There has been a lot in the news recently about full-body scanners at airports. The Transportation Security Administration has begun to use technologically advanced full-body scanners at airports for security purposes, and it is expected that much talk will ensue on the topic of these body scanners in 2010. These scanners have the ability to see beneath a person’s clothing in order to fully search a person for weapons. There are two types of full-body scanners. The first is the Millimeter Wave Scanner which looks like a very large cylindrical phone booth. The machine emits very high frequency radio waves that are able to pass through clothing and therefore, show a three-dimensional image of the body underneath. Anything that is not human skin that shows up on the image is a cause for concern. The other type of scanner is the Backscatter Scanner which looks like two large boxes for a person to stand between with their arms out. Backscatter X-Ray machines, in contrast to Millimeter Wave machines, create a detailed two-dimensional image taken from two sides of the body. It works on the principle of the Compton Scattering Effect, which refers to the type of scattering x-rays and gamma rays undergo when coming in contact with matter. In this way, the scanner emits high-energy waves that are able to penetrate clothing, but not human skin, therefore, detecting the radiation that reflects back from an object on the body to form an image showing only the unclothed human body and any weaponry or explosives that one may happen to have on them.
The idea that over the next ten years, these scanners are expected to increase dramatically scares many people. Though this is obviously a way to effectively and efficiently search people for any harmful objects or weapons that they may be carrying, many people believe it to be a violation of personal privacy. It has been called a “Virtual Strip Search”, in the way that it allows screeners to see a detailed image of a person’s essentially nude body, even though the person viewing the image is in an isolated room away from the security section, and the face of the person is blurred. The person viewing the image may also be able to access personal information about the person from the image; for example, they would be able to see if the person has a colostomy bag, a missing or prosthetic limb, or is transsexual. It is also questioned as to whether or not these body scanners break child pornography laws, and whether or not there are health risks associated with their use.
This subject became of interest to me because when I was coming back from Chicago, I had to use a Backscatter Scanner. At the time, I was not aware of what was actually being done, but once I researched the subject, I felt very uncomfortable and kind of violated. Though I do think it is a violation of privacy, and essentially, a strip search, I know that the purpose of the scanners is to more efficiently diminish the number of people allowed to board an airplane that are holding dangerous weapons, which is also extremely important. In this way, it is hard for me to say if the potential risks that can arise because of security checks that are not thorough enough outweighs the invasion of my privacy. I tend to think that the safety of all the people is the most important, and so I understand why full-body scanners would seem to be necessary and the most effective way to search people of any dangerous objects that they may be carrying with them; however, violation of privacy is also an important issue. What do you think about full-body scanners? Is being virtually strip searched acceptable if it can more easily increase the safety of the general public?
This article from The Globe and Mail talks about the airport body scanners in New York City, more specifically, the ones at the Kennedy International Airport. It brings up some of the concerns that I have talked about and explains how the scanners work: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/americas/nyc-airport-rolls-out-detailed-full-body-x-ray-scanner/article1769550/
Thank you!
No comments:
Post a Comment