Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Significant tragedies, such as 9/11, usually prompt authorities to enact legislation that will avoid similar incidents in the future, thereby taking reactive measures. Simultaneously, the reverse approach is possible – taking proactive steps to prevent disasters. From my perspective, decisions after September 11 are purely reactive and aimed at preventing similar tragedies. For example, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 was passed to reduce the US vulnerability to terrorist activity (Fagel, 2013). Despite its importance, it appeared only after the tragedy, although counter-terrorism measures have been developed for quite a long time. A similar situation was observed with Hurricane Katrina, in the context of which steps were taken only after the disaster (Fagel, 2013). The Homeland Security Act and the post-Katrina National Response Framework are prime examples of reactive policies.
This trend, from my perspective, continues to this day. Recently, the situation with terrorism inside the country has improved significantly. As a result, it was difficult to find any acts or laws related to this problem. The act adopted in 2018 only refined the earlier anti-terrorism measures. Moreover, in its context, residents’ rights are considered in the framework of interaction with international terrorism – the type of activity that is more relevant to the United States (“Anti-terrorism clarification act,” 2018). Therefore, the current policies are a response to existing problems, and as the problem inside the country has become smaller, the reaction has also decreased. A reduced response can also be judged by public opinion polls, according to which most companies do not adequately implement emergency plans (Hardy et al., 2009). Therefore, the tendency towards reactive rather than proactive activity can be noted at various levels.
It seems to me that the technological changes the world has undergone in the twenty years since 9/11 may impact this. Currently, most people are constantly in the information field, receiving information about various international threats. On the one hand, such connectivity allows for a more flexible response to emerging dangers. However, constant interaction with such information makes the problems less acute. It occurs both in the general population and at the administrative level, as exemplified by the belated response to the COVID-19 pandemic (Reese & Stienstra, 2021). Despite the ability to use various means to deal with the crisis quickly, the United States faced many problems and barriers. Consequently, technological advances have certainly changed the perception of threats since 9/11, but not for the better.
References
Anti-terrorism clarification act of 2018, S.2946. (2018). Web.
Fagel, M. J. (2013). Crisis management and emergency planning: Preparing for today’s challenges. CRC Press.
Hardy, V., Roper, K. O., & Kennedy, S. (2009). Emergency preparedness and disaster recovery in the US post 9/11. Journal of Facilities Management, 7(3), 212-223. Web.
Reese, S., & Stienstra, L. R. (2021). National preparedness: A summary and select issues. Congressional Research Service. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.