti-government militias. These groups only have violent propensities as common denominator. Americans experienced a frame-up among those who intruded the Capital on January 6th. Two hundred and fifty people have been charged to date for their siege role. The participants charged were from diverse groups which include neo-Nazis, armed militia, QAnon and Boogaloo ideologies. The George Washington University (March 2021). The intention of this report is to provide a snapshot of the diverse participants. This briefing will examine how private security, law enforcement, the courts, and corrections could have collaborated better to prepare for and respond to your selected national security emergency.
Partnering
There should be a centralized command task force, which can be mobilized and dismantled during and after the civil arrest. The role of the command will be to coordinate and mobilize all units in the private security, law enforcement, the courts, and corrections to counter civil unrest, minimal damages to properties and loss of lives (Sebastian, 2015). Essentially, having a centralized command during civil unrest similar to those observed in the United States could minimize the bureaucratic processes that hinder immediate response and collaboration of private security, law enforcement, the courts, and corrections. To curb negative outcomes associated with civil unrest.
Lesson
Having a framework for action is key to enhancing the collaboration and workability between public and private security organizations to improve community safety during and after civil unrest.
Working Together
Ideally, the police and the private security firms have an underlying distinction, which steps from their main interest towards providing security and safety. The police are motivated to serve and protect the community, while the private sector is motivated by providing a means to deliver similar services. Thus, public safety and private security leaders should work together to bolster protection to the communities to develop a framework that can unify their interests. This means combining the resources of the public and private security apparatus towards service a common goal of better protecting their communities while sustaining their fundamental interest (Morabito & Greenberg, 2005). For instance, the public security leaders can extend their policing power to private surety firms to extend their ability to deploy in large numbers in a small community where security is a challenge. Additionally, both the public and private security firms can coordinate their resources’ deployment to facilitate transportation and evacuations during emergencies.
Reference
Morabito, A., & Greenberg, S. (2005). Engaging the private sector to promote homeland security: law enforcement-private security partnerships. Washington: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance.
The George Washington University. (March 2021). “This is Our House!.” https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs2191/f/This-Is-Our-House.pdf
Sebastian, S. (2015). The role of police in UN peace operations: Filling the gap in the protection of civilians from physical violence. Stimson.
Leave a Reply