West Coast Publishing Surveillance 2015 november page
Download 449.23 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Body scanners stop terror attacks – all other measures fail
- Body scanners are key to airport security – other detectors are too outdated
- Terror DA Links – Body Scanners – AT: Magnetometers
- Magnetometers fail – backscatter tech is key
- Terror DA Links – Body Scanners – AT: Pat-Downs
- Terror DA Links – Profiling
- We control empirics – Israeli profiling has successfully prevented numerous attacks
- Profiling would have prevented the 9-11 hijackings
- Profiling is key to preempt terror attacks
DA LinksTerror DA Links – Body ScannersBody scanners are key to prevent terror attacks – best method to detect non-metallic explosives and weaponsJessica Hoff, Managing Editor of the Michigan State Law Review and JD Candidate at the Michigan State University College of Law, 2014, “Enhancing Security While Protecting Privacy: The Rights Implicated by Supposedly Heightened Airport Security,” http://digitalcommons.law.msu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1108&context=lr While there may be valid reasons for protecting privacy rights of Americans, the TSA has strong arguments in support of its use of more invasive methods like AIT and full-body pat-downs. Under the Department of Homeland Security, the TSA’s mission is “to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States and to reduce the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism.”174 As such, the TSA believes that AIT, a more invasive security method than the previously used magnetometers,175 is essential in carrying out its mission.176 Supporting this proposition, the TSA argued in its NPRM that current threats to airport security involve non-metallic explosives and weapons, which AIT provides the best method of discovering without physically touching passengers.177 Body scanners stop terror attacks – all other measures failWill Saletan, writes on politics, science, and technology at Slate, 3-3-2007, “Digital Penetration,” http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2007/03/digital_penetration.single.html This is no joke. The government needs to look under your clothes. Ceramic knives, plastic guns, and liquid explosives have made metal detectors obsolete. Carry-on bags are X-rayed, so the safest place to hide a weapon is on your body. Puffer machines can detect explosives on you, but only if you're sloppy. Backscatters are different. They can scan your whole surface, locating and identifying anything of unusual density—not just metals, which have high atomic numbers, but drugs and explosives, which have low ones. Body scanners are key to airport security – other detectors are too outdatedTobias W. Mock, Technical Editor of the Santa Clara Law Review and JD Candidate at the Santa Clara University School of Law, 1-1-2009, “The TSA’s New X-Ray Vision: The Fourth Amendment Implications of Body-Scan Searches at Domestic Airport Security Checkpoints,” http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1096&context=lawreview The Transportation Security Administration is currently testing a new form of airport screening technology that renders a virtual naked image of the human body.' This socalled "body-scan" technology is earmarked to become the centerpiece of the "checkpoint of the future," replacing walkthrough metal detectors as the primary means of detecting personally concealed weapons and contraband.2 The technology is emerging as a result of widespread deficiencies in present-day search capabilities.' Since the events of September 11, 2001, government accountability auditors have successfully bypassed security checkpoints with weapons and explosives at an alarming rate.4 While weaknesses exist across all areas of airport security, outdated technology has been identified as a primary culprit, with traditional walk-through metal detectors (magnetometers) leading the way. Terror DA Links – Body Scanners – AT: MagnetometersBody scanners are key – otherwise, we can’t detect modern non-metal explosivesTobias W. Mock, Technical Editor of the Santa Clara Law Review and JD Candidate at the Santa Clara University School of Law, 1-1-2009, “The TSA’s New X-Ray Vision: The Fourth Amendment Implications of Body-Scan Searches at Domestic Airport Security Checkpoints,” http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1096&context=lawreview The TSA’s investment in threat detection technologies has increased significantly with the emergence of liquid and other modem explosive devices such as those uncovered in the British terrorist plot of 2006.06 The non-metallic properties of these emerging threats have rendered magnetometers obsolete and left the TSA scrambling for answers. 