Airport Body Scanners and Personal Privacy Essays

Airport Body Scanners and Personal Privacy Essays Airport Body Scanners and Personal Privacy Essay Airport Body Scanners and Personal Privacy Essay SecurityAdministrationAirport Body Scanners and Personal Privacy Believe it or not, there was a time when passengers showed up an hour before their flights and walked directly to their assigned gates without taking off their shoes at a security screening station or throwing away their bottles of water. There was even a time when friends and family met passengers at the gate and watch their flights take off or land without having a ticket or identification†¦and that was only ten years ago. Air travel safety precautions changed dramatically after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that targeted passenger planes in the United States and killed well over 1,000 people. Precautions continue to evolve as new threats are detected and passengers are now concerned about where to draw the line with invasion of privacy versus national security, particularly with the introduction of the body scanners at security checkpoints. Flight passengers must accept the use of body scanners to ensure safe air travel for all. In 2007, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began distributing body scanners to use at security checkpoints in airports. There was an instant outrage when people were told that the scanners produced images of passengers without clothing. As of September 2010, there were 200 body scanners at 50 airports in the United States with hundreds more to come (Stellin 2010). Disgruntled passengers have vehemently protested the invasion of privacy resulting from the body scan images. Passengers are equally angry with the alternative to the body scan: an intrusive, full-body pat-down that is more intimate than pat-downs of the past. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, â€Å"The TSA has recently changed its guidelines and these pat-downs are now much more invasive. Screeners are now authorized to use the front of their hands and to touch areas around breasts and groins. † (2010). Women and men both liken the new pat-down regulations to sexual molestation and claim that it is not an acceptable option over having a naked body image scanned and viewed by a TSA agent. Holiday travelers were recently advised by independent groups to protest the body scanners’ invasion of privacy by insisting on having the pat-down alternative in public view so fellow travelers could see the invasive nature of the new procedures. There are also concerns over the safety of the body scanners. There are currently two types of scanners: millimeter wave body scanners and backscatter scanners. The millimeter wave scanners use electromagnetic waves to create images, while the backscatter scanners emit low-levels of radiation that reflects off the skin to create the naked body image. Frank 2010). Passengers are demanding to know the long-term effects of the radiation exposure required to capture the body images when using the backscatter scanners. Pilots are also up in arms over the new scanners and claim that the small amounts of radiation exposure increase the already high risk level of cancer seen in airline pilots. Knox claims that the U. S. Airline Pilots Associ ation and the Allied Pilots Association are recommending that pilots refuse the body scanners and request a pat-down (2010). Passengers are arguing that the privacy violations and increased radiation exposure that the body scanners are creating are not even relevant in the fight against terrorism, as most of the current security measures are reactionary. For example, in 2002, Richard Reid attempted to blow up a passenger plane by using a bomb in his shoe. Ever since then, passengers flying out of domestic airports are required to remove their shoes for scanning before clearing security. Security has not uncovered another shoe bombing since the incident. Another example is the 2006 terror plot discovered by British authorities. The plot involved a man who planned to detonate a bomb with liquid explosives and a MP3 player. In response to this threat, passengers were banned from bringing liquids or gels onboard, with the exception of those purchased in the terminal after clearing security†¦bad news for travelers who want to bring a thermos of coffee from home, but good news for the airport vendors. In 2009, a man on a flight from the Netherlands to Detroit attempted to blow up a plane with explosives in his underwear. Although the body scanners were in the United States at the time, they were not in the Netherlands. Passengers argue that no matter how many security measures are put in place, terrorists will find a new and innovative way to cause destruction. They claim that the only guarantee the body scanners can make is violation of privacy for innocent people. 