If Looks Could Kill By Wendy Kaminer Comparative Analysis

A comparative analysis of the two articles, If Looks Could Kill by the Economist and Trading Liberty for Illusion by Wendy Kaminer is about the emerging security technology that uses a surveillance system that is able to identify the intentions of criminals before they carry out their criminal activities. In the Economist’s article, the writer remains optimistic that the surveillance system is going to serve the purpose for which it was set without compromising the innocence of the citizens. On his side, Kaminer remains skeptical about the effectiveness of the system and the effects it will have on the liberties of the citizens if indeed it works. However, the two seem to rely on historical data that indicate a racial profiling of innocent
It draws heavily from the proponents of the surveillance system such as psychologist Frank Morelli and other gait analysts to lay the foundation of his argument for the surveillance (Sutherland, 2012). Further, it relates the information obtained from the surveillance systems and the logical reasons for such behaviors such as the weight of an explosive belt. Kaminer, on his side, uses more emotional argument than a logical explanation against the introduction of the systems. At the beginning of his article, Kaminer makes it clear that security for the citizens of America has been more of a racial profiling or a case of targeting the minorities for no apparent reason rather than for the need of curtailing it. His focus is more on the historical injustices meted on the past advocates of equality than how the surveillance systems have failed to stop criminal
By combining both their opinions and statistics, the two converge on the issue albeit with a different emotional standpoint. The economist’s article uses the FAST project to show that despite the project claiming an 80% success rate, there were a number of innocent people that were captured by the sensors. However, the article maintains a neutral ground by providing the exact explanation provided by the experts. Kaminer uses the case of ACLU to explain how the technology erred in the identification of human differences (Kaminer, 2002). In his explanation, he uses emotional statements to discredit the technology even though his sources are