Although target hardening is considered a "tried and tested" means of crime prevention by Criminologists, who have seen it used to tackle crimes including household burglary and shoplifting in the past; is there a chance that by expanding the perimeter of protected targets, we are simultaneously exposing more people to the threat? Will terrorist organisations simply shrug their shoulders and walk away from terrorism as a means of achieving their aims? Or, is the more likely outcome that potential terrorists will seek ways to adapt, bringing about attacks which are infinitely more deadly, or targeting the very cyber infrastructure on which our nation is built? This article will argue that although target hardening is generally deemed to have been successful in preventing attacks on high profile locations such as airports, this is merely the calm before the storm: terrorist organisations will find new ways to disrupt, damage, and wreak havoc. Staying abreast of new and emerging research on target selection will be pivotal to ensuring our preparedness for what is to come, and we would be foolish to think that by banishing terrorism from high-profile locations, we will not, effectively, bring it closer to home.
I should probably start by saying that this is a blog about babies. For those of you who feel queasy at the sight of the millions of photos of other people's children on social media sites, now is probably the time to locate the small ‘x’ in the corner of this page. However, if, like me, you find this world of sleepless nights, gripe water, pampers, and breast pads rather fascinating: please, read on.