Domestic Security Scenarios

Balancing domestic security and civil liberties is an immense challenge. In North Korea, there is no political activism or domestic security challenges to threaten the regime but there are also little if any human rights possessed by the citizenry save for a few of the elite. Such a model would not work in the United States. The rights of citizenry should not trump domestic security but there must be a balance.

In looking at the United States, the Department of Homeland Security is charged with domestic intelligence support to state and local levels (Burch, 2009). This organization relies on other agencies to collect the information; it serves as a clearing house for information. The NCTC also serves a similar function, concentrating on terrorism but often serves only the federal level (Burch, 2009). Fusion centers at lower levels as well as the FBI Joint Task Forces can serve the local level but often times

What constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure in terms of preventing terrorism? We have studied in the past readings about misuse of intelligence gathering agencies on US citizens. Operation CHAOS was directed at anti-war protesters. This is not the agenda today of domestic security; the aim is to prevent terrorism. Lawfully speaking, the FISA court which we have read about provides a legal framework to conduct intelligence gathering on US persons. But is it enough?

In looking at the United States, having a domestic intelligence agencies, similar to MI5 in Great Britain, would not fare well in the US. The law enforcement disposition of the United States is highly decentralized. A strong federal domestic security force would not be well received. The citizenry would decry overreach of federal power and state and local law enforcement would likely push back against such an