Many of you responded thoughtfully to the issue of making people feel safe but not removing their rights or discriminating against people. Well, there are many advanced methods for scanning people and detecting dangerous materials. In this CBS News article the question of personal privacy is raised in response to the many ways machines can now scan airport travellers:"(AP) The airport security systems of the future can see through clothes for weapons, sniff a person for explosives and determine what's in a bottle without opening it."
After reading the article, "New Airport Security Devices" consider this question:
- Do you think any of the new devices from the article go "over the line" and invade the privacy of airline passengers? Explain your position.
1) I don't think the new advices would be a privacy problem for the airline passengers because in the news article, it already mentioned a device that gives x-rays HAVE TO BE DONE by security workers of the same gender. So there's nothing wrong(it's ok).
ReplyDelete2)On the otherhand..the new system: "The Barringer Ionscan 400B " might give a little problem...If the system sprays air that can be used to detect traces of explosives, then will the system cause any side effects to passengers ( it is a chemical)? Will it it's chemical effect cause anything weird? Will it harm our body?
1)I think that the Rapiscan Secure 1000 invades privacy. A person has a right not to reveal their body if they don't want to. Even though the security workers of the same gender would be checking that person, the person being scanned might not feel comfortable with the security workers scanning them. I think this is ridiculous because everyone has the right to have privacy even though it is for safety. If they want a scanner that scans for weapons, they should create a machine that doesn't reveal the outline of the body.
ReplyDelete2) I think the Barringer Ionscan 400B is good for finding drugs and explosives. However, what if they harm the body like what Sabrina said? Is there any chemicals in the Ionscan? Also, what if a person does not want to get sprayed at? It is not fair to the person if they don't want to get sprayed.
I think that these new technology systems are going "over the line". I understand that after 9/11, that there has been major security concerns. However, I think that it is unjust for the security system to be able to reveal the person's body outline or make someone uncomfortable. Security is important, but privacy is also important.
-Tiffany Y. 722
Ilana, Class 722
ReplyDeleteI think that all the new technologies being developed to keep civilians safe is amazing but there have to be some boundaries: their are privacy matters invovled, too.
I think that it is right for companies that are planning to install devices that let the viewer see everything to make the scan optional, or a last result; but i think that it is embarassing becuase even though someone of the same gender is going to operate it, they are still complete strangers.
Also, if companies are planning on using these technologies they should also invest in research of way to cover somethings up or protect them, like those special aprons doctors use when they are taking x-rays
These airline safety devices test the boundary between privacy and safety. The interesting thing about privacy is that it's a word that is not actually written into the Bill of Rights but we think of it as one of our most important rights in this country. The "standard" of privacy changes over time. For instance, abortion rights are considered a privacy issue even though 36-years-ago it was illegal to have an abortion. These rights that we think of as permanent and god-given, change based on an "evolving standard" that reflects the will of the people at the time. Of course, changing laws that deal with our freedoms is very hard to do which is how the founding fathers wanted it in the first place.
ReplyDeletei do not think that most of these new technologies cross the line. their goal is to protect and preserve human life and if a person has nothing to hide they would not have a problem with these new technologies. even though i believe this, some devices do invade a persons privacy. the bomb sniffer searches for illegal drugs which should not be taken across the border(this does not cross the line). the rapiscan secure 1000 is a definite invasion of privacy. no matter how good the will it is disrespectful to see a person without their cloths while searching them.even if it is a person of the same gender, it is a complete stranger and this can become a dangerous situation. the lonsacan is not an invasion of privacy and i do not think that it will be distracting to the workers. though it is important to take security measure, some of these new technologies cross the line.
ReplyDeletei think that it is an invasion of privacy. some people just might not feel comfortable with this. even though the person checking and the person going through will be the same sex, some people might still not agree to it.
ReplyDeleteBetty Lazis 722
I don't think the new advices would be a privacy problem for the airline passengers because in the news article, it already mentioned a device that gives x-rays HAVE TO BE DONE by security workers of the same gender. So there's nothing wrong(it's ok).
ReplyDeleteOn the otherhand..the new system: "The Barringer Ionscan 400B " might give a little problem...If the system sprays air that can be used to detect traces of explosives, then will the system cause any side effects to passengers ( it is a chemical)? Willwe it it's chemical effect cause anything weird? Will it harm our body? he bomb sniffer searches for illegal drugs which should not be taken across the border(this does not cross the line). I think that all the new technologies being developed to keep civilians safe is amazing.On the otherhand..the new system: "The Barringer Ionscan 400B " might give a little problem... Of course, changing laws that deal with our freedoms is very hard to do which is how the founding fathers wanted it in the first place.
First, I would like to say that these devices represent the changes in technology in our current world. In today's world, these new technologies could provide themselves very useful to solve the issue of drug trafficking, and maybe even terrorism [who knows?]. Although these devices are, arguably, an invasion of privacy, I'm not so sure. Same-sex searches are not likely to lead to harassment. And x-ray scanners will search for dangerous possesions, not body figures/components.
ReplyDeleteThese new devices can be considered as "going over the line" but once again, I oppose this. After all, these devices are devised to make air travel safer for all passengers [especially after 9/11]. I think these devices may be just what airports need to prevent terrorism, drug trafficking, and several other important issues.