A Reasonable (and Calm) Look at a Controversy

Anyone who checked out my facebook account on Tuesday or Wednesday of this week probably saw a heated debate between 2 of my friends and myself.  Some saw it as too intense.....most saw it as passionate people arguing over a very controversial issue.  Each person is entitled to their own opinion and  most of the time I can understand why people come to the conclusions that they do.   I would like to present my argument against the new procedures...hopefully in a way that doesn´t seem offensive or too intense since I have had time to think about it some more.

I would like to state that I am NOT against advancements or enhancements to security for airports.  I simply do not wish to trade my dignity and 4th amendment rights for a false sense of security.

Before going over my objections and concerns about the ¨enhanced¨ security, I would like you to keep something in mind.  One airport has not been breached since 2002 and is not exactly in the safest part of the world to put it mildly.  Security lines normally last only about 30 minutes. They do not use X-Ray vision machines or feel your intimate body parts The screeners at the Ben Gurion airport in Israel make eye contact with every passenger and ask them simple questions, watching to see how the person behaves rather than peeking at what’s on their body.  How much would it cost to train TSOs compared to the $170,000 price tag of EACH machine and many larger airports have 5-10 machines.

Recent Attacks & Attempts

To start, I would like to examine the attacks and attempts in the post 9-11 world since that expression is so popular with supporters of the new procedures.  First, 9-11 terrorists did not use any type of bomb device...they used box cutters or knives.  Clearly for those type of things to make it through security was a sign of the lack of security we had and we immediately incorporated new security features to improve the situation. 

What about attacks after 9-11?  Arguably there have been two major terrorist acts since 9-11: Madrid and London.  Both of those attacks happened on subways inside a city.  Should we expect the same security procedures to take place on a daily basis in order to get on a subway or train.  I´m sure people of Chicago or even NY would have something to say about that.  These attacks also show that air transportation is not the main focus for terrorist groups.

What about recent attempts in aircraft that were not successful.  Well, in the last few months we have seen attempted bombs make their way through boxes and packages like in the case of the London plane headed for the US- not on a person.  Even today, a news story about a suitcase was found with bomb-like features in Germany- not on a person.  I have also read news stories about bombs being sewn into animals which were foiled simply because the surgery was so bad, but the method could have worked- not on a person.  These are just a few examples of how even if attacks are planned on a plane, the new invasive procedures could not catch them because they have nothing to do with people and try to avoid anything to do with people.

Ways Around It

While the new procedures are able to see better what is under our clothing and on our bodies, it cannot see what is IN our bodies.  The press that the new procedures have gotten will certainly have alerted and prevented any prospective terrorists from trying to hide anything on the outside of the body.  Without being too grotesque, there is enough room in the orphases of our body that could easily pass through the new security features.  Why do I need to be violated if something can get through so easily?  I am not saying that these machines or pat downs are not effective for finding things on the outside of the body, but it wouldn´t take much to find something small enough yet effective enough to do some damage that can be inserted inside the body.  Not to mention the other options above that completely avoid the new procedures.

I do not think terrorists are un-intelligent.  They are misguided or angry or maybe even being forced to act in that way, but they being a terrorist doesn´t qualify them as stupid.  Innovation is just as natural to them as Internet hackers and the products people sell to protect you from them.  It is a never ending game of advancing the tactics except in the case of airport safety, the ¨protection¨ from the terrorists is very personal and very invasive.



How Far Can It Go 

That brings me to my next point.  Some people say that the new procedures are not that invasive or they are worth it to keep us safe.  But I have to ask.....where is the line?  If orphases, dogs and cats, and who knows what else are the next phase in planting bombs, what are we going to be subjected to next.  Stronger X-Rays to see in the body?  More thorough manual searches?   At what point will it stop becoming more invasive.  Remember 9 years ago when we couldn't go the gates anymore?  We were disappointed, but we understood.  Remember when we started to have to take our shoes off and throw away our water bottles?  We were annoyed and maybe a little disgusted to walk barefoot at the airport, but we understood.  Remember when we didn´t have too worry about every single bottle of liquid that we were carrying?  It was nice, but all of the changes since 9-11 were understandable.  We slowly changed the system so that we were safer.  None of these changes however involved invading our personal space, modesty, or took away our right of being innocent (and being treated innocently) until proven guilty.  They all were things outside of our body that did not expose us in a derogatory way to any person or persons.

Untrained/Unprofessional TSOs 

Part of the problem with the new procedures that include firm touching of the hands and fingers to the genitals and breasts along with clear scans of our bodies is that the TSOs are not always the most professional and well-trained employees possible.  I have read articles (which always must be taken with a grain of salt), where a teenage passenger heard the scanner operator tell the operator on the computer (in another room) ¨We got a real looker coming through.¨  That normally would not offend anyone if someone wasn´t looking at our naked bodies.  Those two employees could have easily talked about her after work....about her naked body.

Another story which originally did not get any press, but currently is resurfacing is about the TSA employee, Negrin, who attacked a fellow employee Osorno after months of derogatory and humiliating comments about his genital region.  It was during training and Negrin went through the machine while Osorno and other agents were examining the computer screen.  In this case, they clearly knew one another which is not normally the case, but it still shows that the people operating the machines or performing intimate searches of their body are not always mature professional people that I can trust not to humiliate me.