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. For example, the TSA has established strict guidelines regarding the images received by the body scanners. Images of women are only viewed by female agents and images of men are only viewed by male agents. The agents viewing the images are in a separate, secure room and never see the passengers they are viewing on screen. According to TSA’s privacy policy, â€Å"The two officers communicate via wireless headset. Once the remotely located officer determines threat items are not present, that officer communicates wirelessly to the officer assisting the passenger. The passenger may then continue through the security process. † (2010). The images are not stored; they are deleted after being viewed. â€Å"Advanced imaging technology cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image is automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer. Officers evaluating images are not permitted to take cameras, cell phones or photo-enabled devices into the resolution room. † (Privacy 2010). Also, in many cases, the scanners have a special feature that blurs faces so distinguishing facial characteristics are not seen. â€Å"To further protect passenger privacy, millimeter wave technology blurs all facial features and backscatter technology has an algorithm applied to the entire image,† (Privacy 2010). Privacy measures have also been taken with the pat-downs. Passengers have the right to request a private area for the pat-downs, out of view from other passengers. The TSA Pat-Down procedure states, â€Å"You have the right to request the pat-down be conducted in a private room and you have the right to have the pat-down witnessed by a person of your choice. All pat-downs are only conducted by same-gender officers. The officer will explain the pat-down process before and during the pat-down. † (2010). While officials are unable to do anything about the intrusive nature of the pat-down, the TSA says, â€Å"Pat-downs are one important tool to help TSA detect hidden and dangerous items such as explosives. Passengers should continue to expect an unpredictable mix of security layers that include explosives trace detection, advanced imaging technology, canine teams, among others. (TSA Statement 2010). According to government officials and researchers, the concerns about increased radiation from the body scanners are unfounded. Consumer Health News quotes physics professor Peter Rez as saying, â€Å"The probability of getting a fatal cancer [from the body scanner] is about one in 30 million, which puts it lower than the probability of being killed by being struck by lightning in any year in the United States, which is about one in 5 million. (Reinberg 2010). While passengers are exposed to very small amounts of radiation from the backscatter body scanner, the millimeter wave scanner’s electromagnetic waves are harmless. Frank states, â€Å"Millimeter-wave machines are entirely safe. Backscatter machines, which emit low levels of radiation, have been studied and declared safe by groups including the Food and Drug Administration, the American College of Radiology and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. The FDA says backscatter machines emit less radiation in each scan than a passenger receives during two minutes of a flight. † (2010). The biggest criticism of security measures, including the body scanners, is that they are reactionary methods of keeping flights safe. That statement is true; however, it does not invalidate the fact that the measures have successfully kept domestic flights safe since they were implemented. There hasn’t been another instance of a shoe bomber because terrorists know they will be detected through security. There hasn’t been a liquid explosive or explosives in underwear on domestic flights for the same reason. Without a doubt, the security measures slow travel down, and offend passengers- but they are done in the name of safety and they are the best options currently available for safe travel. Reactionary methods are necessary to prevent the same tragedy from happening over and over again. It is crucial to learn from past weaknesses and build stronger security protocols based on previous attack methods. The new body scanners in airports across the country upset many travelers. It is true that the scanners do produce graphic images; however, there are TSA precautions in place to ensure the utmost level of privacy and respect possible for travelers while protecting the safety of everyone traveling on passenger planes. Health concerns over the scanners are not merited and numerous studies have found that the levels of radiation emitted are negligible. TSA offers a body pat-down for those who remain unconvinced of the scanners’ safety or are unwilling to have an image taken. While the pat-downs are intrusive, like the scanners, they are necessary to ensure the safety of everyone. The reality of the world is that there is danger. There are people all over the world and within the United States who want to do harm to others. An invasion of privacy is preferable over death, particularly when the body scans are conducted with the highest amount of discretion possible while still being effective. Passengers must not think of the new security measures as insulting and degrading; they are, in fact, an insurance policy that makes air travel one step closer to being safe. Reference List Frank, T. (2010, November 24). Answers to questions on new measure. USA Today. Knox, R. (2010). Protests mount over safety and privacy of airport scanners. National Public Radio. Retrieved from npr. org Privacy. (2010). Transportation Security Administration. Retrieved from www. tsa. org. Reinberg, S. (2010, November 23). Airport body scanners safe, experts say. Consumer health news. Stellin, S. (2010, September 12). Are scanners worth the risk? New York Times. TSA pat-down search abuse. (2010). American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved from aclu. org/technology-and-liberty/tsa-pat-down-search-abuse TSA statement. (2010). Transportation Security Administration. Retrieved from www. tsa. org.