Category Archives: Domestic Policing

Texas DPS’ Face and ALL Ten Prints Biometric Policy Makes Everone a Suspect

lineup

Kaye Beach
July 14, 2014

Like Oklahoma, Texas requires applicants for a state drivers license or ID card to submit to his or her facial and finger biometrics to being captured and stored. But Texas has recently upped the ante requiring those who wish to have a state issued driver’s license of ID card, to submit to the scanning and retention of all ten fingerprints.

Texas lawmakers have passed legislation that allows the Department of Public Safety to get all ten of your fingerprints the next time you renew your drivers license. And the DPS quietly began doing that this year.

‘To Cut Down On Fraud, DPS Wants Fingerprints To Renew Drivers License,’

If you are already offended by the notion of the notion of being fingerprinted like a common criminal just to get an driver’s license or ID card you will be horrified by what Ryan Barrett, a former DPS employee who resigned over the new fingerprinting policy, reveals about what is actually being done with the data.

His main objection, he tells The Watchdog, is that all fingerprints of Texans are now being run through the state’s criminal database. (my bold)

…Barrett says he is not against catching criminals. The problem, he says, is that if someone has no criminal record, a new record is created of the innocent individual and stored in the statewide database called AFIS.

…Barrett says he believes the reason DPS quietly launched the program this year without public announcement is because such a public notice would have touched off a debate about the program’s legality.

Read more, ‘The Watchdog: Whistleblower blasts DPS for taking fingerprints,’ July 12, 2014, DallasNews.com

Dave Lieber, Watchdog Reporter for the Dallas Morning News is doing a fine job of investigating and reporting on this story which he first reported  on back on June 7, 2014.

Watchdog: Driver’s license centers snatch your fingerprints

[. . .]Quietly, earlier this year, the Texas Department of Public Safety began requiring full sets of fingerprints from everyone who obtains a new driver’s license or photo identification card.

[. . .]Since 2010, Texas has used facial recognition software to match driver’s license photos with government databases looking for persons wanted by law enforcement for various reasons.

The state’s Image Verification System also matches known faces from driver’s licenses and photo ID cards with sketches of criminal suspects, a Texas Department of Public Safety spokesman explained in answer to The Watchdog’s questions.

[. . . ]In the Texas Homeland Security Strategic Plan, which Marina found, authorities cite identity theft and terrorism as two motivators for using fingerprints and facial recognition software.

Checking fingerprints, the plan says, will help officials locate people seeking a second, unauthorized identification card.

The plan states that fingerprints will be compared with the federal Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System to identify criminals and terrorists.  Read more

July 12, 2014 article, The Watchdog: Whistleblower blasts DPS for taking fingerprints

And here is Lieber’s article published today, July 14, 2014, that allows the whistleblower and a representative for the Texas Department of Public Safety,  to both give their perspective in their own words.

Judge for yourself if fingerprint taking is necessary for Texas driver’s licenses

 

I love the DPS whistleblower, Ryan Barrett’s,  final thoughts on the matter.

‘…you can use any means or methods to stop crime and then justify it with the DPS’s blanket ‘safety’ statement.  You can say the DPS is placing RFID chips in all driver’s license holders, and then justify it with the the same sentence Tom used: that it stops fraud, combats terrorism, and keeps people safe.  In fact, I’m sure it probably would stop a little fraud, or some crime, but that doesn’t mean it is morally right, in line with the concept of citizens’ privacy, or cost-effective.  You could search every single house in a city when a crime is committed and justify it with that statement, and yes, the police would probably find some crime or wrong-doing.  But again, that doesn’t mean it’s morally right…’

Read more, ‘The Watchdog: Whistleblower blasts DPS for taking fingerprints,’ July 12, 2014, DallasNews.com

Florida Police use DMV Faceprints to Investigate Public

cctv_startseite

Kaye Beach

April 12, 2013

Imagine if law enforcement began randomly snatching citizens off the street and throwing them into a suspect line up with no probable cause.    In addition to the physical disruption to their lives selectees would be at risk of misidentification as the culprit for a crime they didn’t commit.  People would be outraged.

In Florida, the police are using facial biometrics gathered and stored by the DMV for Real ID with facial recognition technology to identify and investigate individuals in public, at will.

Presumption of innocence? Probable cause? Not necessary when everyone is a suspect.

We are just at the edge of an onslaught of similar stories that whether revealed or not are rooted in Real ID.

