Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Despite the fact that full body scanners may be the most technologically advanced equipment we could realistically put in an airport, they still have their shortcomings. Full body scanners can't see inside your body. Generally, the machines also can't find items stashed in a body cavity. This means that a determined terrorist could potentially store bomb materials or weapons inside their body, specifically in their anus. Since such a low dose of electromagnetic energy is beamed inside the people who enter the scanners, the images are only skin deep. So just how drug traffickers smuggle drugs inside their bodies, terrorists could do the same but with far more dangerous materials. As America witnessed with the failed shoe bomber, it does not take a great deal of free space to hide materials that could overthrow or take a plane down. For instance, C4 explosive, which is military grade, can be fit in the anus of a determined individual. Taking this into account, it becomes all too apparent that smuggling a small knife on to a plane would be a relatively simple task. On top of the practical problems associated with the technology, there is a certain social stigma associated with using full body scanners (Smith, n.d.).
With the full body scanners, it ultimately boils down to one human being seeing another human being nude, although somewhat distorted. Many people are self-conscious about their physical appearance which is never an issue with pat downs or metal detectors. However, full body scanners are effective because they don't hide anything at all, but this is also their downfall. The technology itself was made with the best of intentions, but human beings aren't the most pure of creatures so it can easily be misused. For instance, a scanner image of a celebrity could potentially be sold for a great deal of money by a greedy TSA worker. An overweight individual could potentially become the subject of many jokes among co-workers without that individual ever knowing. The verdict as to whether or not these machines are beneficial remains to be seen, so we must conduct further research (Smith, n.d.).
Critics of full body scanning say that the technology isn't a magical machine that will totally resolve aviation security concerns. In spite of the complexity of the piece of technology, if one can gather the information on how it works and what its technological constraints are, then that machine is not going to discourage a sophisticated terrorist operation. The Electronic Privacy Information Center and the American Civil Liberties Union also feel that the scanners infringe on Americans' privacy rights and the Fourth Amendment, which defends against unreasonable searches and seizures. Others are questioning the security of delivering small doses of radiation to millions of people, a procedure some experts say is sure to result in a few added cancer deaths. The radiation amount administered by the scan is so small that the risk to an individual is insignificant. But communally, the radiation doses from the scanners incrementally augment the risk of fatal cancers among the thousands or millions of travelers who will be exposed, some radiation experts believe. Another anti-scanner dispute is that the devices break child protection laws, which forbid the creation of offensive images of children. Privacy campaigners maintain the images fashioned by the scanners are so graphic they amount to virtual strip-searching. "Even Pope Benedict XVI has weighed in on the privacy debate. He has said the threat of global terrorism does not merit impositions into personal privacy, according to the Catholic News Agency" (Full-body scanners: Security hopes and privacy fears, 2012).
No matter which side of the argument that one falls on there is no doubt that there is a real need for increased security in airports everywhere. Unfortunately, these are the times that we now live in. There is a need to make sure that no one gets on an airplane with the capability to do harm to other people. Right now the current technology that is being used to accomplish this is full body scanners. It may be in the future that a different technology surfaces and things change, but for now we must learn to live with what we have.
Research needs to be done into the complaints about the effectiveness of the scanners along with the safety issues that have been brought to the table. If it can be shown that these scanners are not effective at reducing the amount of dangerous things that get onto airplanes or it is proven that the machines are not safe for individuals, then the technology should be reevaluated and a new plan put into place. On the other hand if it is shown that these are nothing more than a slight inconvenience then people have a decision to make. Fly and submit to the body scanners or don't fly. In the end the main goal is to keep flyers safe while in the air and if full body scanners are the only way at the moment that this can be done, then travelers need to learn to adjust as the alternatives are not very inviting at all.
Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT). (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/index.shtm
Brain, M. (2012). How Airport Full-Body Scanners Work -- and the huge national debate around the TSA right now. Retrieved from http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2010/11/17/how-airport-full-body-scanners-work-
Eaton, K. (2009). Full-Body Scanners at Airports: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
Retreived from http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kit-eaton/technomix/full-body-scanners-airports-good-bad-and-ugly
Full-body scanners: Security hopes and privacy fears. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.prairie.org/events/23449/full-body-scanners-security-hopes-and-privacy-fearsSwallow, E. (2011). The Science Behind Airport Body Scanners. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2011/11/17/tsa-body-scanner/
Smith, M. (n.d.). X-Ray Full Body Scanners. Retrieved from http://sites.google.com/site/mryansmith5892/fios-internet
Solanki, P. (2012). Whole Body Imaging at Airports. Retreived from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/airport-body-imaging-whole-body-imaging.html[continue]
"Ethics And Morality Full Body" (2012, April 26) Retrieved October 22, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-and-morality-full-body-56880
"Ethics And Morality Full Body" 26 April 2012. Web.22 October. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-and-morality-full-body-56880>
"Ethics And Morality Full Body", 26 April 2012, Accessed.22 October. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-and-morality-full-body-56880
The report suggested that the planned ban on human cloning should be evaluated inside of five years, but that it ought to be reassessed only if a fresh technical appraisal indicates that the actions are probable to be secure and successful, and if an extensive nationwide conversation on community, spiritual and ethical issues proposes that re-examination is necessary. The panel deemed that the technical and medical contemplations that rationalize
38); a Prince should also appear to keep at least some of the old ways so the people will readily accept the new ways (Machiavelli, Discourses on the first decade of Titus Livius, 2007, p. 98). While the circumstances may change, it is clear that a Prince must be willing and able to manipulate appearances in order to convince others to give their power over to him. 3. Conclusion Niccolo Machiavelli's
These are some of the opinions and arguments by which I have come to sway my agreement more in the Direction of NRLC. Ethically speaking, the NARAL provides a strong argument about the rights of women, and I do think there is much to be said for that. However, as NRLC proclaims, someone has to look out for the rights of the children that are being murdered everyday. It would
Also, careless people with guns shot the condors at will; and when ranchers put out poison to kill wolves and grizzly bears the condors then fed on those carcasses and were poisoned as well. In 1937 the U.S. Congress set aside a refuge for the condors in Santa Barbara County and in Ventura County in 1947, trying to protect these great birds, Peeters explains (p. 114). By 1987, there were
Ethics in the Workplace Organizational ethics is an area that is gaining increased importance in formal professional education. Ethics are moral rules that guide the behavior and conduct of an individual. Since ethics are shaped by personal factors like religion, family, society, law and culture, it is unlikely that two people share the same ethical standards or viewpoints (Weiss 2008, p. 116). This frequently gives rise to ethical conflicts or internal
Ethics and Morality -- Ethics and Development The problem of "development" (or, perhaps "progress" and "advancement" also fits in this context) is that while many millions of citizens of the world have been blessed by dramatic progress (technological, industrial, and communications) over the past few decades, many millions are being left behind. Indeed, while millions are living better, living more comfortable lives, countless millions are not benefiting in the least from
That ethics has become so controversial reflects the individual nature of ethics. Each individual choice is imbued with certain ethical assumptions, but those assumptions will vary from person to person. Only when those assumptions are shared by a large enough segment of society do they become norms. For the individual, the choice often becomes the decision between one's personal code of ethics and that of society as a whole. Even the