Turner 1
Dustin Turner
ENGL 1010-407
Rebecca Miner
August 7, 2014
How Should Airport Security be Handled?
Airport security is important to everyone; after all, it involves our safety while traveling. The events of September 11th, 2001 changed the way security was handled forever. The United States government had the difficult task of deciding who should handle security from now on. At the time, individual airports had their own procedures, but it was not uniform across the country. Was it better to leave security to individual airports and just require stricter guidelines? Should the government create their own agency? Then, what procedures and technology should be used to further advance our security procedures? Airport security is ever-changing, but the details of how, who, and why are a difficult task and they continue to evolve today.
One of the largest problems with security prior to 9/11 was the many factors involved. Each airport was responsible for screening passengers and watching the perimeter of the airport; some of them had their own people do it, while others used private firms or local police agencies. The airline itself was responsible for screening baggage, which was contracted to another company. Then, the FAA was the government agency responsible for having certain policies and they would do random checks to ensure these were met. Paul Seidenstat, talking about security and terrorism stated, “The weaknesses of the security system involving the three partners, the FAA, the airlines, and the airports, made for conditions that would have made it difficult toprevent the hijackings of September 11”(2004). We had an ineffective security system because there were “too many hands in the pot”.
In order to combine the multiple factors that were once responsible for security, the best determination was to create a federal government agency, now known as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). This allowed the government to screen workers to ensure they were up to the standards expected of a security officer. It also gave them control of the funds that would be used to maintain the security force and where to get it from. TSA was able to govern fees to the airlines during ticketing so that each passenger helped pay for the newly created department. This new agency was able to add screening machines that were well-above the current technology being used at airports. They added an air marshal program, which provided secret agents on board various aircraft.
TSA believes its methods continue to be the most effective and provide the most secure way of flying. The agency has had great scrutiny, however it has evolved greatly over the past several years. They continue to look for new ways to improve the convenience of security and make a passenger’s experience more pleasant and quicker to get through. As an example, in 2009, TSA adopted a new procedure to expedite screening of Laptop bags. Previously, the laptop needed to be removed before screening. However, to make the process simpler, they now allow passengers to keep their laptops in the bags and simply send them through the machine (Journal of Property Management, 2009).
Not everyone believes however, that TSA is the most effective method. It is costly and has “grey” areas in their screening practices. In 2006, TSA introduced a new program called SPOT (Screening Passengers by Observation Technique). This program consists of approximately 3,000 officers that simply observe behaviors and facial expressions of passengers. They are trained to recognize certain behaviors that may indicate terrorist-like activity. If they suspect you may be a risk, you would be sent for a second-level of screening which could consist of questioning and deeper examination of your bags, including bomb testing. While TSA maintains their stance that this is effective, others disagree and feel this is a waste of financial resources. In an article titled. “Intent to deceive?”, Sharon Weinberger states, “Critics, however, note that these statistics mean that fewer than 1% of the referrals actually lead to an arrest, and those arrests are overwhelmingly for criminal activities, such as outstanding warrants, completely unrelated to terrorism” (2010) Simply put, the SPOT officers simply add an unnecessary inconvenience to airport travelers. On a side note, SPOT is the very definition of profiling.
In addition to profiling, a big concern is the use of body scanning machines. This technology is described by Scott Kendall as, “One such technology, backscatter X-ray imaging, uses a low-level X-ray that is capable of seeing through objects and creating a photo-like image of the object being scanned” (2013). This has been greatly covered in the media due to the images it produces, being label as pornography. The technology however, gives a more in depth view of potential threats that a typical metal detector cannot see.
In addition to body scanning technology, TSA has established other means of stopping threats by using technology. In 2004, a new program called CAPPS II (Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System) was established. This program ran checks on passengers after the tickets were issued by the airline. They performed background and credit checks and even additional information such as home ownership, income, and your travel patterns and history. Based on these findings, the passenger was assigned a risk threat. Once the passenger arrives at the airport and their boarding pass is scanned, the system would tell TSA whether you should be screened more heavily due to risk factors. This technology, along with body scanners and passenger profiling have been heavily scrutinized and are being challenged legally for constitutional violations.
The world we live in is mostly convinced that technology is the way to go and is ultimately the most effective at doing things. However, does it really help? Courteney Taylor discussed the idea in the article, “Touched by an Agent: Why the United States should look to the rest of the world for a new airport security scheme and stop using full-body scanners” (2013). The United States, along with other countries, such as Australia; have implemented the use of body-scanners and other technologies insisting it averts terrorist attacks. However, Israel’s Ben Gurion airport takes a different approach. They do not use any of the recent technology advances, but rather use a detailed questioning and profiling method. They intentionally target certain races, religions, and national affiliation to decide what level of questioning is necessary. The passenger is questioned outside the airport upon arrival, then again upon checking in for their flight. Their security guards primarily use queues from the traveler to determine their nervousness or voice tone. This method has made the airport one of the most secure, without any terrorist attack since 1972.
In conclusion, our procedures in airport security are of high importance. After all, we would all like to get to our destination, whether it be for business reasons or to vacation with the family. One thing is certain – the terrorist attacks in 2001 were devastating and frightening. The government acted to prevent a further attack from happening again and in the end, created its own department who was responsible for keeping our country secure. Technology has aided in this process, but whether it is used legally or not, remains to be determined. There is a fine line when it comes to our security, which makes it difficult to find the right balance. If it is determined that our rights are being violated, resulting in the elimination of body-scanning technology, it is possible an attack could occur. At the same time, the technology may not actually be a significant enough benefit and may not aide in finding threats at all. In that case, it is not fair to violate passenger’s rights. The debate will continue as time goes on, but most of us can agree that the most important thing is to be safe during our daily travel. New technology and ideas will emerge, hopefully creating a secure and satisfying experience for all.
Works Cited
Seidenstat, Paul. "Terrorism, Airport Security, And The Private Sector." Review Of Policy Research 21.3 (2004): 275-291. Business Source Premier. Web. 23 July 2014.
"TSA Adopts New Airport Security Checks For Laptop Bags." Journal Of Property Management 74.1 (2009): 14. Business Source Premier. Web. 23 July 2014
Weinberger, Sharon. "Airport Security: Intent To Deceive?." Nature 465.7297 (2010): 412-415. Academic Search Premier. Web. 23 July 2014.
Persico, Nicola, and Petra E. Todd. "Passenger Profiling, Imperfect Screening, And Airport Security." American Economic Review 95.2 (2005): 127-131. Business Source Premier. Web. 23 July 2014.
Taylor, Courteney L. "Touched By An Agent: Why The United States Should Look To The Rest Of The World For A New Airport Security Scheme And Stop Using Full-Body Scanners." Houston Journal Of International Law 35.2 (2013): 503-536. Legal Collection. Web. 23 July 2014.