You and I have the dubious honor of being located in the slice of our generation that is going to gain a deep understanding of the value of our privacy. We will learn because we are the ones who once, having the luxury of relative obscurity, are watching it slip away. The loss for this slim section of humanity will be acute. For most of those born in the post 911 era and those who follow them, they will be hard pressed to realize what has been taken from them.

Oviedo approves use of facial recognition program for police use

April, 3, 2013

OVIEDO, Fla. —

More local police officers are getting a new crime fighting tool. Oviedo just agreed to allow police to tap into facial recognition software developed by the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office.
The technology allows law enforcement to run photos through a database to help identify crime suspects.
What Oviedo just approved has been put to use in Winter Springs for almost a year.
The system is somewhat controversial because it allows law enforcement to search through driver’s license photos, even if you’ve never been accused of a crime.

Guthrie man still “smarting” from police detainment after refusing new “smart meter”

lost battle og&e 2Kaye Beach

Feb.20, 2013

By Andrew Griffin at the Red Dirt Report;

Guthrie man still “smarting” from police detainment after refusing new “smart meter”

OKLAHOMA CITY —  While most customers of Oklahoma City-based utility OG&E fully accept the installation of the new “smart meters,” which are to replace the old analog meters, there are some holdouts who are resisting the forced installation of these devices.

While we do not have the individual’s name, we learned today, via a blog post at OK-SAFE (in cooperation with Axxiom for Liberty), Inc., that a gentleman in Guthrie, Okla. “has been fighting the installation of the spy-meter for a while now, and was surprised by today’s show of force by OG&E.”

OG&E’s repeated attempts to replace the old meter with the controversial “smart meter” were all for naught and because this man was the last holdout in this particular Guthrie neighborhood, the Guthrie Police Department sent three officers to the man’s house to protect the OG&E installer, while allegedly detaining the man, echoing a story out of Naperville, Illinois last month where two women were arrested for “interfering with the installation process.”

. . .This encounter was confirmed by Karen Kurtz, a spokesperson for OG&E.

“We did have police out at that gentleman’s residence,” Kurtz said. “It wasn’t a show of force at all. His was the last remaining smart meter installation in that area.”

Once the police had detained the man, the smart meter was installed.

Read more http://www.reddirtreport.com/Story.aspx/25162

Are We being Tracked by ALPR Spy Cams? 38 State Law Enforcement Agencies to be Queried

Kaye Beach

July 30, 2012

It has recently been announced that 38 states (including Oklahoma) have joined with the ACLU of Maryland to find out how the information collected by ALPR camera license plate data is being handled.  This is very good news! (Click the map to find out state specifics)

Automatic License Plate Readers

The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland joined with ACLU affiliates in 38 states to send requests to local police departments and state agencies to seek information on how they use automatic license plate readers to track and record Americans’ movements.  Here in Maryland, the state has reported that there are more than 320 ALPRs being used and many are linked to the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, Maryland’s “fusion center,” where the data is potentially stored indefinitely, creating an ever-growing database of our location and travel through the state.

ALPRs are cameras that cam be mounted on vehicles such as police patrol cars or in fixed locations like light poles. These cameras snap photographs of license plates and store the image along with the vehicle’s registration data plus the time date and location of every vehicle captured. The devices have the potential to track all vehicles even those who are registered to owners who have broken no law at all.  Without appropriate restrictions, the police can collect, share and retain the data indefinitely which enables our movements to be tracked and monitored, a concern I raised recently with the announcement that Shawnee police were using the devices and touting their potential to be used for investigative purposes.

“For investigating, it will be phenomenal,” Frantz said. Link

Read more;

Are Oklahoma Cops Using Spy Cams to Become Super Snoopers?

073012 Press Release: ACLU Seeks Details on Automatic License Plate Readers in Massive Nationwide Request; Information Sought on How Cameras are Used by Police Agencies and How Data is Stored

Are Oklahoma Cops Using Spy Cams to Become Super Snoopers?

Kaye Beach

June 16, 2012

Two police agencies (to my knowledge) in Oklahoma are now using Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPR).  The Oklahoma County Sheriff’s Department and the Shawnee Police Department.

LINK

These cameras snap photographs of license plates and store the image along with the vehicle’s registration data plus the time date and location of every vehicle captured. ALPR can be mounted on police vehicles or in a fixed location and they can capture thousands of license plates per hour.