Modesty

I am religious person and around family and close friends I am not the most modest person, but I am very in regard to what people see of me or feel of my body when they don´t know me.  I don´t even like it when the doctor (male of female) has to give me a breast exam or something as simple as feeling on my belly.  I don´t like people touching me or looking at me in an exposed way....regardless of the circumstances.  I guess I am more modest when I am the one being exposed to a person that is not exposed at all.  The locker room or beach isn´t as bad (though I try to keep decently covered), because everyone that is there is at the same level of exposure.  It´s multi-directional rather than solely directed at me.

I have been traveling a lot lately and I have found that I love traveling in dresses because they are typically loose fitting and comfortable, but still look nice.  Sometimes I wear very thin leggings and sometimes I don´t.  The scanning machines have more difficulties with loose fitting clothing since sometimes the overlap of material can block the radiation from your skin, therefore, appearing as if you have something.  So after you have submitted yourself to being looked at, you must now be groped to make sure whatever it was is nothing harmful.  Someone´s hands will be firmly rubbing up and down my legs and along my groin with as little as a thin pair of underwear.  I know some defenders of the procedure would just say ¨Don´t wear that kind of outfit,¨ but (not including a thick pair of jeans) I think most material would allow too much to be felt along your private areas.

Americans don´t even like to touch each other on the arm or leg while in public areas.  From the day we are born, we are taught to not touch each other.  Think back to 1st grade when the teacher constantly reminds children to sit at their own desk and leave the other students alone.  Or your mother telling you not to touch strangers when in line at the grocery store or hell not to let strangers touch you in your private areas.  I know when I was in grade school we had multiple presentations about ¨Stranger Danger¨ and inappropriate touching.  It´s hard to be raised in a culture like that and suddenly be told that the areas your significant other or doctors are normally the only ones to touch will now be looked at or touched by strangers.

Criminal  

I have never been convicted of a crime.  I have never been arrested.  I have never even had a traffic violation.  I am not a criminal.  The new procedures to me are equivalent to what criminals are put through.  An intense pat down including genital areas are performed by policemen on people suspected of carrying drugs or weapons....this is done when they have good cause to believe that person has something on them.  Before a person goes to jail and while they are in jail, a strip search is done to ensure no weapons or drugs are being hidden....once again because they are either convicted criminals or enough evidence has been found to show that they could be dangerous in one way or another.

Why should it be that anyone who wants to fly home for the holidays should be the equivalent to a criminal.  Many people would say that if you don´t want to be safe and go through the new security features, then don´t fly.  Well, my friend Dustin had an excellent response to that "don't fly if you're scared of flying."  I do not have a choice in the matter.  It has been a few years since the last ocean liner made passenger journeys across the Atlantic from the US to the UK.  There is one ocean liner in existence Queen Mary which is mainly used for cruises.  If I want to go home, I have to fly.  If I fly, I have to be subjected to some type of procedure that I personally find humiliating.

Skin Cancer

I would first like to say that most worries about cancer in regard to the radiation used are overstated.  I know that.  However, radiologists and oncologists have both said that there are cases when radiation even in small doses could (not will) affect some (not all) people.  I am not trying to scare anyone into thinking the imaging machines will affect everyone, most people, or even a lot of people.  But the question I have to ask is, if the hundreds of millions of people who travel every year ( I read 800 million) go through the scanning machines and .001% of them are affected by them (because of bad genes or whatever reason)  that is 800,000 people.  That is a thousandth of 1%.  Is that percentage to high? What about .00001% that still amounts to 8,000 people----that is one billionth of a percentage which I´m sure is significantly smaller than what the FDA would require for the machines to be considered safe.  There were less than 8,000 people killed on 9-11.

If anyone has the FDA report which explains the possible side effects of the machines, please send it to me.  I do like to be well-informed.


General feelings about 4th Amendment Rights (and a little with 1st Amendment)

Finally,  I have to address the infringement by the new procedure on my rights as a citizen.  When it comes to American rights, laws, and the constitution, I know (as well if not maybe a little better) than the average American.  I do not pretend to be a lawyer or well versed in court cases that would show precedence in this area so anyone that has knowledge on this subject please let me know.

¨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.¨

I am sometimes very annoyed or frustrated by the American government, American policies, and sometimes Americans themselves, but I love being American. I have rights as an American citizen that give me a sense of pride and security, both of which are taken from me by the use of these new procedures.  I am not proud that we are now that the majority of Americans have been ¨terrified¨ enough to allow images of their naked bodies to be taken or allow inappropriate touching of their bodies simply to get on a plane.  I do not feel secure that these machines or pat downs will do what people expect they can do.  I do not feel secure that my rights as an American won´t continue to be taken away.

I have the right to be secure my person and my belongings unless someone has probable cause to search me or my belongings.  Trying to board a plane to go home or to go to work does not give them probable cause to violate my person.  I was more than willing to give some room within the amendment especially with my belongings- having my bags X-rayed or opened and examined.  I was willing to take off my shoes or be lightly patted if necessary when it came to my actual person.  But my body- undressed or intimately touched and examined?  That is too far.  That is too much.

I am not one of those people who refuse to accept there are limits on the Bill of Rights or that they were made at a different time and therefore different needs needed to be satisfied (the 2nd amendment comes to mind).  But we do have them for a reason and we need to protect them and ourselves from unfair violations.  I refuse to continue down this road of sacrificing our freedom and dignity for safety.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. 

Benjamin Franklin An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania. (1759) 

On a final side note....I have now fixed the setting where anyone can comment on the actual blog without being a member.  I didn't realize I had checked the wrong option.