Security versus privacy - Essay Example

Uyen Ton 14 May Airplane Security versus Human Privacy Since the devastating terrorist attacks in America on September 11, 2001, the American government and Department of Homeland Security have done everything in their power to assure that citizens and government officials alike do not experience a similar catastrophe as the one on that ill-fated September morning. Due to other attempted attacks, such as the bombing that was averted on Christmas Day on an airplane over Detroit, Michigan, the Department of Homeland Security has increased security measures in airports throughout the world.

Unfortunately, many of these measures have become controversial, because many people are claiming that the TSA agents cross the boundaries of personal privacy. Though numerous people may not be thrilled with the thorough patdowns or the detailed full-body scanners, they exist to ensure safety by making sure terrorists cannot enter an airplane with weapon or explosives, and should therefore be embraced, not rejected. The thorough patdowns and the full-body scanners may be revealing and invading on the privacy of airline passengers, but their purpose is to guarantee that dangerous materials and equally dangerous people do not make it onto airplanes.

In the attacks on September 11, the suicide bombers found no difficulty in getting on the airplanes fully armed with a variety of weapons, and going through security without being detected. Since then, the goal has been to disable others from getting away with the same thing. This is where the patdowns and body scanners come in to play. After airplane passengers go through the basic metal detector, if there is any further concern, such as the metal detector sensing something stronger than jewelry or coins, they are given the option of receiving the patdown or going through the additional scanner.

If they do not want to receive the patdown or the full body scanner, they will not be allowed onto the airplane. If these measures are implemented, more potential threats can be found and avoided. Passengers are able to benefit from these precautions because they will not only feel safer knowing that others are being pat down, but be safer as well. A temporary breach in privacy is a small price to pay for guaranteed safety not only to those in the airport or on an airplane, but to everyone else in the sky on other airplanes or other such aircraft and on the ground.

While these security measures might be tedious, time-consuming, and as speculated by Jeffrey Rosen in “Nude Awakening: The Dangerous Naked Machines”, be considered to invade on the privacy of individuals (Rosen 1), these are not the purposes that they serve. People have every right to be concerned when a stranger has their hands around their private regions, but these agents are specially trained in how they search passengers. The time it takes to check and make sure that every person is safe when they travel is done out of concern for the well-being of every citizen.

These measures were designed for the sole purpose of making sure that people are safe. Though invading privacy is an issue of concern since it goes against the rights of human beings, the need for safety from enemies and terrorists who are willing to kill anybody is an even bigger matter that needs the most attention as the lives of people are put at risk. It is unfortunate that we have entered a time in America’s history where we cannot trust people who simply want to travel or visit relatives in distant places.

Children and the elderly, though seeming innocent upon presentation, are just as liable to house an explosive or a weapon as a terrorist. As noted by Mohammad Khan in “Racial Profiling Ineffective”, detailed scanning and searching of individuals used to be based on racial profiling with TSA focusing on people who, simply by looking at one’s skin color, could be marked as potential threats (Khan 1). This poses an issue as TSA turns to racism to determine if someone may or may not be a terrorist.

This method is as faulty as simply assuming that children or elderly people are exempt from being involved in a terrorist attack. Instead of focusing on everybody as being potential terrorists, TSA agents used to automatically assume who is or is not capable of being involved in a terrorist plot. Nowadays, patdowns and full-body scans need to be used as often as possible because threats have been known to come in all religions, ethnicities, genders, and ages. Threats must be met and taken care of before innocent bystanders find themselves victims to devious plans.

The patdowns and body scanners are necessary since anybody can be a threat, and just assuming that someone is safe based on gender or skin color is not a guaranteed way to ensure the safety of others. Another great counterargument surrounding the controversial security measures is that the measures being used are not helping to keep people safe. Young children and infants are being thoroughly patted down, but dangerous criminals are still being let onto airplanes with weapons without any trouble, such as the terrorist who attempted the Christmas Day bombing, which Schultz points out in “New Airport Policy: Grin and Bare It (Shultz 1)”.

Due to this, many people feel that their privacy is being compromised without any benefits in regard to safety. Since the thorough patdowns and full-body screenings are often implemented when there is heightened concern about an individual, such as if someone were to set off the basic metal detector or the bomb detector, people are appalled when infants are sent to an agent to receive a full-body patdown. The people who should be getting the most attention, such as those that have criminal backgrounds, are the ones who walk through the airport with ease.

The methods being implemented have been helping to keep people safe, as even infants and elderly people have been found to be harboring bombs and weapons on their person. In the case of infants, many terrorists believe that children, as innocent as they are, would never be accused of being a tool or weapon in a terrorist plot. Because of this, it has to be assumed that, for everyone’s safety, anybody can pose a threat. It is true that people with criminal backgrounds should have more attention put on them since they already have a past of larger, dangerous and illegal actions, but if a TSA agent has reason to believe that a child might have a bomb strapped to them, it is in the best interest of everyone for that child to be searched.

As long as threats exist to our nation, there will need to be methods to avoid them. Balancing aggressive security measures and the need to respect privacy might be easier said than done, but if people learned to cooperate and understand that these measures are being done for their safety, the system can run more smoothly. If people do not like the measures being taken at airports, they can find another method of travel, such as by train or cruise ship, or be more prepared for when they go to the airport by not giving the TSA agents any reason to be suspicious of them, so that they are not stopped with the assumption of carrying weapons.

To make the security check go more smoothly, the passengers should make sure that all forms of metal, such as jewelry or coins, are removed from their person before going through the metal detector. The attack during September 11 left America a more cautious, prepared nation, and it would be in the best interest of everyone if they allowed America to grow back into the secure nation that it once was. A temporary sacrifice of privacy must be made to achieve this, but it will be worth it in the long run.

Works Cited Khan, Mohammad. "Racial Profiling Ineffective." The Daily Evergreen Online. N.p., 14 Jan. 2010. Web. 13 May 2011. . Rosen, Jeffrey. "Nude Awakening: The Dangerous Naked Machines." The New Republic. N.p., 29 Jan. 2010. Web. 13 May 2011. . Schultz, Connie. "New Airport Policy: Grin and Bare It." Creators Syndicate. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2011. .