Shawnee Police Chief Russell Frantz is very excited about his new surveillance technology for the same reason Oklahomans should be concerned.

“For investigating, it will be phenomenal,” Frantz said. Link

ALPR is great for spotting stolen vehicles or wanted criminals but they also capture the information of completely innocent drivers.  If the information captured on non-offending drivers was immediately discarded then the concern would not be so great but that is not what is happening.  Without proper rules in place, this potentially valuable tool becomes nothing less than a nationwide tracking system.

As I have written about recently, the information is being used by a private company, Vigilant Video, to build an enormous database, the National Vehicle Location Service (NLVS).   As a private corporation Vigilant Video is not bound to any privacy requirements which (somewhat) restrain governmental entities and yet police departments nationwide are both supplying and utilizing the NLVS database.

You can watch Vigilant Video’s ticker that reveals how many records have been consumed by their national database here.  At the moment of this writing the count was 669, 699,058.

If you follow the link to view the ticker, be sure to look at the other products this company is offering.

Line Up” certainly caught my attention.

LineUp collects face images, detection times and “entire human” (full body) images — then catalogs all human face events into a centralized database. Using the LineUp Event Search, you can enter a suspect image into the system — and instantly search through a time-based history of every possible match.

This isn’t an issue of lack of privacy in public. We cannot stop ourselves from being viewed or photographed once we enter the public sphere. ALPR collecting, storing and sharing of this data is more properly understood to be much more than a simple sighting in public-it’s an investigation. (More on that aspect here)

The Electronic Police State

An electronic police state is characterized by state use of electronic technologies to record, organize, search and distribute forensic evidence against its citizens.

The information gathered under an electronic police state is criminal evidence, ready for use in a trial. It is gathered universally (“preventively”) and only later organized for use in prosecutions.

In an Electronic Police State, every surveillance camera recording, every email sent, every Internet site surfed, every post made, every check written, every credit card swipe, every cell phone ping…are all criminal evidence, and all are held in searchable databases. The individual can be prosecuted whenever the government wishes.

Link

I consider it to be an assault on my autonomy as a free, independent and law abiding citizen to be entered into a tracking database.   It may surprise you to know that although I am a law abiding person, I still have plenty I would like to hide from the government.  I don’t want them to know where I go to church, who I associate with, what political events I attend or where I get my nails done.  Even though I am not doing anything wrong-they are- and it is none of their damn business! 

Lots of people have plenty to hide that is still no business whatsoever of the police or any of their cronies that they might be persuaded to share this info with.   If you happen to go to AA, have a sweetie on the side or are a politician (hello!)-you should be especially concerned and more than a little creeped out.

The only reason to track and monitor anything is for control so what does that tell you about the collection of this type of information on all of us?

I suggest that residents of Shawnee and Oklahoma County contact their Police Chief or Sheriff and ask a few questions about how this data is being used.

You have a right to receive from your chief law enforcement official;

  • A copy of their data policy and privacy policy governing ALPR’s
  • Any documents showing how the collected plate data is stored, shared and/or deleted
  • Any auditing requirements the department has to ensure appropriate data privacy, and to discover and punish any abuse of the system.

You should be able to get this information by simply requesting it.  I say “should.” It may not be that simple in which case you will want to structure your request to include reminders of Oklahoma’s Open Records Act.  Fortunately, there is an easy way to do this.  Use a template!

Oklahoma Open Records request template

http://journalism.okstate.edu/faculty/jsenat/requestletter.htm

About OK Open Records Act

http://andylester.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=3Yx2gpCgJBM%3D&tabid=81

Autonomy  is “The desire to avoid being manipulated or dominated wholly by others.

… Loss of autonomy means loss of our capacity to control our own  life

It also would be a good idea for anyone who is concerned about their privacy or autonomy to contact their local police or sheriff’s department and ask if they have or are considering using ALPR and let them know that you will cause a ruckus if they use this technology inappropriately.

Data should not be retained or shared on innocent motorists!

Cops Want ARMED Drones!

Kaye Beach

May 23, 2012

Well, you’d have thought that they would wait until the things had been flying over us awhile before they would start talking about arming them but NO!  We have given them too many inches now and predictably, they are taking their miles.

Groups Concerned Over Arming Of Domestic Drones

May 23, 2012 1:18 PM

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) – With the use of domestic drones increasing, concern has not just come up over privacy issues, but also over the potential use of lethal force by the unmanned aircraft.

