Distributed Defense?

As noted below, Jeff over at Caerdroia has a good post on the logic of distributed systems and redundant networks, and how we can apply some of that thinking to combating terrorist attacks. I’ll take his idea, that:

bq. “the government needs to encourage the population to arm itself with handguns and long arms; to offer training in spotting bombs, recognizing vulnerabilities, emergency medical care, planning in advance for contingencies and the like; and to give us the information we need to understand and react to threats

…and differ in two places: [1] I’m reluctant to ‘encourage’ people to arm themselves without some measure of training (as opposed to ‘not interfering’), and [2] I think that the giving of information needs to be a two-way street. I think that the government needs to come up with some good communications channels that can go from citizen upward, as well as from local agency upward, since the local sheriff or firefighter is likely to be the first on the scene in the event of any kind of threat or attack.

Over the last few days, I’ve had some experience on how that shouldn’t be done. Let me tell you a story.I have a long commute from Thousand Oaks to the South Bay; one of the perks is that I get to ride my motorcycle through the Santa Monica Mountains, which have some of the most beautiful (and entertaining) roads in the nation.

About a week ago, I was commuting home up one of the canyon roads, and started closing on a car. Looking up, I saw that it was a big white car. As I got closer, I noticed that it was a Crown Victoria (a model of Ford favored by law enforcement). I slowed my progress, looked more closely and realized that it had a civilian license plate, as opposed to the ‘exempt’ plates police cars and other local agency public cars have. I looked, and decided that it probably wasn’t a police car, and so was safe to (illegally) pass, and moved up still closer. And saw that it had a cage (barrier in between the front and back seats), spotlights, and an antenna. Definitely not a civilian, but what? I have a fair amount of experience with law enforcement; two of my dearest friends are a working LEO and a retired one. UC cars don’t have cages, and typically aren’t Crown Vics. Command cars have exempt plates, and some agency markings on them. I puzzled for a moment, then decided not to pass and fell back and followed the car until it turned up into a driveway. I rode away going “huh?” and forgot about it.

Until the following Tuesday, when I drove in to work, and happened to catch the tail end of a news story about someone at large who had been imitating a police officer, and who drove – a white Crown Vic. A bell went off in my memory, and I wondered what to do. I’d decided to call one of my LEO friends and ask, when I pulled up next to a LA Sheriff patrol car. I beeped, rolled my window down, and asked for a moment of his time.

Note: when you do something like this, obey their instructions, and before he gets out of the car, roll your window down and make sure both forearms are on the sill…why make the officer nervous?

I told him what I’d seen and heard, asked him what to do, and he replied that frankly, he had no idea, but he’d pass my contact info on to the detectives when he went off shift. I gave him my card, and drove off.

No one called, and I put it out of my mind, until Saturday, when the L.A. Times ran a story:

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department is investigating reports that a group of about six men masquerading as law enforcement agents … and calling themselves “the posse” … has been falsely arresting and robbing motorists in Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

OK, now I’ve got to do something, I called my LEO friend at home, and told her what I’d seen, asking if maybe it was something she knew about…LEO vehicles with civilian plates. She berated me for not getting the plate, and said that yes, I should call it in to the San Bernardino Sheriff ASAP, particularly as I’d seen it drive up a driveway and could probably find it again.

So I called. No one could take a message on a Saturday, and I didn’t have the name of a detective to ask to be sent to his or her voicemail.

This morning, I called again. I was told that I couldn’t be transferred to the Detective Bureau, they didn’t take calls. After protesting that I was calling in response to a story in the Times about a crime they were investigating, I was transferred to the Public Affairs Division, whose mission is to serve:

as a departmental emissary by fostering relationships between the organization and the communities. Division staff works closely with media sources, citizen groups, labor units, residents, schools, and the faith community to facilitate the flow of information between the Sheriff’s Department and the citizens we serve.

In other words, I left a message about an active investigation with the guy who I’d ask to come speak to my son’s second-grade class.

