Transport Security Administration - Essay Example

English 13 March Transport Security Administration (TSA) Introduction The establishment of the Transport Security Administration agency can be traced back to the beginning of the 21st century after the terrorist attacks in United States. It is a division developed to secure the transport systems on land, air and water ways into the USA in effort to prevent any attacks from occurring in American soil again. The September attack of 2001 will always be a reminder to the American people, government and defense force of the need to be alert of any terrorism activities within its land. Whether it’s domestic or external terrorism, the defense team could not afford to watch the devastating effects of such criminals taking destructive actions on innocent people and the American economy once again. The 2001 attack executed through hijacked aircrafts by the terrorists left over three thousand people dead, and thousands more with serious injuries, besides the destruction of billions of property in the crime event. The chain of events in the various states targeted such as New York, Pennsylvania and Washington DC, led to rethinking of the federal security. Working closely to the DHS, TSA was formed and has been controlling people’s movement into and out of the United States; more so, it has committed itself in strengthening the transport system and securing commerce activities for American’s safety for the last 13 years, and hopefully into the future (TSA, tsa.gov). Though it’s quite inclined on the aviation security, there has been increasing attention on the highways, subways and other entry and exit terminals used in transportation. Thesis: The appropriateness of the security measures and their effectiveness in ensuring security are debatable since the TSA began operation. Though the transportation system attacks and crimes have declined, issues of prejudice with respect to appearance, race, culture and other factors by TSA officers enforcing security at entry and exit points in the United States have been raised. This does not go unnoticed and would affect the United States movement to impact on tourism and its foreign relations. Since 2001, the USA federal government has invested heavily in security measures by the TSA, which has enabled oversight of security through its officers on the ground, their activities and supportive equipment, and the machinery they use. It is worth to appreciate the TSA operations for its adaptation to the rising security threats. While terrorists seek alternative ways to execute their operations, TSA has fastened its measures through deployed technologies together with its personnel on various terminals, especially at the airports for search and screening operations, which continue to give positive results, despite TSA’s clash with the legal issues pertaining individuals rights. Passenger Screening at the Checkpoints It was the first security measure taken by the TSA when it took the responsibility of airport security. The agency officers were required to conduct screening on each passenger entering or leaving the USA through an airport. Previously, most passengers did not have to pass through screening and would probably be conducted on selective individuals on suspicious cases. It has become mandatory for every passenger to be screened at the checkpoint before being allowed to the departure gates at the airports. After the September 2001 attack, criminals’ tactics seemed to have changed and as passengers in the transportation system, they used their bodies and dressing to hide their destructive devices, so that they would obtain an easy pass to board the airplanes, trains and other public transit to conduct their attacks. The example of the famous shoe bomber (Richard Reid) who had managed to pass through the security at the airport into an airplane and attempted to ignite the explosive laden shoe though caught in time, proved the need for thorough passenger screening by the TSA (Gill 1). Shoe inspection was initiated at the commercial airports in the USA and was legally enforced after the mid last decade. Pat down procedures for TSA: It is the alternative for screening through image technologies and also supports the search of any detected anomalies by the screening. Preferring the part down option does not mean you are due for a lesser search; instead, TSO strives to conduct thorough and adequate search with the help of TSA’s professionals like psychologists and required medical professionals. Detected threats and suspicious cases have been confirmed at the airports through screening and pat down processes, and enabled to save the lives and health of thousands of people in the USA. Though the officers are well trained to conduct the pat down search, numerous complaints are forwarded to the TSA over excessive force and different kinds of assaults on individuals’ bodies. The method is criticized to be too invasive and unnecessary for young children and old people, who seem to pose no threat. Past terrorist activities have proven to target young children for their suicide missions, and following the Umar Farouk attempt of bomb attack hidden in the inner wear, the pat down of individuals even in sensitive areas where threats are suspected is justified (NBC, nbcnews.com). It is rather controversial for people to claim the inappropriateness of pat down checks because the past experience proves the need. Nowadays, I find it common for airport passenger screening and having taken several trips already, I had to remove my shoes and belt and placed them in the screening bin in reference to the screening regulations. Shoe bombs are a reality and the procedure for shoe inspections should not be ignored by the security officers, especially after another such incident was discovered in Kenya; passenger screening of the outfits and shoes proved to prevent many attacks that would have probably occurred out of ignorance. Domestic and international criminals who use the transit system to smuggle harmful products and services into the United States have been the majority apprehended, as the chances for explosive devices and other attacks are prevented in the USA. Observational technique of screening: The criminal detection scheme used by the TSA focuses on passenger behavior by observing them at a distance. SPOT program enables TSA to collect information of observed behavior of individuals; it is first