The paper discusses the issues of privacy that have resulted from implementations of security technologies following the events of September 11 attacks in 2001. Further, the paper seeks to strike a balance between security and privacy by offering possible solutions or recommendations that may be used to address security and privacy to the satisfaction of both the American people and the government.
Since the occurrence of the September 11 attacks, the concept of security has been viewed from a terrorism perspective. Privacy of individuals is bound to be influenced in cases of public security. Some of the measures used to improve security have resulted to the trumping of civil rights such as privacy. Cases of suicide terrorism have resulted to use of technologies by the government that invade the privacy of normal Americans.
As a democratic nation, America is considered a land of freedom because of the observance of human rights, which means people are able to use their right on many aspects daily. The law ensures basic human rights of people, which protects every person in this nation. People have the freedom to publish books, vote for a president, and protest on the streets. On the other hand, because America is superpower country, there are many hostile terrorist acts conducted towards America, such as 9-11 in the year of 2001. In order to prevent such actions, which can have serious safety impact, most federal departments such as Transportation Security Administration, have used full body scanner to prevent suspicious, criminal activities especially in most of the airports (Schultz). These body scanners reveal the full body image of people, which impinge on privacy of people. This scanner equipment practically violates the right of privacy and even increases the risk of cancer, which is unhealthy to people. However, the full body scanner, which used in most of the airports, should not be used widely because it invades privacy.
When traveling on my vacation, I saw there are always long lines for people who are waiting security check. For me, when I enter the full body scanner, I feel uncomfortable psychologically because of showing my naked body. Chinese people are more conservative in comparison with most of Western people; that means it is always a serious problem if someone sees me nude without asking me first. Amanda Patchin, a graduate student who comes from Boise, said “It is just too high a price, to pay for securityWe have gotten comfortable with having our freedoms infringed upon in the name of safety” (Royce). The scanners are still a serious concern for a group of people who possess strong religious beliefs. Two Muslim women were prevented from boarding an airplane because both of them refused to use full body scanner (Royce). Not only the religion people, for some of people they may feel that they are violated by their human dignity for using full body scanners.
As a result, the use of the full body scanner invades privacy, and in the process, it goes against the commanding perspective of democracy. The body scanner equipment can provide intricate details of the naked human body without permission from people. This new generation of security technology uses X-ray technology, which inspects the body including the private parts. Private parts of a person being clearly visible impinge on privacy of a person. Furthermore, the introduction of this technology has attracted public attention and controversy. However, the security department considers the use of body scanners being a good security technology, which not only improves the safety, but also improves the speed of checking. Some people argue that it is extremely contrary to the protection of personal privacy, and it hurts personal dignity. No one prefers appearing in front of security staff naked. An example of a scanner that reveals the full naked image of a person is the millimeter-wave scanners used to detect high-density contraband.
Although the government claims that this scanner radiation will not cause harm to people, some travelers have expressed concerns. Those people who travel frequently claim that it is still difficult to know whether their health is affected or not. The full body scanner does not guarantee healthy safety for the people. Therefore, manufacturers of the new body scanners ought to ensure that the new technologies are developed based on privacy standards. This implies that the technologies need to have more measures that seek to protect privacy of people and even ensure safety to passengers. The present body scanner such as millimeter-wave scanners does not search perfectly.
Security affects privacy mainly because of infringing on people’s identity. One thing that should be noted is that implementation of security by imposing on the privacy of people does not necessarily improve security. The question becomes whether body scanners will give people one hundred percent safety. This is the illusion of safety that body scanners actually make (Rosen). Last year, during Christmas, a man attempted to blow up at Northwest Flight 253, by carrying a bomb in his underwear.
Consequently, increasing security levels does not need to reduce the privacy of individuals. Laws should be designed to address both privacy and security without one law affecting the other. The laws should both address the need for increased security and appreciate the privacy of the people.
The use of technology has had a significant impact on privacy. Since modern day technology is easier, faster and cheaper, intruding into people’s personal space has become easier. Presence of backdoors, telecommunication equipments as a way for the government to detect suspicious activities on security may present an opportunity for a third party to infringe on the privacy of the unknowing individual. An example of this scenario is clearly illustrated by the wiretapping scandal that captured private conversations of Greek’s top officials in 2006 (Chandler). Moreover, the security measures that seek information on terrorist activities through data mining prove to be ineffective. This technique produces many false positives. Consequently, such techniques may be targeting certain ethnic and religious populations. Additionally, the presence of a centralized database on personal information may be susceptible to outside attack by a third party or may even result to internal abuse.
Laws set up to safeguard the privacy of individuals’ acts as a normal requirement to suit the civil activists. The government seems to infringe on the privacy of individual despite the fact that there are laws that are concerned with protecting the privacy of individuals. The privacy protection laws need to further reinforcement to become stronger.
There is a need to have a balance between the extents of security and privacy. The government should adhere to following laws regarding privacy when dealing with security issues. The government itself should have regulations that control the use of surveillance technologies. Additionally, surveillance programs that are oriented to address terrorism should only be used for those purposes only. Congress and judicial committees should closely monitor the surveillance programs to ensure privacy of individuals is not invaded (Griffiths). Furthermore, there needs to be a transparency on the way the government uses the information it collects. The people need to be aware of how such information was used. Rules should be developed that direct the government how to use technologies to address security issues without invading privacy. In addition, the rules should also constrain the government when not to implement the technologies.
It is evident that in cases of threats to national security the value of privacy declines. Focus needs to be directed towards understanding that certain privacy reducing methodologies actually reduces security.
On a normal scale, issues of security are a government’s main agenda regardless of the privacy issues it may raise. The government’s intrusion of privacy of Americans has resulted to protests from various civil rights groups. Civil rights groups claim that the increase in the use of scanners by the government is a way duping people to believe that they are safer, which does not seem to be the case.
There is a need to develop a balance between these two concepts of security and privacy. The government needs to observe constitutional principles that address the privacy of individuals by opposing programs that aim to enlarge the use of wiretapping on a domestic level. In addition, the government needs to oppose the use of data mining technologies that target suspicious behavior. This evidenced by the lack of credibility of such systems such as the Total Information Awareness. The government should also seek the use of newer technologies that do not infringe on the privacy of individual while addressing security matters.
Works Cited
Chandler, Jennifer. Privacy versus national security Clarifying the Trade-off. eBook.
Griffiths, Jay. "The Tips of Your Fingers Individualism, identity, and the state's assault
on public life." Orion Magazine. N.p., 01\2010. Web. 7 Jun 2012.
Royce, Samantha. Do full body scanners violate right to privacy?. N.p., 2010. Web. 7 Jun
2012.
Rosen, Jeffry. "The New Republic." Nude Awakening: The dangerous naked machines.
N.p., 2010. Web. 7 Jun 2012.
Schultz, Connie. "New Airport Policy: Grin and Bare It." creators.com. N.p., n.d.
Web. 7 Jun 2012
