The Evolution of Airport Passenger Screening
Table of Contents
|Introduction |2 |
|The Evolution of Airport Passenger Screening |3 |
|Legal Implications |6 |
|Other Concerns |11 |
|Recommendations and Alternatives |12 |
|Conclusion |14 |
Introduction It is common knowledge that terrorists hide dangerous items on certain parts of their bodies which make more traditional airport passenger screening procedures less effective. These areas include the small of the back, high on the thigh, and inside undergarments (Elias 7). Such efforts have brought to light the increased necessity for adequate passenger screening protocols to protect passengers and crews from potential terrorist activities. However, newer invasive technologies, even if narrowly defined and utilized, pose a significant threat to civil liberties (NRC 37). So much, in fact, that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) have vehemently expressed their opposition to such technologies because of the potential for passengers to be forced to display highly-personal details such as the size of their genitals, medical devices, or other potentially-embarrassing details simply to board an airplane; essentially calling the searches a “virtual strip search” (Kornblatt 409; Hindman 337).
|Introduction |2 |
|The Evolution of Airport Passenger Screening |3 |
|Legal Implications |6 |
|Other Concerns |11 |
|Recommendations and Alternatives |12 |
|Conclusion |14 |
Introduction It is common knowledge that terrorists hide dangerous items on certain parts of their bodies which make more traditional airport passenger screening procedures less effective. These areas include the small of the back, high on the thigh, and inside undergarments (Elias 7). Such efforts have brought to light the increased necessity for adequate passenger screening protocols to protect passengers and crews from potential terrorist activities. However, newer invasive technologies, even if narrowly defined and utilized, pose a significant threat to civil liberties (NRC 37). So much, in fact, that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) have vehemently expressed their opposition to such technologies because of the potential for passengers to be forced to display highly-personal details such as the size of their genitals, medical devices, or other potentially-embarrassing details simply to board an airplane; essentially calling the searches a “virtual strip search” (Kornblatt 409; Hindman 337).
Cited: Calder, David. “Who says ‘passengers aren’t baked beans’? Making passenger security screening productive while delivering high service levels.” Journal of Airport Management 4.4 (2010): 335-339 Hindman, Stuart A. “Full-Body Scanners: TSA’s New ‘Optional’ System for Airport Searches.” Issues in Aviation Law and Policy 10.2 (2011): 337-366 Kornblatt, Sara. “Are Emerging Technologies in Airport Passenger Screening Reasonable under the Fourth Amendment? Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 41 (Fall 2007): 385-412 Rosen, Jeffrey. “NO, Transportation Security is Invasive, Annoying—and Unconstitutional.” Insights on Law & Society 11.2 (2011): 17-18