It's Not Trivial

[paft.livejournal.com]

The other day someone asked me, after I’d made some passing comment about the whole TSA get-photographed-naked/be groped issue, why anyone would bother with this when there are so many other more important issues, like world poverty. “Why waste your time talking about something so trivial?” I was asked.

After thinking about it, I decided it’s not a minor issue.

This latest hamhanded policy – and its timing -- amounts to a referendum on how much intrusion officials can inflict on Americans. It’s no accident that this came up not long before the holiday rush. They’re counting on most of us being too preoccupied with getting from point A to point B to complain. After a few weeks, they hope, we’ll get used to it and accept it as the norm.



That’s really what it’s about.

So what’s next? Because rest assured, the envelope will be pushed a little further once they’ve established that we will put up with either being effectively photographed nude or strangers groping our genitals. It always is. Every time such authorities make an incursion into our privacy, it’s with solemn assurances that it will not be abused and – honest to God! – this is as far as they’ll go. Really! Cross their hearts and hope to die!

Don’t for one minute assume that wealthy and influential travelers are going to be subjected to this policy. Once it becomes established, opting out of it will become just one more cozy perk enjoyed by high end business fliers, one more little chip at the dignity of the rest of us.

No, it’s not on quite the same scale as world poverty, the nuclear arms race, unemployment, or torture. But it’s still important. It impacts us all. It forces us to confront how much of our personal privacy we’re willing to relinquish in the name of security.

At what point do we draw the line?

Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

Comments

Re: Can someone please let me know

[existentme.livejournal.com]

Heh. Hide and wait, and soonly enough someone will be asking the same question about foot travel.

This is a virtual gold mine: yes, we need our air travel safe, so we may as well have our train and bus travel safe, and not to mention, omg, have you ever seen how many people are gathered in those stadiums every Sunday afternoon? Those scanners cost cash, and bureaucracies love to expand.

My opinion is that it is immaterial whether one or the other is a right or not - our government does not own us, or we ought not let it in any case. Therefore, strangely enough, the decision with regard to the level of intrusion we permit for illusory or actual safety is actually our decision and not its.

Re: Can someone please let me know

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Well it is significantly different to foot travel in at least 1 important sense: you don't have to hire someone elses legs in order to travel by foot.

Normally I would simply say that if the airlines are willing to forgo the searches, they're the ones providing the service.

But on the other hand, by putting people on an aircraft, you're potentially turning it into a very large guided missile, a la 9/11. So the government would seem to have a certain purview into the issue. Although a simpler solution to that, is to make aircraft hijack proof.

Re: Can someone please let me know

[existentme.livejournal.com]

Yes, and this is all very well taken. My point, however, is that without some vigilance, all the differences you cite will eventually either disappear or cease to matter.

(Besides all that (and having nothing to do with this thread), it does not take a genius even of the average politician's caliber to figure out that the most effective and long lasting and least expensive way to fight terrorism is to simply stop one's own terrorist activities across the globe.)

Re: Can someone please let me know

[nikoel.livejournal.com]

Neither the new scanners or the enhanced pat downs would have stopped 9-11.

Re: Can someone please let me know

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

I don't know whether or not that's true, taking into consideration other existing measures such as luggage searches, but I do know that hijack proofing the flight deck and training the flight crew to ignore whatever is going on behind them in the event of hijacking, certainly would have. In that case the Saudis probably wouldn't have even bothered trying.

Re: Can someone please let me know

[qnetter]

And we don't have a time machine, so your point is moot. The question is whether they have already stopped or deterred any other options. A question to which you can't possibly know the answer.