I think that law enforcement is better suited to share intelligence now. There was the awful reminder of the intelligence failure of 9/11 and the intelligence reforms post 9/11. Sims suggests that "one of the US government’s worst intelligence failures during this tragedy was the lack of adequate data fusion and analysis" (2007, p.39). One development resulting from this has been the implementation of local fusion centers to aid LE in "collecting and disseminating data" (Fickes, 2008, para. 10).
Thanks for the Best cite, that looks like a good read!
http://newsbusters.org. (2014, December 6). Harris-Perry on 'Burn This B---- Down': Arson, Looting 'Not Necessarily Violence'. News Busters. Retrieved February 12, 2015 from http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2014/12/06/harris-perry-burn-b-ch-down-arson-looting-not-necessarily-violence
(LIC = "Low Intensity Conflict" CAS = "Close Air Support")
"in LIC, having dependable CAS assets allows ground forces to operate with reduced indigenous firepower since they rely on airpower to supply fires previously provided by Army artillery" (Haun, 2006, para. 7).
There is some debate within the Air Force about the appropriate kinds of planes to use for CAS ( the Marines and Army love it when an A-10 Warthog flies in support, but flying Warthogs can be a dead end as far as a pilot's career path), or whether CAS is a priority at all. Ireton makes the argument that the Air Force "must make the support of US ground forces its tactical thrust by ensuring availability of the effects of combined arms" (2008, para 1).
Haun, P. (2006, Fall). The nature of Close Air Support in Low Intensity Conflict. Air & Space Power Journal. Retrieved February 15, 2015 from