Today I saw a story on CNN about how people get very offended when patted down or frisked at the airport. They compare that security measure to being sexually harassed. Many are against the scanners as well because they show off the body's curves, but not the face.
To me this is an ethical dilemma. Two rights pitted against each other.
It is right for the airports to want to be safe. After 9/11 they are making sure nothing or no one is taken for granted. Being complacent and not checking everyone fully could one day lead to something catastrophic. That's exactly what a terrorist needs- a slight lapse in security.
However, it is also right for people to want to be treated with dignity. Especially for pilots who say they already have to go through FBI checks to get the positions. Pilots say they feel uncomfortable being frisked and patted down right to the inner thighs or buttocks. They say if passengers see them being frisked like that, they might think the pilots are not trustworthy.
In my opinion, I think scanners and frisking are necessary but annoying. Passengers don't have to go through both. If somebody refuses to go through the scanner, they can opt to be patted down. In an age of terrorism, one has to be careful. The metal detectors in airports only detect metal. So if somebody happens to be carrying a dangerous, wooden knife on them, or other objects that can cause harm to another person, the detector won't catch it. That's where the scanners and frisking comes in.
It's unfortunate that so many people feel as though they are being violated every time they have to catch a flight, but it is something they will have to get used to, because it's a whole lot better than having a repeat 9/11. This is a good example of the individual versus the community.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
These days it seems many people are not willing to make sacrifices unless it's on their own terms. We demand safe air travel but we want to be trusted to abide by air travel rules, such as not packing heat. Shouldn't the needs of the community always take precedence over the needs of the individual? Is there a greater good argument?
Yes, absolutely. I would honestly prefer to be checked, even if that is inconvenient, and feel safer on a plane. This is for the greater good. Recent history has shown us what happens when security is not that tight on airplanes.
Post a Comment