Global Security and Intelligence Studies
enforcement agencies as more likely to discover , investigate , and prosecute these individuals . As mentioned previously , terrorist activity is more likely to be dangerous to a local populace and result in death , so higher penalties should be warranted . States should develop and pass legislation which addresses these individual terrorists , so they move beyond merely charging and prosecuting individual terrorists with lesser crimes such as weapons possession or attempting to use explosive devices . States must move beyond relying on federal prosecution as the number of terrorist attacks conducted by unaffiliated individuals continues to grow .
Reduce Current Legal Ambiguity
As clearly demonstrated by the above discussion , current laws and policy
have neglected the growing threat of lone wolf terrorism . It seems that legislatures at the federal and state level have failed to address the reality that unaffiliated individuals are conducting an increasing number of terrorist attacks . Laws need to be updated to ensure that the legal system moves beyond charging perpetrators with simplistic crimes such as bombings or murder when terrorism seeks to impact as wide as an audience as possible .
One possible solution would be to consider more substantial penalties for individuals who plan or conduct terrorist attacks alone . While this might seem counter-intuitive at first , there is a strong possibility that this approach could lead to more prosecutions of those terrorists affiliated with groups . If the deterrent effect of criminal penalties can be assumed to be effective , it is possible that some with a propensity toward terrorism might pursue groups when conducting terrorist activities to ensure a lesser penalty if ultimately caught . From an investigative standpoint , it has been well established that lone wolf terrorists are difficult to investigate for the simple fact that they are working alone ( Phillips 2011 ). If stronger penalties could drive these types of individuals to work in terrorist organizations , then it is more likely that these individuals would be found out by law enforcement agencies or penetrated by informants leading to higher incidents of disruption and arrest . More research would undoubtedly be required to evaluate this approach , but this type of unique thinking is required when considering laws addressing lone wolf terrorists .
Move Toward Consistency
Executive Branch agencies inconsistently apply the existing laws addressing
lone wolf terrorism , in large part due to the inconsistency in the laws themselves . Agencies like the FBI and DHS , neither which define “ lone wolf terrorism ,” cannot create overarching policies helping them work together toward addressing lone wolf terrorism . While some agencies like the FBI do develop terms such as HVEs , which closely parallels the definition of lone wolf terrorism , the fact
18