The Pros And Cons Of Airport Security Methods

Another measure TSA took was to add body scanners to security. These scanners can see what a person is carrying underneath their clothes. There have been a few different designs to this machine due to some lawsuits in the past brought up because the TSA agents were making fun of a man’s gentile size or certain passengers would feel embarrassed because someone can see their bodies. Now what the TSA agent sees is an outline of the passenger’s body and whatever is on the body. The body scanner does not show a naked person anymore.

The Travel security agency, or the TSA, is an important agency whose job it is to protect our nation in airports and borders. Impressively, the Agency has stopped many weapons, and saved our citizens numerous times. According to several experts however, the TSA has never stopped a terrorist plot. Their methods have been questioned too. As our nation grows deeper and deeper in debt, the TSA is a huge cost that may need to be cut. In order to gain a clear understanding of the TSA, its successes, issues, and cost must be evaluated critically.

After the devastating terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11th, TSA (Transportation Security Administration) was created and have since then beefed up their security. Because of all the new security devices and rules taking place now, the wait time at in the security line is longer, but for a good reason. On an average day, TSA screens 1.1 million bags. Of those 1.1 million bags, around 50,000 of them have to be checked thoroughly due to suspicious items inside the bags. The wait time at airport security lines has increased because of new threats. Because of an increase in the wait time at the security line, some people find it very frustrating and think that all the precautions are unnecessary. Those people are wrong though. In the past years since TSA was created, multiple bomber attacks have been attempted but have yet to succeed due to TSA keeping up with its safety requirements. In 2010, TSA started to use full body scanners. Some people are uncomfortable with the idea that when going through the body scanners, they are almost viewed completely naked and worry that those photos will be leaked. In Emily Holbrook’s article, Airport Security: privacy vs. safety, she makes an interesting pint when it comes to body scanners by quoting Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who said, ‘” you don’t need to look at my wife and 8-year-old daughter naked in order to secure that airplane”’ (quoted in QTD. Holbrook 14). This is an issue that has been brought to many people when going

Debate continues over interpretation of fourth amendment rights as applied to the Transportations Security Administration’s (TSA) use of full body scanners. In the opinion article appearing in the Washington Post, Rosen clearly defines the arguments against full body or naked scanners attempting to sway public opinion and thus, swaying a potential supreme court decision regarding its use as a violation of the Fourth Amendment (2010). Not only does this article point out the level of invasiveness and the ineffectiveness of naked scanners but, also provides less intrusive methods that could be used in its place.

Searching every person attempting to board a flight is easy compared to securing a huge land border. While national security is taken seriously concerning border crossings, it is also a contentious political subject. Politicians and business leaders have a large stake in keeping the border as open as possible and (I suppose) must balance this need with also defending the nation and meeting immigration laws. It is a mess that is made all the more difficult by the fourth amendment rights afforded every person from unreasonable search and seizure. The report “Protecting Our Perimeter: “Border Searches” under the Fourth Amendment” highlights the difficulties placed on border agents when it concerns searching people at or around the border. This coupled with the impossibility of searching 100% of all people entering or leaving the country by land, truly endangers national security as a whole. Where the fourth amendment is concerned, I feel the last sentence in the report really sums up the difficulty:

I believe that the pat-downs and full-body scans at the United States airports are too much. Many people oppose it and it is receiving negative reception. (Stellin) There is an issue of privacy when it comes to pat-downs and full-body scans. People do not want their body to be groped or scanned in a way which shows nude images of them. Another thing about this new security practice by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is that it is time consuming, so travelers have to go through the unpleasant chore of having to go through security longer. I believe that the Transportation Security Administration is violating traveler’s privacy and their solution in making the airways safe is too excessive. I looked at many articles, videos,

Each year, millions of American travel by airplane. However, only a minority of the population are forced to check their rights when they check their luggage. As fundamental that citizens should be able to reach their destination with their privacy and other civil liberties intact, it is becoming increasingly harder. Being asked to remove your shoes and walk through a metal detector is nothing compared to what women — and some men — with natural hair have been forced to endure.

In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,

Privacy issues often become a heated debate in a country like the United States of America, which was founded on the basic principle of freedom. Passengers are outraged that officials are viewing nude images of their bodies. They are rebelling against intrusive pat-downs and demanding better solutions. The TSA takes all of these concerns under consideration and has made admirable efforts to ensure privacy, as well as to clarify points used in arguments against the new screenings.

Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, body scans and security checkpoints have become the norm for airports throughout America. Airports tell you what you’re allowed to have and they restrict small things such as scissors, pocket knives, too much

Shortly after 9/11 twelve years ago, the federal government created the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to protect air travel and prevent similar attacks. In 2012, the TSA had a budget of $8.1 billion, and while it claims to improve airport security, it fails to do so. Additionally, their checkpoints are privacy-invasive and cumbersome, negatively impacting the air travel industry. For these reasons, the agency should be abolished.

This article analyzes findings which state that the United States airport security measures promotes unreasonable searches and seizures, and violates the privacy of passengers, which is covered under The Fourth Amendment. The author also mentioned two major concerns travelers have with full-body screening processes. First being that their privacy is hindered, and secondly, their health is at risk. Travelers have encountered unethical actions of airport officials, who assured them that their belonging would be kept safe, only to learn that their personal items such as photos are on the worldwide web. A Florida Federal courthouse, prohibits the storing of full-body screening images after a United States Marshall, Gizmodo, saved 35,000 images

Are the civil liberties of the citizens of the United States sacrificed during the airport security checks with the use of body scanners for the sake of national security? This week thousands of Americans will board airplanes to head to their Thanksgiving destinations, and they will need to undergo several security checks in order to advance to their flight. Since September 11, 2001, the vulnerability and fear arose in the United States citizens about the security tactics in place to protect our nation. One area of concern was the airport security measures that allowed al-Qaeda and their associates to take control of United State’s airplanes to carry out their plan of attack. The fear of another terrorist attack taking place on the airplanes resulted in extraordinary security tactics immediately emerging to protect the citizens. Further instances of other threats required more advanced security equipment to be installed, such as the body scanners. Statistics revealed there were an estimated 793 scanners (full body scanners) in use in March 2016 in more than 157 airports in the United States (Jansen). All of these security measures have taken place with the expense of sacrificing civil liberties. Although, the body scanners were developed to protect the people, the civil liberties of the United States citizens are sacrificed for the sake of national security through invasion of privacy, inefficiencies, misuse, and expense.

Many citizens find this wrong because it violates an individual’s freedom; however, what is the difference between this and airport security? In both circumstances an individual’s personal space and possession is being obstructed by the government. Both of these security technique are put in effect for citizens’ safety. People find that looking into personal information is a disturbance of privacy, but they find that airport security is different.

Airport security is necessary for the safety and efficiency of airlines today. Attacks involving airlines have been “among the deadliest in terms of human lives and economic impact,” even though relatively few attacks have occurred using airlines compared to other terrorism methods (Szyliowicz, 2011, p.2). Airport Security has been administered using a government-operated system since the Aviation and Transportation Security Act was enacted in 2001. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), now an agency of homeland security, replaced private security measures and personnel with at least 60,000 federal employees (Szyliowicz, 2011). However, privatization may be making a come-back. The following analysis will analyze