107 The technologies at the forefront of this effort are two kinds of "whole-body" scanning machines that utilize "backscatter" x-ray and "millimeter wave" technologies, respectively, to detect items concealed under layers of clothing.' ° While utilizing different technologies, both machines penetrate clothing but not skin, allowing the screening officer to view an image of the human form along with hidden items of "unusual density."10 9 Magnetometers fail – backscatter tech is keyBootie Cosgrove-Mather, writer at the Associated Press, 6-26-2003, “Feds Want See-Through Security,” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/feds-want-see-through-security/ The government is considering using the technology at airport security checkpoints because the magnetometers now in use cannot detect plastic weapons or substances used in explosives. Hallowell is sacrificing her modesty to make a point: Air travelers are not going to like being technologically undressed by security screeners. "It does basically make you look fat and naked - but you see all this stuff," Hallowell said Wednesday during a demonstration of the technology. The technology is called "backscatter" because it scatters X-rays. Doses of rays deflected off dense materials such as metal or plastic produce a darker image than those deflected off skin. The radiation dosage is about the same as sunshine, Hallowell said. Backscatter machines have been available on the market for years. They are priced at between $100,000 and $200,000 and used in all sorts of security situations, from screening families of convicts visiting prisons to South African diamond miners going home for the day. The agency is trying to find a way to modify the machines with an electronic fig leaf - programming that fuzzes out sensitive body parts or distorts the body so it is unrecognizable. Another option might mean stationing the screener in a booth so only he sees the image, said Randal Null, the agency's chief technology officer. Null hopes to conduct pilot programs with backscatter machines at several airports this year. A pilot project at Orlando International Airport in Florida using volunteers met with mixed results, he said. Some volunteers were uncomfortable with it. For others, "It was a whole lot nicer than having someone pat me down," he said. David Sobel, general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, thinks most people will object to the backscatter technology. "The public is willing to accept a certain amount of scrutiny at the airport, but there are clearly limits to the degree of invasion that is acceptable," Sobel said. "It's hard to understand why something this invasive is necessary." But Rep. John Mica, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on aviation, thinks it is essential because of the strong likelihood that a terrorist will try to bomb a plane. "I predict it will happen," said Mica, R-Fla. "The chances of someone bringing an explosive on an aircraft by walking through a metal detector or in hand-carried luggage are very real." Mica pointed out that Richard Reid, convicted of trying to blow up a trans-Atlantic jetliner with explosives in his shoes, walked through metal detectors at Orly Airport in Paris several times before boarding the plane. Federal transportation security officials say a backscatter scanner could have foiled Reid. Terror DA Links – Body Scanners – AT: Pat-DownsBody scanners correct many flaws present in pat-downsTobias W. Mock, Technical Editor of the Santa Clara Law Review and JD Candidate at the Santa Clara University School of Law, 1-1-2009, “The TSA’s New X-Ray Vision: The Fourth Amendment Implications of Body-Scan Searches at Domestic Airport Security Checkpoints,” http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1096&context=lawreview Finally, body-scan searches, even in their modified form, are a more effective security tool than pat-downs.25 ' Though the TSA has been somewhat secretive surrounding body-scan test results, the technology is presumptively more accurate for two primary reasons. First, while body-scans render an image of the entire body, the effectiveness of a pat-down search is limited to its permissible parameters. 28 Although pat-downs are invasive, 259 searching officers are not permitted to search every part of the body,260 such as inside religious headwear,261 or in or around sensitive parts of the body.262 Furthermore, when searching more sensitive, yet permissible areas, the officers are required to use the back of their hand, further limiting their ability to detect hidden items.263 Therefore, not only does this limit the effectiveness of the search, but it gives those wishing to surpass the security system the knowledge of where to hide a dangerous item, i.e. in-between breasts, genitalia, or in a prosthetic.2" Body-scans, having the ability to detect items located in these areas, are not similarly limited. Second, the potential for human error in pat-down searches is more prevalent. While a body-scan searching officer must recognize an object projected onto a screen, a patdown officer must be able to detect a hidden item by touch alone. Therefore, the officer conducting the pat-down must be able to differentiate between threatening and harmless objects below one or more layers of clothing, and further, the officer must be trusted to execute a comprehensive search without passing over any areas of the body. While similar shortcomings exist in body-scan searches, they are not as prevalent; the officer is not given as much discretion as to the extent of the search, nor does it take