Investigating hate crimes

 

 

Write a 6–7 page paper in which you answer the following questions:

Identify the best practices being used by law enforcement agencies to ensure that officers are trained in all aspects of understanding and manipulating technology and technological devices in their attempts to keep up with the rapidly changing technological environment.
Identify the ways in which police officers are responding to a changing and diverse community. What can police agencies do to improve the trust between diverse members of the community?
Identify the agencies involved in investigating hate crimes. Identify the challenges involved in investigating hate crimes. Analyze the problems related to determining the actual number of hate crimes and what makes a hate crime different from other crimes. Describe how domestic terrorism and hate crimes are similar in nature.
What does the future of policing look like in America? Identify the myriad of challenges that those in the law enforcement community are currently facing, and will face in the future.

 

Sample Solution

Law enforcement agencies are increasingly relying on technology to improve their effectiveness in responding to crime and preventing future criminal activity. As such, it is important for officers to be knowledgeable about all aspects of understanding and manipulating technology so that they can properly use available resources in their work (Sparrow, 2018). To ensure this, there are several best practices being used by law enforcement agencies across the United States.

One of these practices involves providing ongoing training opportunities for officers that allow them to stay up-to-date with the latest technological developments (Gard & Fisher, 2017). This includes offering courses on topics such as digital forensics and cybercrime investigations which will help officers develop an understanding of how to properly operate devices and apply new technologies during active investigations or other operations (Gard & Fisher , 2017). Additionally, some departments have implemented programs that allow officers access to virtual training simulations where they can practice using various pieces of equipment while working through different scenarios (Gard & Fisher 2017).

Another key practice is involving outside experts whenever possible when implementing new technologies or systems. By doing this, laws enforcement agencies are able to tap into external knowledge bases which may contain information not readily available within the department itself (Sparrow , 2018). Additionally, consulting firms specializing in security solutions may also be consulted if necessary so that any vulnerabilities present can be addressed before implementation begins (Sparrow 2018). Finally , developing a culture among staff members where open communication is encouraged is essential for successful implementation of new systems as it allows problems or issues related to usage or functionality be identified more quickly than if everyone remains silent (Kuhn et al., 2014)

Overall, having knowledgeable and well-trained personnel when it comes to using technology within a law enforcement setting is essential for success. By following the best practices outlined above law enforcement agencies can ensure their staff have the skills needed not only now but also as technological advances continue over time.

 

ombatants. Combatants are people who are involved directly or indirectly with the war and it is lawful to kill ‘to shelter the innocent from harm…punish evildoers (Begby et al (2006b), Page 290).However, as mentioned above civilian cannot be harmed, showing combatants as the only legitimate targets, another condition of jus in bello, as ‘we may not use the sword against those who have not harmed us (Begby et al (2006b), Page 314).’ In addition, Frowe suggested combatants must be identified as combatants, to avoid the presence of guerrilla warfare which can end up in a higher death count, for example, the Vietnam War. Moreover, he argued they must be part of the army, bear arms and apply to the rules of jus in bello. (Frowe (2011), Page 101-3). This suggests Frowe seeks a fair, just war between two participants avoiding non-combatant deaths, but wouldn’t this lead to higher death rate for combatants, as both sides have relatively equal chance to win since both use similar tactics? Nevertheless, arguably Frowe will argue that combatant can lawfully kill each other, showing this is just, which is also supported by Vittola, who states: ‘it is lawful to draw the sword and use it against malefactors (Begby et al (2006b), Page 309).’
In addition, Vittola expresses the extent of military tactics used, but never reaches a conclusion whether it’s lawful or not to proceed these actions, as he constantly found a middle ground, where it can be lawful to do such things but never always (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is supported by Frowe, who measures the legitimate tactics according to proportionality and military necessity. It depends on the magnitude of how much damage done to one another, in order to judge the actions after a war. For example, one cannot simply nuke the terrorist groups throughout the middle-east, because it is not only proportional, it will damage the whole population, an unintended consequence. More importantly, the soldiers must have the right intention in what they are going to achieve, sacrificing the costs to their actions. For example: if soldiers want to execute all prisoners of war, they must do it for the right intention and for a just cause, proportional to the harm done to them. This is supported by Vittola: ‘not always lawful to execute all combatants…we must take account… scale of the injury inflicted by the enemy.’ This is further supported by Frowe approach, which is a lot more moral than Vittola’s view but implies the same agendas: ‘can’t be punished simply for figh

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.