Drones have been used overseas to target and kill high-level terror leaders and are also being used along the U.S.-Mexico border in the battle against illegal immigration. But now, these drones are starting to be used domestically at an increasing rate.

The Federal Aviation Administration has allowed several police departments to use drones across the U.S. They are controlled from a remote location and use infrared sensors and high-resolution cameras.

Chief Deputy Randy McDaniel of the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office in Texas told The Daily that his department is considering using rubber bullets and tear gas on its drone.

“Those are things that law enforcement utilizes day in and day out and in certain situations it might be advantageous to have this type of system on the UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle),” McDaniel told The Daily.

Read more of this insanity HERE

IACP 2010: Airborne support for law enforcement that won’t break the bank

Vanguard Defense Industries’ ShadowHawk provides a serious strategic advantage for any agency that deploys it

“Yes, Virginia, We Can See — and Shoot — You From Up Here

Do you know who voted to release 30, 000 drones in US skies?

HR 658, the “Federal Aviation Administration Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act” was passed by both Houses and signed by the President on Feb 14, 2012

Oklahoma Senators
Yea   R Coburn, Thomas OK
Yea   R Inhofe, James “Jim” OK
Oklahoma House
Aye   R Sullivan, John OK 1st
No   D Boren, Dan OK 2nd
Aye   R Lucas, Frank OK 3rd
No Vote   R Cole, Tom OK 4th
Aye   R Lankford, James OK 5th

Study finds warrantless police cell-phone tracking widespread and OKC PD response to FOI request

 

Kaye Beach

April 5, 2012

 

Warrantless cell-phone tracking widespread, study finds

By Donald White  Apr 02, 2012

Many U.S. police departments are tracking the location of cell phones without a warrant or court supervision, according to an investigation by the American Civil Liberties Union.

Starting last summer, ACLU affiliates around the country began filing hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests with law enforcement agencies to find out about their policies and procedures governing cell-phone location tracking.

Many agencies didn’t respond at all. But based on more than 5,500 pages of documents from the 200 agencies that did respond, the ACLU found that although police departments routinely use cell-phone location tracking in their investigations, “only a tiny minority reported consistently obtaining a warrant and demonstrating probable cause to do so.”

Read More

 

From the ACLU;

Cell Phone Location Tracking Public Records Request

April 4, 2012

Of all of the recent technological developments that have expanded the surveillance capabilities of law enforcement agencies at the expense of individual privacy, perhaps the most powerful is cell phone location tracking. And now, after an unprecedented records request by ACLU affiliates around the country, we know that this method is widespread and often used without adequate regard for constitutional protections, judicial oversight, or accountability.

Cell phones register their location with the network several times a minute and this function cannot be turned off while the phone is getting a wireless signal. The technology’s threat to personal privacy is breathtaking.

All cell phones register their location with cell phone networks several times a minute, and this function cannot be turned off while the phone is getting a wireless signal. The threat to personal privacy presented by this technology is breathtaking: To know a person’s location over time is to know a great deal about who a person is and what he or she values. As the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. explained:

“A person who knows all of another’s travels can deduce whether he is a weekly church goer, a heavy drinker, a regular at the gym, an unfaithful husband, an outpatient receiving medical treatment, an associate of particular individuals or political groups — and not just one such fact about a person, but all such facts.”

The government should have to obtain a warrant based upon probable cause before tracking cell phones. That is what is necessary to protect Americans’ privacy, and it is also what is required under the Constitution. In United States v. Jones, a majority of the Supreme Court recently concluded that the government conducts a search under the Fourth Amendment when it attaches a GPS device to a car and tracks its movements. The conclusion should be no different when the government tracks people through their cell phones, and in both cases a warrant and probable cause should be required.

Until now, how law enforcement agents use cell phone tracking has been largely shrouded in secrecy. What little was known suggested that law enforcement agents frequently tracked cell phones without obtaining a warrant based on probable cause.

In August 2011, 35 ACLU affiliates filed over 380 public records requests with state and local law enforcement agencies to ask about their policies, procedures and practices for tracking cell phones.

What we have learned is disturbing. While virtually all of the over 200 police departments that responded to our request said they track cell phones, only a tiny minority reported consistently obtaining a warrant and demonstrating probable cause to do so. While that result is of great concern, it also shows that a warrant requirement is a completely reasonable and workable policy.

