Reader Comments No comments yet.
Be the first by posting your comment below. Sign in to submit a comment:. Submit Your Comment Comments posted may be subject to moderation. Be nice.
Sounds easy enough, right? Personal attacks or insults of any kind will be removed.
When submitting letters to the editor, we require the following information to be submitted for verification purposes: Full Name: Phone Number: City:. Symposium of sin. DNA experts, researchers and authors will spend a day with the public at this true crime conference. For the most part, after all, these mass murders have not been committed by Islamic extremists.
From the more than deaths of this sort since the Aurora shooting three summers ago, only eight were killed by individuals inspired by Islamic radicalism. Domestically, in the name of prevention, the government launched a series of measures that transformed the American landscape when it came to both surveillance and civil rights.
When Penelope Madewell reports that her husband is missing, the police spring into action, thus bringing together a lovelorn detective, Patrick Delaney, and Professor Willgrubs' niece, Emily Peterson, runner-up in the Alice in Dairyland beauty contest. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Expected to be delivered to Germany by Christmas. Olivier has been having a torrid affair with Carl Madewell's wife Penelope. Burial Rites Hannah Kent. Heffernan rated it it was amazing Sep 06, Submit my comment as a letter to the editor.
Yet despite the acquisition of newly aggressive powers of every sort, law enforcement has a woeful record when it comes to catching domestic mass murderers before the damage is done. In fact, a vanishingly small number of them have even shown up on the radar of the national security state. The ability to collect all phone metadata from all Americans has not deterred these attacks, nor has the massive surveillance of Muslim communities in the U.
As with so many attempts at government redesign, the new policy already has its own name and acronym. The new CVE program will theoretically rely on a three-pronged strategy: building awareness of the causes of radicalization, countering extremist narratives especially online , and emphasizing community-led intervention by bringing together law enforcement, local service providers, outreach programs, local governments, and academics.
It is, in other words, meant to be a kinder, gentler means of addressing potential violence before it occurs, of coming to grips with that year-old who's surfing jihadist websites and wondering about his future. It sounds good. But just how new is it really?
In essence, the national security state will be sending more or less the same line-up of ideas to the plate with instructions to potentially get even more invasive, taking surveillance down to the level of disturbed kids and community organizations. Why then should we expect the softer-nicer version of harder-tougher to look any better or prove any more effective?
Coming up with a new name and an acronym is one thing, genuinely carrying out a different program involving a new approach is another. With that in mind, here are five questions based on past errors that might help us all judge just how smart or not so smart the CVE program will turn out to be:.
To be fair, there are some small signs of a desire for change in the law enforcement community. The courts, too, may be starting to show signs of a new sense of restraint.
see Too many youths experience periods of doubt, depression, anxiety, anger, and instability to predict which few will turn to acts of violence.