Yes it is an invasion of privacy, but the person scanning your body cannot even see your face and your pictures are discarded right after being scanned. The opposing side argues that the government is the invading personal privacy of innocent civilians, violating the Fourth Amendment Rights to prohibit… 1469 Words 6 Pages in April 2010 because United States officials recognized that Anwar al-Awlaki was a danger to United States Homeland Security Lucas 1. Before you enter the gate they have a pre-gate before the stadium entrance gate that divides of males and females. At one point they were saying anyone who refused the body scan would not be allowed to fly. Having the capacity to store memory makes people feel like it is invading their privacy. Full body scans would be a great way to prevent terrorist from entering a plane, but as stated these body scanners lack the capability to detect hidden weapons in body cavities and small explosives.
To those who claim that the body scans are an invasion of privacy, I would respond that I would rather have a virtual strip search that takes about 15 seconds while fully clothed versus the alternative: full-body pat-down. I also think that it is not an invasion of privacy because you cannot see the person viewing the scan and they cannot see your face or have any way of saving the picture. Overall, the airports having the authority to make those kinds of searches are unfair and they are an invasion of privacy. How things stand right now, air passengers are faced with the option of going through a body scanner which produces virtually naked images, submitting to an invasive pat down, or leaving the airport under threat of an. Personally, I always opt-out of the x-ray scanner because even if the radiation dose is minute, I'm not willing to risk my health by exposing my entire body to any avoidable dose on a regular basis. Many members of Congress did not want to see the new agency become an unaccountable domestic police authority, wielding its powers against citizens. They say the machines may also miss certain types of low-density powder explosives.
Having full body scans will makes people think more about what they are bringing and hopefully cut down on terroistic violence. Backgrounder by December 22, 2010 This publication is now archived. The devices are designed to pick up illicit and potentially dangerous materials but they also show private details of a traveler's body such as breast implants or prosthetic devices. . I think that the comment Rupal from Tenafly High School, posted was very good point that no matter how safe something is there will always be at least 1 unhappy person saying that their rights have been violated. To get through O'Hare each patron is required to go through a full body scanner and pat downs. One which more and more people are having a problem with.
After investigators detained the man and executed a thorough search of the plane and all the luggage on board, they determined the man had been suffering from food poisoning. Some people may believe that these are an invasion of privacy but would they rather be looked at half naked or being high jacked in the plain and or getting blown up in a plane. In Japan I never fly dom, I use the trains because of the simple excess and ease. If there is little enough security for airport workers that they can smuggle weapons up and down the East Coast, what's to prevent them from sabotaging an aircraft? But those claims ring hollow in the face of Americans' real experiences at the airport. We now can't enjoy anything in public without fear of a terrorist attack and it makes everyone question safety. Arguing against full-body scanners, civil liberties groups cite the Fourth Amendment, which protects the privacy of your body and your possessions. Many great points are made, the screening can't tell if there are any explosives inside the body cavity, so how much of a difference does it make from the pat down besides embarrass people? These scanners had previously been used on a trial basis at a small number of airports.
America has had 21 terrorist attacks, from 2000 to 2009 consisting mostly of al-Qaeda and suicide bombers infoplease. The New York Times, 14 May 2012. At many international airports like , only one full body scanner is located at each major entrance to the departure gates. If you can swallow a camera and send remote video, fly drones miles away or create a bluetooth device the size of a penny then you know the tech is out there and very cheaply. So, the machines were not programmed as promised to delete images directly after they were viewed, and the personnel using the machines are unprofessional and have let images that they said didn't exist out of the system. Although these cameras can not detect low-density powder explosives, it is a temporary way of protecting the nation from terrorists. The incident prompted the Transportation Security Administration to announce heightened security guidelines for passengers Sunday that included more full-body pat downs, secondary screenings and additional rules onboard the plane.
This topic gets under my skin because those same people that are complaining about this invasion of privacy were probably the same people that whined about not feeling safe several years ago. In this argumentative essay it shows how airport security is not an invasion of privacy just necessary precautions. You could do way more damage to life and property on a train. I didn't mind the swabbing, per se, but I did not want us separated, even if she was in 'sight'. The scanner creates a full body image that can reveal any suspicious element that may be concealed on their person. How anyone could expect after 911 to not go through procedures like this is ridiculous.
I knew going to England that they may require a body-scan or optional pat-down. So I am all for improving. Like Dan said, I also went to a football game this year and was surprised about the steps security has taken to make people feel comfortable while you are patted down. The people who feel uncomfortable being scanned by the machine have other options, as well. People do not want their body to be groped or scanned in a way which shows nude images of them.
For the sake of our safety, and for the greater good, I personally believe that these body scanners should be put into widespread practice. So I am all for improving. What are the odds that a person who goes on one trip per month would be in that plane? There will be no way that the people who see your image will know who it is they are seeing. Quote: At best, avoiding terrorist profiling wastes scarce resources by subjecting everyone to the same time-consuming, often humiliating searches that have ignited public rage. Those against the scanners are likely very passionate about defending their privacy. It is true that there is potential for abuse and exploitation of the full-body images; however, this capacity for exploitation is a fact of life and human nature: irrelevant.