The government’s location tracking policies should be clear, uniform, and protective of privacy, but instead are in a state of chaos, with agencies in different towns following different rules — or in some cases, having no rules at all. It is time for Americans to take back their privacy. Courts should require a warrant based upon probable cause when law enforcement agencies wish to track cell phones. State legislatures and Congress should update obsolete electronic privacy laws to make clear that law enforcement agents should track cell phones only with a warrant.

Below is an overview of our findings and recommendations.

Read more

 

 Is Your Local Law Enforcement Tracking Your Cell Phone’s Location?

In a massive coordinated information-seeking campaign, 35 ACLU affiliates filed over 380 requests in 31 states with local law enforcement agencies large and small to uncover when, why and how they are using cell phone location data to track Americans. Click on a state in the map below to see what requests we filed in that state, and what documents we received. Click here to learn more about the requests.

http://www.aclu.org/maps/your-local-law-enforcement-tracking-your-cell-phones-location

 

Here is the response from Oklahoma City Police Department;

http://www.aclu.org/files/cellphonetracking/20120328/celltrackingpra_oklahomacitypd_oklahomacityok.pdf

 

Reality Check for Real ID

Kaye Beach

Feb. 23, 2012

On Feb 14th I wrote an article entitled Are You Seeing Stars on Your State Driver’s License?  Say Hello to REAL ID

Janice Kephart, true believer in the Real ID cause and Director for National Security Policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, stopped by to leave a comment on my blog singing the praises of Real ID and denying that it is a national ID.  I was traveling when she left the comment and had little time and I will admit, little patience to respond to Ms. Kephart.  Fortunately, someone else stepped in and gave a great rebuttal to Kephart’s claims.  (You can read Gene’s reply at the bottom of the post in the comments section)

Paul Henry of Floridians against Real ID has been tireless in his activism and efforts to reverse the federal Real ID Act in his state for years now.  Paul is also a retired law enforcement officer and one that worked specifically on driver license fraud and other identity-related cases.  He too earned a visit from Janice Kephart  and his reply to her was most thoughtful as well as extremely thorough.  Highly recommended reading for anyone who wants to know the truth about Real ID.

Do you wonder;

  • Would Real ID have stopped the 9 11 hijackers?  Or illegal immigration?
  • Does Real ID require an RFID chip?
  • Is Real ID a “national ID”

Read Paul Henry’s reasoned reply!

An E-mail Conversation with a REAL ID Proponent

 

 

Spingola Files: One Woman’s Willingness to Stand-Up to Orwellian ID Act

Kaye Beach

Feb 4, 2011

Respected former detective weighs in on biometric ID case

The very best law officers have one thing in common; they want to get the bad guys and protect the innocent.  But what happens when the tools offered to law enforcement to get the bad guys also threaten the innocent?   This is not a new dilemma for law enforcement but with the myriad of changes taking place in recent years on both the legal and technological front, it must be an incredibly tricky one now.

Steven Spingola is doing something very important.  He is opening a dialog on issues that desperately needs an airing among those who swore an oath to serve and protect the people of the United States.

Spingola is a former Milwaukee Homicide Detective, an author and nationally recognized investigator whose excellent reputation proceeds him.  He is a graduate of the FBI National Academy, a death investigations expert, a police shooting reconstruction expert and is formally trained in investigative analysis.  (Read more about Steven Spingola)

This former detective is truly is an investigator to his core.  Not satisfied with accepting anything at face value he is examining issues at what must be an uncomfortable intersection for anyone involved in law enforcement.

At his blog site, The Spingola Files, Steve wrote an article about my efforts to defend against biometric ID by filing a  lawsuit against the state in Oklahoma.

I continue to heartened by the positive feedback I have received from members of law enforcement and am most grateful to Steve Spingola for his courage in bringing issues such as this to the fore.

From The Spingola Files, Feb. 4, 2012

One Woman’s Willingness to Stand-Up to Orwellian ID Act

When Oklahoma native Kaye Beach sought to renew her driver’s license, she refused to comply with that state’s version of the Real ID Law.

In Oklahoma, and throughout 26 other states, including Wisconsin, the one digital photo taken at the counter will no longer suffice.  Instead, applicants are required to submit to several photos, including a full body profile.

When Ms. Beach declined to acquiesce to the new array of photographs, officials from Oklahoma’s version of the Department of Motor Vehicles denied the renewal of her driver’s license.  Predictably, a time came when Ms. Beach had a traffic related law enforcement contact, at which time she was cited for driving without a valid operator’s license.

