After the introduction of many new airport security measures since September 11 like Secure Flight and full-body scanners, the ethics of these measures have been called into question by the EU and other officials. Issues have arisen regarding the use of the new technologies. Janice Horowitz writing for The Huffington Post even suggests that body scanning machines are unsafe.
At an informal meeting in Toledo, Spain this January, Napolitano and the EU agreed that “biometrics, passenger screening and the ‘identification of illicit materials’ through ‘enhanced technologies’” will become commonplace security measures in airports around the world.
With the introduction of new screening technology, the EU hopes to “totally remove the ban on liquids” at airports.
The goal of these technologies is to change the experience of passengers so they no longer feel like “suspects” when going through airport security.
When it comes to civil liberties and privacy, the USA and EU are as one: security comes first.
- Current security measures include weight and size requirements for baggage, liquid restrictons, and bans on explosives or weapons in luggage.
Over the next couple of blogs, I’d like to discuss the security measures and the reactions to these measures from frequent fliers, and students who fly to and from Furman.
I’d like my interviewees’ opinions on whether or not they see current security measures as effective means of protecting the passengers against terrorism in the air. Should we see these new technologies as invasive towards our civil liberties, or is it worth sacrificing liberty for the sake of security?