Now, based on my knowledge of cops, they take the crime of ‘imitating an officer’ damn seriously, as they should. I have no reason to believe that the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department feel any differently.

But it’s pretty obvious that they don’t have a clue…and here I’ll bet they aren’t alone…on how to take information from the public that’s not of the 911 call variety.

I have no idea whether the car I saw was legitimate, or might have been associated with the investigation they have underway. But I can tell you for sure…and I have two sworn police officers who I’ve discussed it with who agree with me…that it’s information that the investigating officers ought to have.

And until we can build structures that make that kind of communication easy, useful, and pervasive, the kind of distributed defense that Jeff discusses, and Instapundit pushes aren’t going to be able to leverage on the existing safety and security infrastructures. Instead, we’ll get centralized bureaucratic systems that will shut out the information they aren’t interested in hearing.

And when that doesn’t work, they’ll get more and more intrusive and sadly, they won’t work any better.

As for my mystery car, I’m having lunch with my LEO friend tomorrow, and she’ll call San Bernardino when she goes back to the office; when she calls, they’ll listen.

(cleaned up grammar)

6 thoughts on “Distributed Defense?”

  1. Amigo,
    STAY WITH IT!!
    Get some real SanBerdoo ossifers to LISTEN to you!
    Rattle cages! Pull chains! Push some buttons! Be a bit of a pest, UNTIL they know enough to act on your GOOD INFO!

    Oh, and Concur Yr Analysis re: “a better info-sharing system is needed.”

  2. AL:

    Persist. My experience with many bureaucracies has been that once you get past the officious gatekeepers, you’ll find some frazzled working stiff who’s grateful for your help. Once you find this guy, hang onto him! He’ll gladly share information and trade little favors, since he’s got a new edge (that’s YOU).

    In some local volunteer work, I’ve had similar problems. Sometimes the only fix has been to outlast the gatekeepers and start off fresh when the new kid gets hired–obviously NOT a good approach in a law enforcement situation. Someone needs a swift kick in the ass, but that won’t happen without more crimes committed and a major scandal in the media. So you MUST keep looking for the guy who’ll listen.

    I do share your frustration–it seems like every private and public institution behaves like this in some way. Ranting and raving is great for creating awareness of the problem, but it usually doesn’t do much to break the walls down. I limit myself to 3 rants a day, and then resume chipping at those walls.

    Good luck with the Sheriff.

  3. Sorry if I was unclear. I meant that all of those pieces needed to go together as a package. I don’t want a pack of untrained gun owners running about, either.

    I certainly think that you need to persist, and it sounds like you are doing so. You are absolutely right, of course, that this will only be truly effective if the information flow is bidirectional. It sounds like the Sheriff’s department has really dropped the ball, here.

  4. Remember the outcry about the TIPS program? People worry that they’ll be the victims of malicious false accusations, so they don’t want unsolicited civilian info taken seriously. People worry more about the right to privacy, which is extrapolated from the prohibitions of the fifth amendment, than they do about the first amendment or the stability of society. The political problems here might be overcome, but I’m not entirely certain.

    There is also the issue of gun control. If politicians are intelligent enough to not pander to a non-existant issue, there are numerous people who support gun control. A decentralized defense is not compatible with increased gun control, and is not even compatible with current weapons laws. To be truly effective the average citizen must be able to legally acquire a weapon comparable to the black market machine guns popular among the mujahadeen and other international criminal organizations. You cannot rely on someone with a semiautomatic glock to stop a weapons smuggler with a fully automatic kalashnikov. The only solution to this problem would be to remove almost all gun control laws at both the federal and state levels, but whether the people would supprt this or not, democratic senators would scream bloody murder.

    — Conservative California Republican

  5. CCR –

    I was also not as vehemently against TIPS as some folks, although it’s something that requires some planning and education on all sides, and needs to be designed so that it’s not like the old Soviet ‘block captain’ programs.

    I do disagree on political and practical grounds with your call for citizens to be carrying heavier weapons. The Israelis are doing quite well with pistol-armed citizens, and so can we.

    A.L.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.