For my first political post, I am going to address the TSA and it's new actions, and my opposition to them.
The new program that has been implemented uses backscatter imaging to produce a portrait of the individual beneath their clothing. The view is fairly obscured, but it does embarrass many people to be viewed like this. If one does not wish to be scanned, they may opt to have an enhanced pat down, which seems to involve, among other things, using the screener's hands to examine the groin area. Additionally, some people are randomly chosen for patdowns, but this was in place before, though the content of the patdown may have changed after the terrorism attempt of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
There are several reasons why this supposed improvement in procedure should not be implemented. The first is opportunity cost. Clearly this development is intended to save lives, but the money used to do so could be used to save more lives elsewhere through other means, such as vaccination, and so considering all lives equally it fails. Opportunity cost, however, is not always a good analytical tool, as it may not be possible to implement the other, preferable policies due to political considerations. Therefore the policy must stand based on strict cost-benefit analysis. It fails again.
The benefit is a decreased likelihood of terrorist attack, however, the likelihood of such an attack is already exceedingly low. If one wished to destroy a plane, it is obvious from images generated by the scanners that it would be easy to adapt to them by placing the explosive in an orifice or within the body in some other fashion. Therefore the benefits are, at most, dubious. The costs, however, are not. First, there is the immediate humiliation and distress caused by the process. Second, there is the manner in which this distress undermines liberty by conditioning individuals to accept invasive government control of their persons. Third, there is the precedent created by allowing such action, which may be in contravention of the Fourth Amendment, both in the public and the judicial mind. Last, there is the cost of the purchase and implementation of the scanners, which is prodigious. Therefore, given the lack of apparent benefit and the serious implications of the policy, it is reprehensible and ought to be opposed.
Let me note in closing that I do believe that the patdown option is designed to give the illusion of choice while at the same time giving a massive and humiliating incentive to simply comply. In short, it is punitive.
Another blog arguing many of the same things and providing various citations and linked articles:
http://laliberty.tumblr.com/post/1651803621/the-case-against-the-tsa
