Although made for TV, I’m a huge fan of the “FBI” series where Jubal Valentine’s Intelligence Unit demonstrates the ideal—setting egos aside with an “other-oriented mentality” that enables seamless collaboration across agencies. They maintain “need to know” protocols without letting them interfere with forward progress in solving violent crimes. The series routinely showcases ATF and its NIBIN system in action, demonstrating how these tools function when integrated properly with shared intelligence and open communication lines. This collaborative approach should be law enforcement’s real-world narrative for gaining the upper hand in mitigating and solving violent crime.
So back to the title of your article, “If Predators …..”, then why shouldn’t law enforcement agencies!
Pete, your call for vendor collaboration highlights a fundamental challenge in law enforcement: balancing information security with the collaborative sharing that’s paramount for preventing violent crime.
While “need to know” principles serve important purposes, overly restrictive silos can hinder effectiveness when criminal enterprises operate across jurisdictions. The breakthrough comes when we recognize that sharing actionable intelligence—the metadata connecting crimes, weapons, and suspects—is fundamentally different from compromising operational security.
What investigators need is “what connects to what and who connects to what,” not access to sensitive operational details. Your emphasis on leadership to drive change is crucial. The technology exists; we need authority and credibility to move from discussion to action.
If we truly wish to prevent violent crime by identifying those responsible, then sharing critical intelligence must be paramount. The alternative—preventable violence while our systems can’t communicate—is unacceptable.
Again Eric thanks for taking the time to expand on the key points of the article. I hope readers read your comments as they add value and new perspective.
I extend my sincere gratitude to you Pete, Ray, and George for your insightful and thought-provoking articles. Your work provides valuable insight and motivation, challenging readers to think critically and find solutions to life's challenges, particularly those related to violent crime which remains extremely important to me. Thank you!
Thanks Eric! Comments like yours not only make all this worthwhile, but they also expand upon and clarify the key points we try to convey. I can tell that you have a passion for some of the topics we cover here at the RF Factor. I know that we would be honored to publish an article you submit as a guest writer on an RF Factor-related topic you feel strongly about.
I just might take you up on that Pete. I have something in the works and would welcome the opportunity to share it with you and the RF-Factor for consideration. Thank you!
Although made for TV, I’m a huge fan of the “FBI” series where Jubal Valentine’s Intelligence Unit demonstrates the ideal—setting egos aside with an “other-oriented mentality” that enables seamless collaboration across agencies. They maintain “need to know” protocols without letting them interfere with forward progress in solving violent crimes. The series routinely showcases ATF and its NIBIN system in action, demonstrating how these tools function when integrated properly with shared intelligence and open communication lines. This collaborative approach should be law enforcement’s real-world narrative for gaining the upper hand in mitigating and solving violent crime.
So back to the title of your article, “If Predators …..”, then why shouldn’t law enforcement agencies!
Point very well taken Sir!
Pete, your call for vendor collaboration highlights a fundamental challenge in law enforcement: balancing information security with the collaborative sharing that’s paramount for preventing violent crime.
While “need to know” principles serve important purposes, overly restrictive silos can hinder effectiveness when criminal enterprises operate across jurisdictions. The breakthrough comes when we recognize that sharing actionable intelligence—the metadata connecting crimes, weapons, and suspects—is fundamentally different from compromising operational security.
What investigators need is “what connects to what and who connects to what,” not access to sensitive operational details. Your emphasis on leadership to drive change is crucial. The technology exists; we need authority and credibility to move from discussion to action.
If we truly wish to prevent violent crime by identifying those responsible, then sharing critical intelligence must be paramount. The alternative—preventable violence while our systems can’t communicate—is unacceptable.
Again Eric thanks for taking the time to expand on the key points of the article. I hope readers read your comments as they add value and new perspective.
I extend my sincere gratitude to you Pete, Ray, and George for your insightful and thought-provoking articles. Your work provides valuable insight and motivation, challenging readers to think critically and find solutions to life's challenges, particularly those related to violent crime which remains extremely important to me. Thank you!
Thanks Eric! Comments like yours not only make all this worthwhile, but they also expand upon and clarify the key points we try to convey. I can tell that you have a passion for some of the topics we cover here at the RF Factor. I know that we would be honored to publish an article you submit as a guest writer on an RF Factor-related topic you feel strongly about.
I just might take you up on that Pete. I have something in the works and would welcome the opportunity to share it with you and the RF-Factor for consideration. Thank you!
Eric
Please do! Its a win-win-win for all
Please do - its a win-win-win for all
Awesome! I’d like to submit to you for review. If you find it relevant, then by all means share. Thanks again!