Airport Checkpoints Research Paper

After the devastating terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11th, TSA (Transportation Security Administration) was created and have since then beefed up their security. Because of all the new security devices and rules taking place now, the wait time at in the security line is longer, but for a good reason. On an average day, TSA screens 1.1 million bags. Of those 1.1 million bags, around 50,000 of them have to be checked thoroughly due to suspicious items inside the bags. The wait time at airport security lines has increased because of new threats. Because of an increase in the wait time at the security line, some people find it very frustrating and think that all the precautions are unnecessary. Those people are wrong though. In the past years since TSA was created, multiple bomber attacks have been attempted but have yet to succeed due to TSA keeping up with its safety requirements. In 2010, TSA started to use full body scanners. Some people are uncomfortable with the idea that when going through the body scanners, they are almost viewed completely naked and worry that those photos will be leaked. In Emily Holbrook’s article, Airport Security: privacy vs. safety, she makes an interesting pint when it comes to body scanners by quoting Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who said, ‘” you don’t need to look at my wife and 8-year-old daughter naked in order to secure that airplane”’ (quoted in QTD. Holbrook 14). This is an issue that has been brought to many people when going

Would you want to have Federal agents come into your home and begin searching your possessions? Is exposing what you have inside your home, either personal belongings or simple everyday items to someone whom you do not know uncomfortable? In which situations should these searches occur without a warrant and do they violate the Fourth Amendment? There are many questions similar to these being debated at national level. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution states that the government cannot search you, your home, or your belongings without a good reason. Nor can the government seize your belongings without a good reason. An important test case of the Fourth Amendment was the case of DLK. In the case of DLK, did the federal government go too far in using its power of search and seizure? There are three main reasons why the government did go too far in DLK’s case: there was no warrant to prove the agents could use the thermal imager and scan DLK’s property, it violated his right of privacy in his home, and the thermal imager used to scan his property may not be 100% accurate, and that since this device scans objects/property, it may be considered a search. But in this case there was no warrant once again to show as evidence that the Federal agents had permission to use the thermal imager.

Searching every person attempting to board a flight is easy compared to securing a huge land border. While national security is taken seriously concerning border crossings, it is also a contentious political subject. Politicians and business leaders have a large stake in keeping the border as open as possible and (I suppose) must balance this need with also defending the nation and meeting immigration laws. It is a mess that is made all the more difficult by the fourth amendment rights afforded every person from unreasonable search and seizure. The report “Protecting Our Perimeter: “Border Searches” under the Fourth Amendment” highlights the difficulties placed on border agents when it concerns searching people at or around the border. This coupled with the impossibility of searching 100% of all people entering or leaving the country by land, truly endangers national security as a whole. Where the fourth amendment is concerned, I feel the last sentence in the report really sums up the difficulty:

“Stop and Frisk” is a program put into effect by the New York Police Department that basically grants an officer authority to stop and search a “suspicious character” if they deem him/her to be as such. They don’t need a warrant, or see you commit a crime. 5They simply need to deem you “suspicious” to violate your 4th amendment rights without repercussions. Since its inception, New York City’s stop and frisk program has drawn much controversy stemming from the disproportionate rate of arrest. While the argument that the program violates an

Why do government agencies need a search warrant if they can collect data from a cell phone and link a person to a crime? If they used a classified means to retrieve the evidence, they do not have to divulge it. A driver is not required to give permission to search a vehicle; however, police may view the denial as suspicious behavior and the vehicle is subject to asset forfeiture. The association to a group that does not have a common belief with the rest of society can mean ruination for life as in the case with the Hollywood eleven. Investigation of allegations by a duly appointed officer of the law, while not particularly fast and sometimes ineffective, is the means to ensure that individual rights remain secure as intended by our founding

We are not fully protected from authorities searches because of the word “unreasonable” used in the Fourth Amendment. In the Supreme Court case, Katz v. United States, it was interpreted that unwarranted searches could happen if the person being searched did not have reasonable expectation of privacy. Without the Fourth Amendment, the police would be allowed to break into our houses and search whenever they please.

These pursuits are regularly unsuccessful on getting the criminals, and instead this policy is going against the 4th Amendment. Regarding the Bill of Rights the 4th Amendment is what gives us the citizens the right to be safe and secure in our personal space and also it protects us against any unreasonable searches without any documentation or probable

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America in simple terms protects Americans from irrational searches and seizures made by government officials in situations where one would expect a certain degree of privacy. Except if the official suspects probable cause, in which case they can, legally search you or they could obtain a search warrant from a judge that allows a police officer to search for specific items at a particular place and time. However, most government officials allow their biased views and racist thoughts to penetrate into their work and make them the gears social injustice. In recent news most of the social

This is a violation of The Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. Statistics suggest that implicit bias within the policy is also a violation of The Fourteenth Amendment. Thus, the policy is not applied in a race-neutral manner when the majority of the victims under the policy 's enforcement are non-Hispanic black or Hispanic.

This was a main reason to make the Fourth Amendment. They also new that in the future it would be very helpful to America. Although police officers have been fighting about this amendment and how they can’t search more people who they think is guilty this amendment protects all citizens of the United States and gives us the right that all Americans deserve.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” –U.S. Constitutional Amendments

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (FindLaw, 2014)

No one should be searched without a good reason and warrant. People should have the right of privacy- it is important to them. It is ethical for police to have search warrants before searching a person’s personal belongings. There have been recent conflicts on police powers over the pass years. Police are disobeying the fourth amendment by searching illegally. Critics frown upon police, while supporters agree with the police. Being searched without a permit is unconstitutional, and police could take advantage of their power, and abuse it. It makes US citizens feel less secure and safe. Citizens need to be guaranteed rights as long as they behave.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). The text of the Fourth Amendment does not define exactly what “unreasonable search” is. The framers of the constitution left the words “unreasonable search” open in order for the Supreme Court to interpret. Hence, by looking at

Many years ago airport security was not even an issue. People felt secure and safe and rarely worried about being searched. As time went on, the prevealance of terrorism became an increasing issue. There began more acts of terrorism by threatening and holding hostages on board commercial planes. As these acts continued, the government as well as citizens became vulnerable and an airport safety procedure was implemented as a way to ensure the safety of the United States. The implemented procedures over the years included a check and scan of all carry on and checked baggage, body scans, hire government airport employees, and a strict list of carry-on items. This made travelers feel safer as it decreased the ability of terrorist to commit