entered into the SPOT database and ensures that individuals indicating suspicious behaviors can be spotted and referred for additional screening or LEO interventions (DHS 2). A variety of collected information in the database is shared across the various transport security agencies for reasons associated to monitoring suspects and enforcement of law against crime. The program would spot anyone expressing deceptive behavior irrespective of their race and consider thorough search. It is much better than random selection of people which may conflict civil rights. SPOT program has produced effective results though highly criticized of it efficiency upon deployment. In 2007, TSA behavior detection officers spotted Mr. Kevin Brown, who exhibited strange behaviors before his flight at Orlando International Airport; the search conducted on him and his luggage confirmed existence of incendiary devices and bomb making materials (Maccario 152). Besides detection of terrorist related behavior, criminal activities like drugs smuggling and illegal weapons have been successfully detected. The program is not old enough since its operation to judge its effectiveness in countering terrorism, but considering a similar successful program used in the UK, the US government has to be patient to realize its effectiveness. Watch list matching: The screening method uses the shared terrorism related information and database to match individuals across the border, with the suspected criminals on the watch list that pose a security threat to the nation. It has helped optimize searches of terrorists from different nations and their possible threats. From to time to time, the watch list is updated to expand the records and information of criminals and suspected individuals linked to terrorist attacks. Watch lists have successful prevented entry of criminals into the USA by conducting background checks on suspects and majority of them are arrested or denied boarding pass at the airports. With the list of names on government terrorist programs, even older cases of suspects left pending for their threats to the American society are retrieved and acted upon. For example, in the arrest of Howard Cotterman at the Border station in Arizona, TSA background check on the watch list identified the suspect based on his previous child molestation cases and with thorough forensic search of his electronic devices, much collection of pornographic materials (Civil btlj.org). Regardless of the privacy allegation involved in the case, the program was a success in identifying the suspect. The North West flight 253 incident allowed the government to improve the watch list nomination process, which has resulted to more suspected individuals with reasonable cause in the NO FLY LIST and maintained secure flights. Advanced imaging technology: The recent technology depends on scanners that inspect full bodies of the passengers to establish threats hidden under passengers’ clothes. AIT screening looks for metallic and non-metallic weapons and explosives using either x ray backscatter or millimeter wave systems, which deliver the whole body image to detect any anomalies (“Milimeter,” 1). The technique is fast and uses image anonymity for privacy measures. Despite the critics to interfere with individual’s privacy, it is challenged for its health risk and the majorities surveyed in the society prefer it over other alternatives. The screen type if not mandatory and anyone objecting it can use the pat down methods. TSA claims that the procedure uses low intensity radio waves incapable of risking passengers’ health, but considering many people use airways transport often and there are those that already have certain health conditions, its suitability becomes questionable. However, critics directed to TSA sincerity are never absent; one time when queuing for my pat down screen, I heard a senior lady behind me arguing with the officer over AIT. She had been diagnosed with throat cancer and held two young grandsons. She feared the low radiation on their bodies would deteriorate their health. She finally had to go with my option though still complained of the officer’s invasive and excessive search that showed no seniors’ respect. Cargo screening: Passengers’ luggage had in the past been used to smuggle weapons across states and designate explosives in the transit systems. TSA implemented baggage screening by “positive bag matching to the passenger boarding the flight, and second using the dog sniffing, manual search of bags, EDS and ETD machines to screen checked baggage for explosives” (Blalock et al. 6-7). The strategies employed are thorough in detecting different types of explosives and illegal substances to ensure airlines’ cargo and passenger baggage is safe for flight. Cargo and baggage screening has been less criticized in terms of effectiveness, probably because it has yielded better results as the screening officers commit themselves to searching a possible single bomb device in thousands of bags passing by an airport. Pinsker confirms how searching for a ticking object could not be ignored after the X Ray machine singled out the suitcase, only to realize later that it was an electric toothbrush that turned on and off depending on the positioning (wired.com). There are numerous cases of established contrabands in cargos and passengers baggage, whose trafficking links are halted. However, cases of criminal connections to TSA officers highly discredit the organizations proliferation of smugglings and other threats. Screening technologies are working, but the officers enforcing the law are oppressing the efforts. If an officer is willing to conceal information of containers containing drugs or for their hiding on the planes for a lump sum payment, would it not be easy for them to assist bombers in the future? Prejudice by the TSA There is a growing concern over the overwhelming minority group of people referred for additional screening. The majority consist of the black, Hispanic and Arab people, whom are more likely to be stopped at the borders and airports checkpoints. The Muslim people seem to be targeted highly not only in the USA, but in other countries, for their engagement in terrorist crimes. For example, Amardeep Singh (Sikh member) and his family shares a similar agony of what Muslims, especially those of Arab origin, experience due to TSA’s biased profile; Singh and his 18 months old son were subjected to extra