Privacy Vs Airport Security

Airport Security vs. Passenger Privacy In the past few years the public has become vocal about airport security and their right to privacy. The issue has been with the new security measures implemented by the government. However upset the public may be with these new measures, they were implemented for the reason of protecting the public from harm while traveling by plane and the public needs to get over it. Due to the tragedy of September 11, 2001 airport security became more restrictive for airport personnel and travelers. The events of this day had put a spotlight on one of the many weaknesses within our transportation system. This has lead to our government to make drastic changes to our overall national security to prevent
such an incident from happening again. One of the changes was the creation of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in November 2001 (Dillingham, 2003). Their overall mission is “ensuring freedom of movement for people and commerce” (www.tsa.gov). To help enforce their mission with airport security, the TSA has implemented the use of full body scanners and “enhanced” pat-downs by Transportation Security Officers (TSO). Naturally these security measures have raised concerns with travelers over their right to privacy; believing these measures are too intrusive of a search on their person. A more recent incident that drove home the issue of airport security was in December 2009. Northwest Flight 253 had an individual try, unsuccessfully, to blow up the plane prior to landing in Detroit. This incident had brought back memories and fears of 9/11 and lawmakers jumped into action. Even with the metal detectors and other increased security measures, terrorist were still able to bring explosives on a plane. This incident has cause the TSA to implement the widespread use of the low-level X-rays and millimeter-wave full body imaging (Keane, 2009). In 2002, two different types of body scanners were introduced and offered to U.S. officials: naked machines (back-scatter) or blob machines (millimeter-wave) that could effectively detect contraband. The differences in them is one will display a graphic image of the human body, while the other blurs the image (Rosen, 2010). Both the back-scatter and millimeter-wave body scanners scan the human body so TSOs can “see thru” the travelers clothing to check for contraband and other metal items. In 2007 the TSA began testing the use of back scatter fully body scanners (Vaas, 2007). Because of the detailed images produced by the earlier body scanners, and the possibility of the images being saved to the computer database, passengers and civil rights activists have spoken against their implementation; crying a violation of individuals right to privacy. Not only has the public vocalized their disapproval with adults having to go thru the body scanners but their disapproval is with children having to go through as well. Though in a recent press release from Homeland Security Today a bill is currently being marked up for children under the age of 16 stating: “A child shall not be subject to pat-down screening before boarding a passenger aircraft, unless a screening anomaly cannot be reasonably resolved by checkpoint technology. If a screening anomaly cannot be resolved by checkpoint technology, the anomaly may be resolved by the child's parent or guardian as directed by a transportation security officer or by a transportation security officer with the expressed consent of the child's parent or guardian" (www.hstoday.us)

 The other intrusive security measure travelers and civil rights activist say violate their privacy are the “enhanced” pat-downs.
Some believe this is only slightly less intrusive than the body scanners. The “enhanced” pat down consists of a TSO physically running the back of their hands up and down the person’s body (www.cnn.com). This has travelers feeling uncomfortable to have a person who is unknown to them putting their hands on them. If a traveler refused the body scanner, the TSO would have no other choice than to perform an “enhanced” pat down because there are no other options to guarantee the traveler does not have any explosives, contraband, or another prohibited items on their person. The TSA has since updated these images to display a “head-to-toe, X-ray like image of a person’s body” (Rettig, 2010). These updated scanners cannot only detect contraband and metals but, detect non-metals as well; such as ceramic weapons. According to the TSA website the new software highlights these anomalies on a generic outline of the human body image (www.tsa.gov), a step up from the passenger specific image. However, if passengers choose to refuse the body scanners, feeling they are too much of an invasion of privacy; they still have the option of the “enhanced”
pat-downs. Though passengers get the option of which security measure they go thru there is still the question of how the TSA can legally conduct these searches. The answer is thru administrative searches. According to Leagalmatch.com “administrative searches are allowed with little or no individualized probable cause that the person being searched is dangerous. That is, searches done to further administrative goals, such as security, rather than to secure evidence of a crime, may be allowed under the Fourth Amendment.” (www.legalmatch.com) Unfortunately the TSA has to walk this fine line in protecting our Nations transportation system while not dipping into privacy issues.
But what passengers and civil rights organizations need to understand is does the cost out weigh the benefits? Does your privacy concerns override the overall their safety and that of others? Another thing travelers should remember is you have a choice as to whether or not to follow these new procedures. You do not have to go thru the full body scanner; you could choose the “enhanced” pat down instead. If neither of these options appeals to you, you could save your money and choose not to fly. There are always options of getting from point “A” to point “B”, but there should be no options in security, which leads to the overall safety of travels and the general public
alike.

Reference: Airport Security Measures: Privacy and Profiling Lawyers. Retrieved September 18, 2011, from http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/airport-security-measures-privacy-and-profiling.html Dillingham, G. (2003, April 1). Transportation Security Post September 11th Initiatives and Long-term Challenges. Retrieved from http:gao.gov/new.items/d03616t.pdf Fliers debate airport prodding, scanning. (November 09, 2010). Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://articles.cnn.com/2010-11-09/travel/bodyscan.patdown.reactions_1_full- body-scanning-airport-screening-pat-downs?_s=PM:TRAVEL Keane, A. (2009). Calls for Full-Body Screening Grow. BusinessWeek.com, 5. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Rettig, J. (2010). Balancing Security and Privacy. U.S. News Digital Weekly, 2(46), 5. Retrieved from EBSCOhost Retrieved September 22, 2011, from http://www.tsa.gov/who_we_are/mission.shtm Retrieved September 21, 2011, from http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/index.shtm Rosen, J. (2010). Nude Beach. New Republic. 241(20), 9-10. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Transportation Security Tsa To Change Airport Security Screening Procedures For Children. (9/14/11). Retrieved September 22, 2011, from http://www.hstoday.us/focused -topics/transportation/single-article-page/tsa-to-change-airport-security-screening- procedures-for-children.html Vaas, L. (2007). Airports turn to full-body scans. eWeek, 24(33), 32. Retrieved from EBSCOhost