The idea of fusion is predicated on the reality that many public data items are fragmented across 100’s or 1000’s of public information systems. To piece together “crime” activities and “hazard” activities into a common view in order to recognize larger patterns and threats is necessary due to a failing of integration between these disparate systems. These bits and pieces of public data can be very informative about patterns of criminal behavior that could also be, potentially, part and parcel of terrorist activity.

Bear in mind, that police reports on “crimes” and “hazards” are collected (indeed have always been collected) by the requirements of law and public accountability. Most states have public information laws that REQUIRE police to document their activities, especially if it involves contact with a citizen.

LE have always shared this information, on an “as needed” basis – - but “need to know” and “need to know who knows” are two different issues. Fusion centers, in part, seek to solve these gaps in information sharing.

This need does not (or should not), however, circumvent the need for policy and procedure on the operation of these systems, adequate security and privacy controls for users and controls on these systems, and a process (transparent) that allows for auditing and the redress of inaccurate data, records or dissemination of said data.

All said, the balancing act needs to be applied, and clearly these systems have not always followed the aforementioned “best practices”…and by means of said obfuscation they will only attract fear and criticism from the public at-large.

The paranoia, on the other hand, that these centers are for collecting information on citizens is dubious – - ChoicePoint, Lexus-Nexus and others have already taken control of this country’s citizens privacy and wrapped it in a stranglehold of commerce and finance. Where there is a bottom-line for profit, it will always exceed the greed and zeal of the public sector.