Arson Fight Hinges on 5 Key Areas
features
The arson crisis in America continues to grow. Deliberately set fires now kill approximately 1000 people, injure thousands of civilians and fire fighters and cause $2 to $3 billion in direct fire losses each year.
Indirect losses in such areas as tax revenues, productivity and medical expenses raise the total cost of arson to $10 to $15 billion annually. About 25 percent of the insurance premiums paid by the average citizen go to cover the cost of incendiary fires, which have tripled in the United States in the last 10 years.
Despite these grim statistics, the fire service until recently stood almost alone in its concern for the arson problem. However, within the past year, the spreading epidemic of intentional fires aroused public and legislative awareness and produced several concrete and important programs to deal with the problem.
One of the most significant actions was the reclassification by Congress in January 1979 of arson as a part I offense in the National Crime Reporting Program (NCR). This will provide extensive statistical data on arson throughout the nation, based on a uniform definition of the crime, which can be used to evaluate existing prevention and investigation policies and help in the development of programs. It will also help to focus continuing public attention upon the problem through the publicity given to the NCR in the national media.
LEAA making grants
Other initial steps have also been taken. The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) is making 12 to 15 grants to local governments to update their arson programs and will develop a training manual for investigators. The United States Fire Administration also will offer expanded training courses and technical assistance to police and fire departments. Finally, approximately 30 states have formed commissions or task forces composed of officials, police and fire personnel, and insurance representatives to study arson problems.
These measures have laid the foundation for a concerted, multilevel, interagency attack on the national arson problem. However, if they are to be a success, these new state and federal policies will require extensive and ongoing planning and coordination.
Rep. Joseph Addabbo (D-N.Y.), who is sponsoring anti-arson legislation in the House of Representatives, summed up this need as follows: “Without a coordinated effort to combat arson, without development of informational services that flow freely between agencies and jurisdictions, without advances in technical detection methods, and— mostly—without an adequate supply of funds…arson will continue to be profitable and nearly undetectable.”
Ultimately, the battle against arson will be won or lost at the local level of government in the United States. If these new policies are to succeed, therefore, the same emphasis on planning, cooperation and coordination must be adopted by the police and fire service personnel who are most directly involved in the problem.
Five key areas
Any comprehensive and broad-based local strategy to deal with arson must include an evaluation of the following key areas:
Organization: Improvement in arson control must begin with a review of fire department organization and operations concerned with arson-related problems. Although many departments have well developed bureaus and highly trained personnel, new state and federal legislation may necessitate changes in procedure. Fire marshals will have to keep abreast of these higher level programs and be willing to avail themselves of expanded training and research opportunities.
This is a particularly acute problem for many volunteer and combination fire departments already hard pressed by increasing service demands. Those departments that rely upon state police or county fire investigators will have to develop a much closer relationship with these officials. In suburban areas where the arson problem is particularly serious, volunteer fire companies may have to push for the addition of full-time personnel on a jurisdictional or regional basis in spite of the current emphasis on reducing expenditures.
Training: Even though it may not be their primary responsibility, every fire officer and fire fighter should receive at least elementary indoctrination and orientation in arson detection. Although they may not become experts, both paid and volunteer fire personnel can be taught to recognize suspicious circumstances and to preserve evidence in a possible arson fire. The information they supply on initial conditions could prove invaluable in subsequent investigations.
Cooperation necessary
Liaison: The reclassification of arson in the NCR will necessitate the intimate involvement of law enforcement personnel in arson cases. Therefore, the fire department must seek to develop a strong working relationship with the police department. Isolation or interdepartmental rivalry will only impede investigations.1 Police officials should be notified immediately of suspicious fires. Fire marshals and detectives should then continue to work as closely as possible throughout an investigation to ensure that the maximum technical expertise of both services can be applied to arson cases. Where possible, regular police officers should be taught, like fire fighters, the basics of arson detection.
The need for liaison also extends to other municipal departments, which can help in the arson fight. Contact should be established with local prosecutors and judges to exchange ideas and problems involved in incendiary fires. Building departments can be asked to keep records on vacant properties which may become the targets of arsonists.
Publicity: One of the most successful techniques for generating attention and concern for a social problem, such as arson, is the ability to arouse moral indignation on the part of a large segment of the general public.2 This can only be done by constantly presenting the human and financial costs of arson to the public.
Local fire departments must capitalize upon the publicity the national arson problem will receive by developing their own public awareness campaigns. This would include emphasizing the presence or suspicion of arson in specific fires, feature stories describing arson problems and policies generally, talking to various community groups and business organizations about arson, i.e., P.T.A., Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce, and developing a brochure for the public that contains tips on how to guard against deliberately set fires.
Diversity: Any program to combat arson at the local level will have to be tailored to both community problems and resources. Further, the many causes and factors contributing to the arson epidemic require a multidimensional approach. Therefore, planning must be flexible and coordinated, allowing for both experimentation and exchange of information of the success of various policies.3
A few examples will illustrate the diversity of arson programs. Recently, through cooperation with the newly created arson task force of the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the Treasury Department, arson investigators in Shelby, N.C., were able to obtain indictments against several individuals involved in an arson-forprofit fire which killed five persons, including four fire fighters. Phoenix and Dallas have established arson hot lines and a reward system in cooperation with local insurance officials to collect information and evidence in arson fires.
Seattle successfully used local sports figures in a public relations campaign aimed at potential juvenile arsonist. Los Angeles County has begun an ambitious program of detection and counseling for young children who deliberately set fires. All these programs demonstrate the imagination and variety that must be contained in arson control. All are good, but none alone will be sufficient.
Hope for future
In conclusion, the new wave of attention and policies concerning arson create a real possibility of dealing with the current crisis. For the first time, the resources and expertise of many governments and agencies can be focused on the problem. However, if this excellent beginning is to bring positive results, the fire service must actively implement arson programs and take advantage of higher level forms of aid.
Such a concerted attack on arson can also have indirect benefits for fire departments. It provides an opportunity to open lines of communication with the police and other city departments, which will help overcome traditional fire service isolation. Further, it also helps to demonstrate the productivity and problems of the fire department to local legislators in the face of demands for budget cuts or police and fire consolidation.
Finally, the fight against arson can be used to raise the general “fire consciousness” of the public, which can be helpful in selling the message of fire prevention.
- Kevin Krajick, “The Arson Epidemic: Who Should Investigate,” Police Magazine, vol. 2 no. 4 (July 1979), pp 5-6.
- Irving Tallman, “Passion, Action and Politics: A Perspective on Social Problems and Social Problem Solving,” San Francisco, W.H. Freeman Co., 1976, pp 127-128.
- Howard McCurdy, “Public Administration: A Synthesis,” Menlo Park, Calif., Cummings, 1977, chapt. 5.