any further effort on his or her behalf to reach its permissible scope. It stands to reason, therefore, that image-based detection technology, even in its modified form, is more effective than a restricted pat-down search. Terror DA Links – ProfilingProfiling is key – we need to screen people, not just objectsTimothy M. Ravich, Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Miami School of Law, October 2007, “Is Airline Passenger Profiling Necessary?,” http://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1298&context=umlr These scares were caused by people with bad intentions or bad judgment, not merely by objects like bombs and knives. That a ten year-old boy could cause an evacuation of an airplane of a hundred or more passengers aptly illustrates the challenge confronting aviation security officials. Aesop's fable of a boy who falsely cried wolf so often that he lost credibility within his community has little application to the commercial aviation industry. 138 Authorities responsible for aviation security must assume the worst and entertain both credible and incredible threats at any time, every time. 139 Terrorism is asymmetrical in this respect, and the fact terrorists need to be successful only once to achieve disaster has become a central tenet of the doctrine of preemption that dominates U.S. foreign policy under President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney." Profiling airline passengers may help to right this acute imbalance. As detailed below, however, whether certain civil liberties should be negotiated or trumped in the name of national security and airline safety is debatable, particularly as government surveillance, domestic wiretapping, and eavesdropping programs are a source of contemporary public concern. We control empirics – Israeli profiling has successfully prevented numerous attacksTimothy M. Ravich, Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Miami School of Law, October 2007, “Is Airline Passenger Profiling Necessary?,” http://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1298&context=umlr For years Israeli aviation security officials have focused on airline passengers themselves. They screen passengers individually and personally in a process taking hours per person.147 The United States has not had to cope with the pervasive terrorism that threatens Israel, and intentionally time-consuming airline passenger profiling is neither a standard nor a welcomed feature in the United States. But it appears to be effective. 48 In 1986, for example, a pregnant woman on a Londonto-Tel Aviv flight was pulled aside by El Al for further screening. Security officials were suspicious of a pregnant woman traveling alone. In fact, unbeknownst to the passenger, her Jordanian boyfriend had planted a bomb in her carry-on luggage that would have killed the 375 people on her flight. 14 9 As a result of security processes like these, no successful hijackings have ever occurred out of an Israeli airport.151 Profiling would have prevented the 9-11 hijackingsStuart Taylor Jr., JD from Harvard Law School and writer at numerous publications focusing on legal and policy issues, 3-1-2002, “The Skies Won’t Be Safe Until We Use Commonsense Profiling,” http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2002/03/the-skies-wont-be-safe-until-we-use-commonsense-profiling/378065/ To be sure, a profile that takes account of apparent national origin (as well as one that does not) might miss a John Walker Lindh or a Timothy McVeigh. No profile is foolproof. But that doesn't justify being foolish. A well-designed profiling system would have singled out all 19 of the September 11 hijackers for special attention. And even though box cutters were not then prohibited on planes, security screeners might have wondered why groups of four and five Middle Eastern men were all carrying such potential weapons onto airliners the same morning. Profiling is key to preempt terror attacksTimothy M. Ravich, Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of Miami School of Law, October 2007, “Is Airline Passenger Profiling Necessary?,” http://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1298&context=umlr Whatever the novelty or precedence of the tactics of September 11, the terrorist threat confronting today's airlines is conceptually different from national security concerns that previously confronted aviation security policy makers. Whereas the Soviet Union created "things" during the Cold War that could be observed and countered, terrorism is an indefinite threat, as "the terrorists create only transactions that can be sifted from the noise of everyday activity only with great difficulty. '22 In this new context, airline profiling systems may offer aviation security officials a preemptive and forward-looking mechanism to identify terrorists. 23 Directory: documents documents -> Concept stage documents -> Concept stage documents -> The great global switch-off documents -> Nonprofit grant application documents -> The Truth about the Rwandan Genocide documents -> Annual InStructional unit plan documents -> Chaos equipment included Download 449.23 Kb. Share with your friends:
|