Get the Government Out of Our Pants

http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/15/get-the-government-out-of-our

Get the Government Out of Our Pants
by Steve Chapman

When it comes to protecting against terrorism, this is how things usually go: 
A danger presents itself. The federal government responds with new rules that 
erode privacy, treat innocent people as suspicious, and blur the distinction 
between life in a free society and life in a correctional facility. And we 
all tamely accept the new intrusions, like sheep being shorn.

Maybe not this time.

The war on terrorism is going to get personal. Very personal. Americans have 
long resented the hassles that go with air travel ever since 9/11—long 
security lines, limits on liquids, forced removal of footwear, and so on. But 
if the Transportation Security Administration has its way, we will look back 
to 2009 as the good old days.

The agency is rolling out new full-body scanners, which eventually will 
replace metal detectors at all checkpoints. These machines replicate the 
experience of taking off your clothes, but without the fun. They enable 
agents to get a view of your body that leaves nothing to the imagination.

A lot of people, of course, couldn't care less if a stranger wants to gaze 
upon everything God gave them. But some retain a modesty that makes them 
reluctant to parade naked in front of people they don't know, even virtually. 
Henceforth, Jennifer Aniston is going to think twice before flying commercial.

Besides the indignity of having one's body exposed to an airport screener, 
there is a danger the images will find a wider audience. The U.S. Marshals 
Service recently admitted saving some 35,000 images from a machine at a 
federal courthouse in Florida. TSA says that will never happen. Human 
experience says, oh, yes, it will.

For the camera-shy, TSA will offer an alternative: "enhanced" pat-downs. And 
you'll get a chance to have an interesting conversation with your children 
about being touched by strangers. This is not the gentle frisking you may 
have experienced at the airport in the past. It requires agents to probe 
aggressively in intimate zones—breasts, buttocks, crotches. If you enjoyed 
your last mammography or prostate exam, you'll love the enhanced pat-down.

Reviews of the procedure are coming in, and they are not raves. The Allied 
Pilots Association calls it a "demeaning experience," and one pilot 
complained it amounted to "sexual molestation." The head of a flight 
attendants' union local said that for anyone who has been sexually assaulted, 
it will "drudge up some bad memories."

But the option of the full-body scanner is not so appealing, either, even 
leaving out privacy concerns. Two pilots' unions have advised members not to 
go through the scanners because of the possible risks of being bombarded with 
low doses of radiation.

"There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk 
of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations," a group of 
scientists from the University of California at San Francisco informed the 
White House.

Aviation trade groups fear the public has finally been pushed over the 
edge. "We have received hundreds of e-mails and phone calls from travelers 
vowing to stop flying," Geoff Freeman, executive vice president of the U.S. 
Travel Association, told Reuters.

The new policy is being challenged in court by the Electronic Privacy 
Information Center, which says it violates the Fourth Amendment's ban on 
unreasonable searches. But don't expect judges to save us.

Says Stanford University law professor Robert Weisberg, with resignation in 
his voice, "Airports are pretty much a Fourth Amendment-free zone."

Though the harm to privacy is certain, the benefit to public safety is not. 
The federal Government Accountability Office has said it "remains unclear" if 
the scanners would have detected the explosives carried by the would-be 
Christmas Day bomber.

They would also be useless against a terrorist who inserts a bomb in his 
rectum—like the al-Qaida operative who blew himself up last year in an 
attempt to kill a Saudi prince. Full-body scanning will sorely chafe many 
innocent travelers, while creating only a minor inconvenience to bloodthirsty 
fanatics.

The good news is that last year, the House of Representatives voted to bar 
the use of whole-body scanners for routine screening. But only a sustained 
public outcry will force a change.

We will soon find out if there is a limit to the sacrifices of personal 
freedom that Americans will endure in the name of fighting terrorism. If we 
don't say no when they want to inspect and handle our private parts, when 
will we?

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot