Issues with Security and Emergency Management
Firstly, to understand the main reasons for the shooting incident in Dallas in 2016, it is vital to review the potential driving forces for this tragedy from the theoretical perspective. In this case, many researchers refer to the insufficient functioning of homeland security and emergency management departments. For example, Wukich and Mergel (2015) state that one of the major issues with the current system is a gap in communication. The authors of this article claim that this lack of connection creates difficulties in decision and policy-making (Wukich & Mergel, 2015). At the same time, this matter increases the strength of adverse consequences such as the number of deaths, as citizens are unaware of the threats. Consequently, social media can be viewed as a tool to distribute information (Wukich & Mergel, 2015). It could be said that this article reveals one of the gaps, but this case does not offer any valuable insights about the incidents with police officers in Dallas County in 2016.
Nonetheless, the subsequent limitations are related to the theory mentioned previously, and the major problems may be associated with internal miscommunication and the lack of knowledge about the issue. For example, Kapucu and Garayev (2011) clearly state that a well-developed communicative network is one of the critical constituents of sufficient decision-making. Apart from the need to pay vehement attention to internal communication, it is essential to underline the importance of cooperation and information-sharing between the departments from different states (Kapucu & Garayev, 2011). It could be said that this approach is beneficial, as it offers critical insights about the problem and supplies homeland security of the state will all required information such as social movements and cultural conflicts that can be used to prevent different incidents. In the context of the selected situation, it could be said that this theory can be applied in practice. The lack of cooperation may be regarded as one of the driving forces for the situation in Dallas.
Nonetheless, it is unreasonable to review the issues from a regional perspective solely since these gaps can be discovered as the outcomes of the federal actions at the national level. For example, nowadays, the authorities prioritize the advancement of external forces while underestimating the role and essentiality of security departments in different regions (Alperen, 2017). This matter creates gaps in financing, development of infrastructure, education of the employees, and this aspect can be applied in the context of Dallas County and be viewed as one of the reasons for the incident in 2016. Nevertheless, apart from the sufficient analysis of the theories mentioned above, it is necessary to discover the Dallas tragedy in more detail to determine the actual causes.
Mechanism of Policy-Making and Changes
It remains apparent that the gaps indicated above cannot be underestimated, as they help reveal the aspects that may cause the shooting of police officers in Dallas. Nonetheless, to gain a profound understanding of the limitations mentioned above, it is necessary to unveil the principles and working mechanism of policy-making in the United States of America. It could be said that another issue with emergency management and the overall judicial system of the United States of America is the lack of a proactive approach. For example, some researchers, such as Barton and Johns (2013), clearly state that the authorities are not interested in making changes and improving homeland security concepts until a devastating incident occurs. In this instance, preventive strategies are not discovered as highly important, while the major task of emergency management is to respond to the changes as fast as possible. The events such as 9/11 could be viewed as critical drivers for modifications in the policy-making, as they emphasized the absence or underestimation of particular components in the security system (Barton & Johns, 2013). For example, the 9/11 incident underlined the need to expand the duties of homeland security while making it focused on various widespread problems such as terrorism (Barton & Johns, 2013). It could be said that this example clearly shows that shooting in Dallas has a vehement impact on national policy-making while underlining the need to make changes in regions such as Dallas County. Nonetheless, this publication highlights that the major gaps in the current system in the United States of America are the absence of effective prevention strategies with the well-developed case scenarios and the lack of proactive methods in decision-making.
Possible Prevention Strategies
Apart from the need to understand the mechanism of policy-making and key forces supporting the development of the incident in Dallas, it is vital to review different prevention strategies that will help avoid similar problems. It could be said that in the majority of the cases, the modifications took place after the most devastating disasters and crimes. Different tragedies like 9/11 underline the fact that the policies have to be constantly modified nationally and regionally (Zaiotti, 2012). In this instance, homeland security and emergency management have to apply the principles of continuous learning. Being responsive to accidents that occur globally can help design effective prevention strategies (Zaiotti, 2012). At the same time, Zaiotti (2012) clearly shows that tragic and devastating incidents have to be reviewed broadly. Different countries and departments have to collaborate to minimize the occurrence of crimes similar to shooting in Dallas in 2016. When referring to this source, it could be stated that regional Counties cannot be viewed as the only entities responsible for various tragedies. More attention has to be paid to the gaps in the policy-making mechanism at national and international levels simultaneously.
Apart from the need to fill the existent gaps and refer to different incidents as potential case scenarios, it is vehemently important to revolutionize the overall principles of policy-making. In this instance, pursuing a proactive approach can be discovered as one of the major solutions (DeLeo, 2015). Using this method implies analyzing different cases in advance and developing step-by-step action plans (DeLeo, 2015). Relying solely on this model will be ineffective, as it is highly impossible to consider all potential incidents, tragedies, and disasters. In this instance, to comply with the main mission of emergency management, it is vital to introduce a model that combines mechanisms of reactive and proactive methods that will ensure a prompt response to incidents (Badiru & Racz, 2013). Nonetheless, a proactive strategy has to be prioritized by different national and regional departments.
Alternatively, one cannot underestimate the role of internal and external communication. It was indicated as one of the most critical gaps that might have led to the shooting incident in Dallas in 2016. In this case, a potential solution is to pay vehement attention to communication with citizens and other departments, as it can increase awareness of the individuals about a possible problem (Wukich & Mergel, 2015). Simultaneously, being in constant contact with different social groups will help review the issue from dissimilar angles and discover the specifics of different cultural, ethnic, and socio-economic groups and their attitudes towards various political and social events. A combination of these factors will help design effective policies or solutions that can minimize the consequences and possibility of a similar issue in the future. Taking advantage of these concepts may enhance the overall decision-making mechanism and improve the efficiency of homeland security and emergency management in Dallas County.
In the end, the findings mentioned above clearly show that apart from playing a critical role in ensuring security at regional and national levels, there are some gaps in the policy-making and emergency management that tend to exist. It remains apparent that the lack of communication is one of them, as it decreases the awareness of professionals and representatives of different cultural groups about dissimilar social issues. At the same time, underestimating the importance of national security and solely relying on the reactive method are also problems that many scholars discover as the main drivers for the incidents. Thus, to address these matters, the researchers underlined the need to enhance internal and external communication networks and prioritize a proactive approach to policy-making. A combination of these factors highlights that it is necessary to discover regional issues at different levels. It will help avoid similar incidents in other counties and countries and depict that local entities are not solely responsible for tragic accidents and disasters. It could be said that these theoretical dogmas and scholarly sources helped review the complex nature of homeland security. However, profound research is still required to unveil the insights of shooting that took place in Dallas in 2016.
Alperen, M. (2017). Foundations of homeland security: Law and policy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Badiru, A., & Racz, L. (2013). Handbook of emergency response: A human factors and systems engineering approach. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Barton, A., & Johns, N. (2013). The policy-making process in the criminal justice system. New York, NY: Routledge.
DeLeo, R. (2015). Anticipatory policy-making: When government acts to prevent problems and why it is so difficult. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kapucu, N., & Garayev, V. (2011). Collaborative decision-making in emergency and disaster management. International Journal of Public Administration, 64(1), 366-375.
Wukich, C., & Mergel, I. (2015). Closing the citizen-government communication gap: Content, audience, and network analysis of government tweets. Homeland Security & Emergency Management, 12(3), 707-735.
Zaiotti, R. (2012). Practicing homeland security across Atlantic: Practical learning and policy convergence in Europe and North America. European Security, 21(3), 328-346.