screening At Fort Lauderdale Airport and this questions TSA selection and profile for higher scrutiny of people based on religion and appearance (“The Reality,” civilrights.org). TSA has a responsibility for full search of passengers from head to toe and their baggage, regardless of one’s religion or culture. People whose cultures or religions require them to cover their heads are no exception to screening, but that should not imply their call for additional search. SPOT program effectiveness places the government in a tough position to defend its objective screening. Since behavioral detective officers have full view of the individuals through the cameras, chances of racial profiling are maximized. Though officers are trained to spot suspicious behavior from the passengers, when personal attitudes are factored in, distinguished people are kept under close watch even where it’s unnecessary. Some behavior detection officers in Honolulu International Airport raised suspicion on the objectivity and effectiveness of the program, when a report was forwarded to the TSA administrator exposing them to have routinely singled out Mexican passengers for further document screening, even without exhibiting suspicious behavior (“TSA facing,” homelandsecuritynewswire.com). It is also common for individuals moving into Florida where African- Americans and Latinos, especially the youths become the major target for search and even arrests in extreme cases. Similarly, many people have ended up in the government watch list even for activities that do not seem to relate to terrorism. Some decent activists of various unions, religions, societies and peace movements in verified areas and regions in and out of the USA cannot use the commercial airports because their names are traced back to the TSA’s no fly list. Majority of the profiled terrorist and suspects are from Arabic nations like Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Mexico, Nigeria and Somalia among others, with well documented histories of terrorism and other crimes. However, some cases where people of Arabic or Islamic origin tend to express themselves in writing either consciously or unconsciously can be a factor to their racial profiling and subject to obstruction of their rights. Raed Jarral, a legal immigrant from Iraq was subjected to discrimination by TSA officials based on his ethnicity and Arabic writing on his T- Shirts, where he was required to cover the writings before entering the plane (Ahlers, cnn.com). Other than the above discriminative allegations, other complaints over TSA’s interference with individuals’ privacy while conducting the screening are the majority among citizens. Some of the people who have undergone vigorous pat down screening describe it as a psychologically disturbing assault, when their private parts are touched to inspect materials hidden beneath the clothing. The Effects of possible Racism on US Foreign Relations and Tourism in the US The intensity of the screening methods and technologies has some profound effects on people’s movement into, out off, and within the USA. Most people do not have to go through deep screening as that required in the USA. While the American citizens can deal with their own nation policies, some tourists unaware of such regulations could feel reaped of their privacy and rights. People have varying sizes of body parts and so would their physiology be. People from highly profiled nations on relations with terrorism risk being spotted and perhaps required to undergo additional screening for assurance. Racial profiling and discrimination seem to be the disguised order of the day in TSA checkpoints through subjective methods of screening like SPOT. It makes an indirect effect on USA’s tourism industry through the reduced demand for air travel. According to Blalock et al. (8), air travels became less convenient as the security measures increased, forcing people to arrive to the airports a few hours earlier for the search. Tourists are not only external but include domestic citizens, meaning that when screening entails racial biases, people from targeted communities would lower their movement for fear of their rights violations. The USA has actively collaborated with other governments in countering terrorism and other heinous crimes. Other than governments, other legal institutions like religious and international organizations ensure open communication and expression of occurrences, to avoid straining their foreign relations with one another. The courts have also been active in determining the legitimacy of the TSA measures to enforce criminal law in the country. Otherwise without such strategies, racism can strain foreign relations between countries. So far, countries have maintained their relations in effort to end terror and crimes domestically and internationally. Appendix DHS – Department of Homeland Security SPOT – Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques TSO – Transportation Security Officer AIT – Advanced Imaging Technology LEO – Law Enforcement Officer EDS –Explosive detection system ETD – Explosive Trace detection systems Works Cited Ahlers, M. M. “JetBlue, TSA Employees Settle Arabic T-shirt Case for $240,000.”Cnn.com. 7 January 2009. Web. 14 March 2014. Blalock, G., Kadiyali, V. and Simon, D. H. “The Impact of Post-9/11 Airport Security Measures on the Demand for Air Travel.” Cornell.edu. 30 April 2007. Web. 14 March 2014. . Civil, C. “U.S. v. Cotterman: Ninth Circuit Holds Reasonable Suspicion Required for Forensic Laptop Search at the Border.” Btlj.org. 20 March, 2013. Web. 14 March 2014. DHS. “Privacy Impact Assessment for the Screening of Passengers by Observation Techniques (SPOT) Program.” dhs.gov. 5 August 2008. Web. 14 March 2014. Gills, R. “Shoe Bombs.” Gstpa.com. n.d. Web. 13 March 2014. Maccario, C. J. “Aviation Security and Non Verbal Behavior.” sagepub.com. n.d. Web. 14 March 2014. “Milimeter Wave Advanced Imaging Technology.” flynashville.com. n.d. Web. 14 March 2014. NBC. “TSA Changes Pat Down Procedures for Young Kids.” Nbcnews.com. 23 June 2011. Web. 13 March 2014. Pinsker, B. “Confession of a Baggage Screener.” n.d. Web. 14 March 2014. The Reality of Racial Profillling,” civilrights.org. n.d. Web. 14 March 2014. TSA. “9/11 and TSA.” tsa.gov. 10 February 2014. Web. 13 March 2014. “TSA Facing Renewed Criticism over Racial Profiling,” homelandsecuritynewswire.com. 30 November 2011. Web. 14 March 2014. Read More