The Transport Security Administration (TSA) has registered a remarkable growth, owing to the increase in the need for public safety. This agency is mandated to ensure the most effective and efficient transportation security. Over the recent past, security concerns have added significant woes to the airline industry that is already hit by labor union problems and high prices which have made terrorists to evade the traditional screening techniques. As a result of the recent security threats, the TSA has decided to sacrifice its privacy concerns to guarantee total safety to the transportation sector. This has changed the security situation not only in the US but also across the world.
The airports have beefed up security policies to prevent another tragic event from happening. In response to the escalating public concern about transport security, particularly airport security, Congress federalized airport security to remove inconsistencies in the private security service providers. Sophisticated screening systems such as Explosion Trace Detection systems (ETD), Sniffer dogs and Explosion Detection systems (EDS) have been put in place to prevent these uncertainties. The TSA is also using advanced computer systems such as the computer-assisted passenger pre-screening systems (CAPPS 2) to screen passengers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
A sweeping change has been seen in every airport after the devastating Al-Qaeda attack that happened in 2001. According to Biggs et al. (2013), the attack prompted the TSA to employ more than 55, 000 screeners at the end of 2002. As a backup, the TSA developed and maintained a pool of 700 screeners that were deployed across every airport in the country. As much as the TSA has tried to improve in its service, training and staffing remain a big issue and the screeners’ effectiveness in locating explosives and weapons is disappointing. Apart from airport security, the TSA has also improved its services in the whole body scanning (Bragdon, 2011). A thorough check is carried out to allay any security concerns about terrorists hiding dangerous weapons and explosives in their garments as in the case Umar Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian terrorist that went through normal airport screening in the busy Schiphol airport without being noticed.
Whole-body scanning appears to be the best option and countries like the United States have started to use it in airports. If whole-body scanners were in use at that time, Umar Abdulmutallab could likely have been nabbed by the airport securities. As indicated by Chan and Anteby (2016), the Transport Security Administration has more than 40 whole-body scanners that have been deployed in 19 U.S. airports and around 450 scanners will be distributed across all 450 airports (Mead and General, 2012). The TSA currently uses two kinds of technologies for whole-body scanning. One of the technologies used is the one-millimeter wave scanning technology. This type of scanner uses harmless electromagnetic waves to develop a 3D body image. The other technology used is the backscatter machines that take two X-rays to develop a 2D image (Peterson et al., 2014). The use of this technology is contentious because the X-rays used are potentially harmful to human tissues. However, it is convenient for passengers because it a bit faster speeding up security clearance. The intrusive nature of these technologies has made privacy advocates to be cautious about the privacy of the passengers.
The TSA has also started to carry out various researches to invent new ultra-precise scanning systems that will be more accurate than the scanning device. The MIT engineers have already devised the T-rays based laser scanning system that is faster and precise than the X-ray (Roots, 2013). This device can penetrate human tissue s, plastic and metals and have the capability to examine objects in terms of chemical composition. Additionally, the TSA is also monitoring the sterile zones in the airport, routine screening of airport staff, passenger and baggage screening to avoid terrorist attacks. The dramatic improvement in transportation security has improved safety in airport, rail, water, and road.
References
Biggs, A. T., Cain, M. S., Clark, K., Darling, E. F., & Mitroff, S. R. (2013). Assessing visual search performance differences between Transportation Security Administration Officers and nonprofessional visual searchers. Visual Cognition , 21 (3), 330-352.
Bragdon, C. (2011). Transportation security. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Chan, C. K., & Anteby, M. (2016). Task segregation as a mechanism for within-job inequality: Women and men of the transportation security administration. Administrative Science Quarterly , 61 (2), 184-216.
Mead, K. M., & General, I. (2012). Key challenges facing the transportation security administration. Office of the Inspector General Report Number CC-2002-180, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC.
Peterson, R. M., Bittel, R. H., Forgie, C. A., Lee, W. H., & Nestor, J. J. (2014). Using USCAP’s analytical models, the transportation security administration balances the impacts of aviation security policies on passengers and airlines. Interfaces, 37(1), 52-67.
Roots, R. (2013). Terrorized into absurdity: The creation of the Transportation Security Administration. The Independent Review, 7(4), 503-517.
