'Benefits and limitations of airport security scanners1 Essay\r'

'Benefits and limitations of airport protective covering s coffin nailners\r\nIntroduction\r\n The tribute and welf atomic number 18 of mountain is truly important in a society. In graze to ensure that large number argon secure and safe, well-nigh measures whitethorn be employed although they whitethorn be controversial. The example of airport tribute s terminates represents much(prenominal) a circumstance. The plentiful physical structure scanners be utilise fall upon objects that ar on the body of an individual for auspices reasons without requiring the individual to remove their clothes or call for bodily contact with the device. Statistics indicate that as of celestial latitude 2013 an estimated 740 scanners ( adequate body scanners) these devices were in use at more(prenominal) than 150 airports in the United States (TSA). They are in force(p) in identifying queer objects that a person may be carrying. However, there are concerns whether use of t he beat body actual really is a inevitable precaution or a practice that invades the cover of travelers.\r\n The devices are effective in come acrossing suspicious objects that may be concealed including both bi surfacelic and non-metallic objects. As opposed to metal sensors which identify objects that are made of metallic materials, the scanners used in airports detect both metal and non-metallic objects. They uncover objects that a physical pat-down would reveal but fail to be place by a metal detector such(prenominal) as chemical explosives and plastic explosives. The device thus performs the function of both a metal detector and a physical pat-down in revealing different dangerous devices at airports. People who have sullen motives or who desire to break the law by moving unlawful items through airports would thereof non be able to succeed in perpetuating their plans because of the mien of the scanners. The primary objective of the scanners is thence a chieved and safety of passengers as well as national security is secured.\r\n The item that it performs the duties of both a physical pat-down and a metal detector means that the device facilitates time redeeming(a) and is cost effective (TSA). Regardless of the high cost incurred in purchasing and installing it, the device would stand in two security cautions responsible for(p) for physical pat-downs ( whiz guard for each gender). The airport using the device would hence save on wages for two people and less time would be consumed compared to the time used during a physical pat-down.\r\n Physical pat-downs are considered by various people to be intrusive and full body scanners will a better substitute that is non as intrusive as pat-downs and that is more thorough. However, since they tacit find out the body of an individual in-depth, they still make people to spirit that their privacy has been invaded. In order to further protect the privacy of peo ple undergoing such scans, screeners are located in a different room from the individual where they can debate images without exposing the individuation of the person undergoing the scan (Tessler). In addition, security officers entering the viewing room are non allowed to enter with mobile phones, cameras or any gadgets that can take images and store or transmit them (Tessler). Still, fears appease that such images may be stored and used in other platforms such as uploading them to the internet. Authorities provide counterarguments such as the assertion that functions that are responsible for storage or transmission are not active but rather that they are handicapped prior to the installation of these devices in airports. This, though, does not overthrow the possibility of technicians managing to enable such functions. Furthermore, it is not sooner clear the reason behind inclusion of such functions in the device yet they get change prior to installation.\r\n The c ostly nature of full body scanners is a major limitation that raises the costs of inaugural for people wishing to enter the aviation industry. more than as they are costly, they fail to reveal objects that are hidden in body cavities and are not capable of revealing objects that are of low density. It is therefore apparent that full body scanner disdain of the significant popularity they have gained in combating security threats and iniquitous practices are incapable of combating drug smuggling that is kill through concealment of drugs in body cavities (Tessler).\r\n bountiful body scanners create a potential for torture or embarrassment of specific groups of people. The device can detect medical equipment that may be affiliated to body parts such as catheters and it may necessitate further examination to confirm the identity of the object detected (Gartner et al). This would embarrass the victim who would feel that they have been singled out because of their medi cal condition. Transgender people are also susceptible to such embarrassment as the scanners are capable of detecting prosthetics such as testicles and breasts and the need may arise to further examine individuals whose images indicate the presence of both breasts and testicles as one of the two body features may be an perform tool to conceal weapons, drugs or other illegal objects or objects not allowed through airport security (Gartner et al).\r\nConclusion\r\n Full body scanners are recommended to correct airport security and only few loopholes are existent like the inability to detect objects in body cavities. Although much criticism has been directed at the devices, much of it is only based on assumptions and not factual information. On the contrary, the benefits of the device are clear by real life examples therefore full body scanners are largely beneficial.\r\nReferences\r\nGartner M., Heyl M., Holstein A. and Thewalt A. What can the ‘raw’ scanner really see? Bild. 22 July 2010. Web. 8 April 2014\r\nTessler, Joelle. Airport full-body scanners have benefits, and limits. The Denver Post. 31 declination 2009. Web. 8 April 2014\r\nTransportation Security Administration, TSA. Advanced visualise Technology (AIT). 12 February 2014. Web. 8 April 2014\r\nSource written document\r\n'