Savvy criminals constantly develop new techniques to target U.S.
persons, businesses, and interests. Individual criminals as well as
broad criminal networks exploit geographic borders, criminal turf,
cyberspace, and law enforcement jurisdiction to dodge law
enforcement countermeasures. Further, the interplay of these
realities can potentially encumber policing measures. In light of
these interwoven realities, policy makers may question how to best
design policies to help law enforcement combat ever-evolving
criminal threats. Criminals routinely take advantage of geographic
borders. They thrive on their ability to illicitly cross borders,
subvert border security regimens, and provide illegal products or
services. Many crimes-particularly those of a cyber nature-have
become increasingly transnational. While criminals may operate
across geographic borders and jurisdictional boundaries, law
enforcement may not be able to do so with the same ease. Moreover,
obstacles such as disparities between the legal regimens of nations
(what is considered a crime in one country may not be in another)
and differences in willingness to extradite suspected criminals can
hamper prosecutions. The law enforcement community has, however,
expanded its working relationships with both domestic and
international agencies. Globalization and technological innovation
have fostered the expansion of both legitimate and criminal
operations across physical borders as well as throughout
cyberspace. Advanced, rapid communication systems have made it
easier for criminals to carry out their operations remotely from
their victims and members of their illicit networks. In the largely
borderless cyber domain, criminals can rely on relative anonymity
and a rather seamless environment to conduct illicit business.
Further, in the rapidly evolving digital age, law enforcement may
not have the technological capabilities to keep up with the pace of
criminals. Some criminal groups establish their own operational
"borders" by defining and defending the "turf" or territories they
control. Similarly, U.S. law enforcement often remains constrained
by its own notions of "turf"-partly defined in terms of competing
agency-level priorities and jurisdictions. While some crimes are
worked under the jurisdiction of a proprietary agency, others are
not investigated under such clear lines. These investigative
overlaps and a lack of data and information sharing can hinder law
enforcement anti-crime efforts. U.S. law enforcement has,
particularly since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
increasingly relied on intelligence-led policing, enhanced
interagency cooperation, and technological implementation to
confront 21st century crime. For instance, enforcement agencies
have used formal and informal interagency agreements as well as
fusion centers and task forces to assimilate information and
coordinate operations. Nonetheless, there have been notable
impediments in implementing effective information sharing systems
and relying on up-to-date technology. Congress may question how it
can leverage its legislative and oversight roles to bolster U.S.
law enforcement's abilities to confront modern-day crime. For
instance, Congress may consider whether federal law enforcement has
the existing authorities, technology, and resources-both monetary
and manpower-to counter 21st century criminals (particularly
cybercriminals, e.g., S. 2105, S. 3414). Congress may also examine
whether federal law enforcement is utilizing existing mechanisms to
effectively coordinate investigations and share information.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
bundle available
(1)
(7)