But instead of simply walking like a sheep to the slaughter to renew her permit, Ms. Beach fought to have her citation dismissed and then filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Oklahoma’s Real ID law.

http://constitutionalalliance.org/work/article.php/20110910201040513

Why is Kaye Beach making such a fuss? After all, what is so difficult about submitting to a series of photographs?

Read More

Secretary Napolitano Meets with State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement on Countering Violent Extremism

Kaye Beach

Jan 18, 2011

Get ready for more top down imposition and pressure on our police forces in order to “prevent violent extremism”

As near as I can tell, an “extremist,” in the eyes of this government,  is anyone that takes issue with its policies, actions or aims which means that there is a whole lot of those extremists and more of them are being minted daily.

The best way to prevent “violent extremism” is to ensure that the ordinary, common garden variety  “extremists” are thoroughly monitored and intimidated. In this way they can be completely disabused of their unacceptable ideas, thoughts or philosophies.   This, my friends,  means nothing good for our rights.  Freedom of speech and association, the right to petition our government for redress of grievances, the right to freely travel and more will keep taking the hits under the guise of keeping us safe.

Congress has a 9% approval rating. 

Only Fidel Castro is more unpopular (at least by this chart) than Congress.  Don’t you think it is odd that in the face of this dismal fact they keep on plowing ahead with travesties like the NDAA?  Isn’t it weird that they keep forcing upon us laws that the majority of us are appalled at?  It’s not so weird really.  They can’t possibly hope to win us over with what they are doing.  I think they are banking on controlling us instead.  Mark my words.  Before long it will be a rare American that will be able to avoid the ugly side of Big Momma Gov. hell bent on rooting out thought criminals.

Happy Hunting Homeland Security and good luck in Oklahoma!  Even our cops will look like extremists to you.

 

Secretary Napolitano Meets with State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement on Countering Violent Extremism

Release Date: January 18, 2012

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano today joined Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan at the White House to meet with senior state, local and tribal law enforcement officials to discuss the Obama administration’s Strategic Implementation Plan for Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism in the United States—released in December—and engage them on the critical task of preventing violent extremism in their communities. Attendees included sheriffs and chiefs of police from across the country, including representatives from the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Major Cities Chiefs Association, National Sheriffs’ Association, National Native American Law Enforcement Association, Governors Homeland Security Advisors Council, and Criminal Intelligence Coordinating Council.

“Engaging local communities is critical to our nation’s effort to counter violent extremism and violent crime, and this meeting brings together many of our partners,” said Secretary Napolitano. “The Department of Homeland Security will continue to collaborate with our state and local law enforcement partners and engage the public in our efforts to combat violent extremism, while protecting civil rights and civil liberties.”

During the meeting, Secretary Napolitano underscored DHS’ efforts to support local communities by enhancing existing partnerships to focus on information-driven community-based solutions, building government and law enforcement expertise, supporting community oriented policing practices and expanding grant prioritization to counter violent extremism and violent crime regardless of ideology. In addition, DHS is continuing to implement recommendations from the DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council Countering Violent Extremism Working Group, such as developing a curriculum for state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement focused on a community-oriented policing approach to countering violent extremism and violent crime. DHS’ Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties also works to educate communities and state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement on cultural awareness across the nation.

Secretary Napolitano also reiterated President Obama’s call for Congress to take action to prevent layoffs of law enforcement and first responders, and keep our communities safe by passing legislation such as the American Jobs Act. The legislation would provide $5 billion in assistance to states and local communities to create or save thousands of law enforcement and first responder jobs across the country.

Over the past year, DHS has worked with the Department of Justice on the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI)—an administration effort to train state and local law enforcement to recognize behaviors and indicators related to terrorism, crime and other threats; standardize how those observations are documented and analyzed; and ensure the sharing of those reports with the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Forces for further investigation.

DHS has also collaborated with federal, state, local, and private sector partners, and the general public, to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign. Originally implemented by New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority and now licensed to DHS for a nationwide campaign, the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign is a simple and effective program to engage the public to identify and report indicators of terrorism, crime and other threats to the proper transportation and law enforcement authorities.

DHS will continue to expand the “If You See Something, Say Something™” campaign nationally to ensure America’s businesses, communities, and citizens remain vigilant and play an active role in keeping the country safe.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov/cve.