Airport Security

In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,

decided to overhaul their security protocols and specifically upgrade the security involving airports and airplanes. The upgrade in security of airports, although in some cases helpful, has caused an unnecessary amount of problems for American civilians due to the invasive changes made by the American government. Not only is it harder to get through security in America, but many of the American’s privacies have been taken away by the government in the name of safety as David Lyon says in his article on security changes in airports: “after 9/11, various policies and even laws concerning matters such as privacy and confidentiality have been overridden by the concern with ‘national security’”(405). Under the claim of safety, American and foreign civilians’ rights and privacy have been abused and taken away, leading to many people being overall upset and angry with the

As an aviation management major airport security is a concern that I have taken a huge interest in. Making travel safer to air travelers is one of the biggest tasks that will never end as long as there is a plane in the sky. However, there are many problems that come about when traveling because passengers feel as if they are being harassed, which doesn’t set a good look for the Transportation Security Administration. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) consist of 50,000 security officers, inspectors, directors, air marshals and managers who protect the nation's transportation systems so you and your family can travel safely. They look for bombs at checkpoints in airports, they inspect rail cars, they patrol subways with our

The Travel security agency, or the TSA, is an important agency whose job it is to protect our nation in airports and borders. Impressively, the Agency has stopped many weapons, and saved our citizens numerous times. According to several experts however, the TSA has never stopped a terrorist plot. Their methods have been questioned too. As our nation grows deeper and deeper in debt, the TSA is a huge cost that may need to be cut. In order to gain a clear understanding of the TSA, its successes, issues, and cost must be evaluated critically.

During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.

In this essay, I will attempt to argue that TSA serves as a mechanism for the government to frame the nature of the debate on privacy, in a way that is beneficial to them. To do this I will first argue that airport security and the TSA is objectively ineffective and merely creates the illusion of privacy. Despite not actually protecting us, the system of airplane security, conditions individuals in the general public to be willing to make sacrifices in privacy for a perceived “greater good” in community safety. This viewpoint of individuals sacrificing a little privacy for the wellbeing of society is the essentially the same “nothing to hide” argument that the government uses to justify mass surveillance and the violation of constitutional privacy rights. This airplane security and analogues government argument is flawed because it defines privacy two narrowly in scope and assumes that privacy couldn’t have social value. However, despite being flawed, the indoctrination by the TSA, and subsequent ideology has become a widely accepted belief. This is inherently

Surely the TSA has foiled some sort of terrorist plot in its nearly fifteen years of existence. But in reality, as far as we know, the TSA has not caught any! Nearly 200 million dollars a year goes into a hidden layer of airport security referred to as “behavior detection” which is where specially trained agents watch out for particular patterns of body language that might indicate that somebody is planning something malicious and apprehending them. However this supposed “vital layer” of security has done nothing more than catch drug smugglers and other such criminals. (CITATION 3) Which is great, but it was not drug smugglers that crashed planes into the World Trade Center. Adding more salt to the wound, an investigation conducted by the Government Accountability Office found in that sixteen individuals later linked with terrorist activities flew 23 different times through United States Airports and not a single one was stopped by the so called “behavior detection officers.” (CITATION

“Oh, right, I haven’t told you yet. You know how we got attacked by terrorists with our own planes? Well, since then, the government formed the TSA. They make sure fliers are safe to travel by checking for banned items through a metal detector and a conveyor belt that screens your baggage. So nowadays we have to get to our flights earlier than usual because of this line.” Alfred quickly said. It’s amazing what the government can get done when people die from a terrorist attack rather than a homicide at a public school.

The United States of America is undoubtedly one of the world’s largest and most powerful nations. However, it has been facing the problem of terrorism for many decades, most notably after the tragic events of September 11th. The Patriot Act was passed shortly after these events in response to the acts of terrorism witnessed by the whole nation. At the time, it seemed rational and logical to allow this bill to pass, due to the extreme anger of American citizens, and the willingness to fight against terrorism. However, certain breaches of privacy came with the introduction of the Patriot Act. We as Americans want to feel protected from the threats of terrorism, however, we are not willing to give up certain privacies and liberties in order for that to happen, even when put to a vote.

The Bill of Rights is paramount to every single human being in the United States. It is the collection of every right a person has, and everyone should know their rights to protect themselves. The United States is slowly becoming less and less free, but not in a restrictive way, it is for the safety of its citizens. Terrorism became more apparent in our country after September 11th, and thus the Patriot Act was passed. This allowed the FBI to survey any suspected terrorist without legal permission (a warrant.) It is not restrictive; we are not limited to what we can do beyond reasonable measures. Today, at any given moment in a busy city, we are on camera from multiple different angles. Also, our emails

President Bush intended through legislation, to aid federal agencies in identifying potential terrorists and to ultimately protect this country from possible potential terrorist attacks in the future (Banks, 2010). Both individuals in power and ordinary citizens were greatly supportive of giving up certain liberties and privacy in order for the protection of the greater good. However, The Patriot Act was extremely controversial and advocates feared that power could be abused and that non-threatening citizens were being examined for crimes in which were not terrorist related (Sievert, 2007). Additionally, the most controversial aspect of The Patriot Act was the fear of privacy in relation to the first and fourth amendment (Xhelili and Crowne,

Airport Security was not an issue until the terrorist attack shocked the United States. Why is there regular screening and TSApre® screening in place? The Transportation Security Administration claims that, “This approach

As with any government organization the TSA has taken much criticism on its security practices.

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 impacted the American people without many of them realizing it. The act called for increased monitoring of computer networks, phone lines, and online history inside the United States and allowed the government to deport suspects (ACLU). What was created by the act has snaked its way into all aspects of our lives, creating a sense of order and restricting some freedom. However, some say that this imposition into our daily lives limits our freedoms and actions allowed us by the Constitution. Many interest groups voice strong resentment for the act while others try to demonstrate the strengths and triumphs of the Homeland Security Act. This paper will show the differing viewpoints of those that feel that the

The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator