Investigation Reveals Serious Breach in Airport Security 1
Officials at some major airports confess that criminal background checks are not performed on employees after they are hired. Rep. John Katko of New York and chairman of a House Homeland Security subcommittee asked if criminal history checks are conducted on every employee, who has access to the entire airport and even goes through the initial background check. (Devin 1) Gary Perdue, who is the FBI’s deputy assistant director of counterterrorism, responds with a no on this subject based on his own knowledge. Security gaps such as this that endanger U.S. airports were assessed at a trial before the House Subcommittee on Transportation Security. Interrogations on present directives conducting
…show more content…
In addition, the Miami International Airport also conducts random criminal background checks after they employ a citizen. Mark Hatfield, who acts as the deputy administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, stated that the TSA is currently investigating the breaches that happened at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport to settle on what policy changes and investments that may possibly be needed. (Devin 2) Hatfield quoted a 2008 report by the Homeland Security Institute that accomplished airport workers going through random screening verified just about as useful as 100% screening, but he included a modernized analysis that could promote present conversations. Katko examined the reason of spending billions of dollars every year on traveler screening although not putting into practice comparable safety measures for airport workers. (Devin …show more content…
Checkpoint.Evo software has been intended to progress the inspection and combination abilities of airport security checkpoints. Checkpoint.Evo bonds separate sensors to a completely networked checkpoint structure to present immediate information gathering, delivery, and organization. Its centralized isolated screening intends to accelerate examination of hand baggage because image assessment and alarm resolution from, for example, X-ray scanners can be centrally supervised away from the sound and commotion at the checkpoint. Additionally, sophisticated recheck utilities electronically spot suspicious regions inside luggage to allow a further focused search for prohibited things by on-the-spot worker, resulting in more rapid throughput and condensed queuing times. Checkpoint.Evo’s information organization abilities put forward instantaneous and chronological information intended for examination and reporting. This permits airport workers to distribute statistics and supervise the whole screening procedure by means of isolated manageable devices, such as tablet PCs. In addition, it allows previous interference for corrective
The Change in Airport Security from 9/11 The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2011 prompted the world to reevaluate and drastically modify airport and airline security. “Four targets had been chosen, all iconic American buildings that would send a clear message of the depth of their hatred for the United States. All four planes crashed, killing all on board—terrorists, crew members, and passengers, along with hundreds who were killed inside the structures, on the ground, and the men and women who ran into collapsing buildings in an effort to try and save others” (Smutz 1). As Jason Villemez said “the decade after the 9/11 attacks reshaped many facets of life in America” (Villemez 1). Before the attacks, people did not think that large scale hostility towards innocent people in our country was remotely possible.
The use of criminal record databases by employers has greatly increased since the 1990s when the information first became relevant (Appelbaum, 2015). The biggest rise in background searches began after the terrorist attacks in New York City on September 11, 2001. Mr. Uggen, a criminologist at the University of Minnesota, states that there is a problem with criminal background checks considering most employers have no idea what they should be looking for. With every business owner having different concerns about potential applicants, “we haven’t really figured out what a disqualifying offense should be for particular activities (Appelbaum,
Tod Miller opens up hisbook by CBP’s involvement in Super Bowl security. This involvement reveals the consequences of hyper-security not only aimed at the order, but also in football fields and local community. The author reveals out the huge budgets spent on the border agency. From the chapter 1,2 and 8, he reports that since 2/11, the US government has spent around $791
Both authors try to put an exact number on the number of individuals that have been detained sine the inception of the Patriot Act to suit their respective arguments. David Cole states that the Justice Department had the number at 1,147 less than two months into the Justice Department’s investigation. The Justice Department, according to Cole, reportedly “responded by simply stopping its practice of announcing the running tally” (p3) due to “mounting criticism over the scope of the roundup”. (p3) Attorney General John Ashcroft gives a substantially lower number of individuals. In three month’s time, he states that 60 individuals had been placed into federal custody, and that 563 have been detained due to immigration violations. (p17) Attorney General John Ashcroft states that the Patriot Act is Constitutionally sound, and that he and the Justice Departmen...
9/11 was one of the United States biggest disasters. Killing nearly 3,000 people including the 19 hijackers that hijacked the planes that crashed in to the two world trade center towers. Many things could have been done differently on the day of September 11, 2001, that could have saved many lives, including the lives of many fire fighters, NYPD officers, and thousands of civilians. The biggest thing that could have been done to stop the attacks is if airport security was much more advanced and more careful with who got on the planes and what they had on them.
“What time should we leave? Two hours in advance? Three? Four?” Millions of people ask these questions each year before boarding a plane. Between driving, security, walking to the gate, and getting settled, boarding a plane exhausts travelers. But out of all of these different activities, one frustrates and restrains travelers the most: TSA security. People ask why they need all this security, complain about the inconvenience it causes, and ultimately annoys people to no end. Created after 9/11, Transportation Security Administration, or TSA, nationalized airport security, increased screening duration, and supposedly increases security on flights. However, statistics say these added security measures never come to fruition and potentially cost more lives than they save.
Airport Security Before the dreaded day of September 11, 2001 , a person or persons flying could be escorted to their gate by family members and loved ones. The thought that a gun would or could be brought on board of an airplane and used as a means to hijack an airplane never crossed a passenger’s mind. Isaac Yeffet said, “After Lockerbie, everyone thought; now we’ve learned the lesson of how to be proactive instead of being reactive. Unfortunately, September 11 came and we know the result.
