INTRODUCTION

Since September 11, 2001, communities throughout the United States and elsewhere have struggled with the question, “How to provide security in an increasingly uncertain world?” As events subsequent to 9/11 have unfolded, U.S. policing, most particularly at the local level of government, has increasingly become responsible for protecting communities from terrorism as well as crime and social disorganization. This role, however, is largely unspecified, and except for the very largest cities like New York and Los Angeles, often beyond local governments' financial grasp. Nonetheless, it is generally recognized that like politics, all terrorism is ultimately local, at least in the consequences of such events.

In the last five years or so, the demarcation between local, state, and federal policing in the terrorism arena has become blurred with overlapping functions, and at times, with competing goals and objectives. For example, whereas federal agencies may be singularly focused on interdicting and preventing acts of terrorism (internationally and domestically), local agencies are invariably tied to responding to terrorism and mitigating its impacts once such events occur, while at the same time providing a sense of community order and safety (see chapter by Maguire and King, this volume). Moreover, the ability of local policing to develop intelligence broad enough to address terrorism is structured both by the size and complexity of the local jurisdiction, but also by the larger set of linkages that the police have within their jurisdiction (see Brodeur, this volume).