The evolution of airport security would evolve over time just as airline safety. There would be a series of unfortunate events that would affect the way all airports operated. Prior to these events passengers would simply show up with their luggage and ticket and get on the plane, no screening or baggage checks were conducted. The FAA and the Federal Government had taken many steps by passing numerous pieces of legislation to address aircraft safety to reduce the number of accidents; however aircraft security was never addressed in all previously passed legislation. As the number of air travelers increased year by year, so did the potential for crimes against the airlines. These crimes included aircraft bombing and hijackings.
After the American tragedy of September 11, 2001, airport security became a heated debate that continues today. America must protect itself from terrorist attacks, but some homeland security methods are better than others. In January of 2010, the Obama administration declared that airport passengers from 14 countries, including Pakistan, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia, would be subjected to rigorous screening before flights into the United States (Schneier). Basically, airport security employees would have the right to discriminate against passengers of Arab descent because of the country they were born in. Attempts to improve airport security through racial profiling are unjust, unwarranted, and completely unnecessary. Innocent passengers do not deserve harassment at airport security simply because of their race. Although supporters of these measures argue that they will greatly reduce the chances of terrorist attacks, not all terrorists are of Arab descent. There are also simple strategies in recruitment that terrorist organizations can take to outmaneuver these airport security measures. Airport security can certainly be improved to protect the country, but racial profiling in airports is not the answer.
Over the years the men and women that risk their lives by boarding planes under a false identity to protect us have been called many things. The names range from simple, “Sky Marshal” to more complicated “Civil Aviation Security Liaison Officers.” No matter what they have been called through the years one thing has always stayed the same. The United States Federal Air Marshals have always been a group of our finest law enforcement officers that give up the luxury traditional police work to sit next to crying babies and old talkative ladies all day. They do this with one goal in mind, to keep the airways safe for private citizens to enjoy the luxury of travel. “The history of the air marshals is closely rooted with the history of hijackings and bombings targeting commercial aircraft. Some of the bombings and hijackings throughout history had more of an impact than others on Federal Air Marshal tactics, manpower and security procedures. These events and the responses of those in civil aviation and the US government are essential to understand the need for air marshals as a last line of defense.” (Biles, 2013) With the rise of crime in the aviation sector the US government has gone to the Federal Air Marshals more times than not for protection of its citizens. It has not always been easy for them and they have not had the best funding around but as you will see throughout this paper, The US Federal Air Marshals have always answered when called upon.
A writer for “The Daily Beast,” Andrew Becker reports that this additional step came “at the tail end of a massive hiring surge that began in 2006 and eventually added 17,000 employees, helping to make the agency the largest law enforcement operation in the country.” This arouses great unease and concern about “the thousands of employees Customs and Border Protection has hired over the past six years before it began mandatory polygraph tests for all applicants” (Becker). The records—official summaries of more than 200 polygraph admissions—contain many very disturbing testimonies of applicants admitting to drug smuggling and even murder (Becker). One confession, according to the Customs and Border Protection summary, consisted of an applicant admitting to having “‘no independent recollection of the events that resulted in a blood-doused kitchen and was uncertain if he committed any crime during his three-hour black out’”(Becker). The fact that thousands have been hired without the screening cannot be ignored. It is this negligence that is the cause of agents such as Justin Tackett—an officer who “had a dubious work history long before joining Border Patrol”—being able to find employment within the Border Patrol agency (Peter.) Tackett’s employment history is such as follows: “[he] joined
As a response to the 9/11 attacks, one would expect that the TSA would improve airport security. In reality, it's just security theater. Originally, the use of metal detectors and luggage x-rays in airport security checkpoints was enough. However, on December 25, 2009, an inbound international flight was the target of an attempted bomb plot. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab got past security screening and successfully boarded the plane with explosives packed in his underwear. He nearly succeeded in detonating the bomb, but the detonation didn't go as planned and passengers overpowered him before he could fix the detonation[0]. As a result, the TSA increased the use of full-body scanners to replace metal detectors. Before the 2009 attack, there were only 40 full-body scanners in use across 19 airports. After the attack, the government planned to have over 1000 machines in use by the end of 2011. However, the expensive machines are ineffective. In 2010, TV personality Adam Savage unintentionally managed to get two 12" long razor blades through security[1]. In 2011, an undercover TSA agent was able to successfully pass through the scanners with a handgun in her underwear, repeatedly[2]. The TSA is clearly incapable of creating a truly safe airport checkpoint, and is becoming less effective the longe...
According to the Encarta Dictionary, Racial Profiling is the assumption of criminality among ethnic groups without probable cause. Since the September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center, racial profiling has been the temporary tactic used to stop terrorism. After more than ten years since implementing this practice, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has made little progress. Some American citizens are still skeptical of Middle Eastern and Muslim people even though TSA has caught no terrorists through racial profiling. Although racial profiling has the potential to catch terrorists, it should not be used because racial profiling can justify terrorist acts, it will not improve airport and airline security, and it is discrimination.
Does the thought of going through airport security make you want to jump off a bridge? Some people may think that security in airports is either too strict, or it is not enforced enough. Airport security has certainly developed over time, both in terms of more technology, and in terms of increased security. It has had a lot of reasons to step up, both with terrorist attacks, and with other incidents, such as the way that explosive technology has evolved. The topic of airport security is a big debate: is it too strict or not strict enough? It is important that people know and understand both sides of this important issue.
What could possibly be worse than taking the risk of freezing to death outside at night, yet some of the homeless still chose to instead of going to shelters. Obviously, the current shelter system is not working to bring the homeless in from the streets. This is why we need to create a safe and sanitary environment in shelters. We also need to work with the homeless to ensure transitional housing includes the resources and services they want and need to encourage them to actively use shelters. In this essay we will discuss the spreading of the germs and diseases in shelters.