Positive Profiling: Blessing or Curse for the Freedom of Airport Passengers?
Author: Annekatrin Thiele
1 Commentries
Since the terror attacks of September 2001, the United States intensified their airline security checks in order to find the suspects as well as to prevent future attacks. As a result of these attacks and the following security precautions racial profiling became the order of the day. The attacks were carried out by Arabic people and from this time on every person who is of Arabic origin was a potential suspect. Consequently, racial profiling means that people get a suspicious because of their origin, religion or political attitude. In order to dispose the racial profiling the government introduced the positive profiling, in 2006.
In contrast to racial profiling, positive profiling means that people will not be selected by ethnical or religious reasons but by certain behavioural patterns. But it is just one part of an entire security procedure and technically high developed systems are required. The idea was not a new one as in the 1960´s the Federal Aviation Administration already wanted to implement such a procedure but it was abandoned. Due to a tragic accident the passenger profiling was taken up again and the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System, in short CAPPS, was born. CAPPS, which was introduced in 1997, is a management tool for airports that selects passengers and labels them as risky or non-risky passengers while they are checking in, using 39 different kinds of information.
A passenger who is assumed to be a low-risk traveller only needs to pass the metal detector and has to accept that his luggage will be controlled with the help of an x-ray machine, the so-called primary screening. Once a passenger is labelled as a potential threat and, therefore, as a selectee has to pass a second screening. This includes an entire check of his clothes, baggage through explosive detection systems as well as a questioning about why, where and with whom he is traveling. After 2001 it was decided to enhance the systems abilities and CAPPS II was launched. But soon it was replaced by the new system Secure Flight. But the only difference is that not the airlines are in charge for collecting and maintaining the data but the Transportation Security Administration. A passenger's name gets filtered through different data bases in order to find out if he is maybe connected with terrorists.
Also these systems are very helpful and may prevent future attacks, opinions about that topic are very controversial. There are supporters of this idea who say it is a very essential part of airport security because it raises the probability to concentrate on finding terrorists. Furthermore, it would decrease the inconveniences of other passengers raised by long and irritating waiting periods because they are able to pass without additional checks. Furthermore, passenger profiling is a potential way of reducing security costs as long lasting security checks will become unnecessary. In more detail, passenger profiling would shorten the baggage screening process as just selected passengers would have to pass it. Airports, consequently, would be able to use this money for maintaining their security standards and procedures. As these arguments reveal travellers which are assumed as being trustworthy are not limited in their travel behaviour.
But there are some negative aspects which have to be considered as well. All named systems do not assure if they are working properly and if the right person was selected or not. There is no certainty that selectees are real terrorists or if they maybe just fall into certain patterns which seem to be suspicious. Systems can be manipulated as well as innocent passengers who may be forced to become a part of the attack. Another weak point is that someone has to be in charge of collecting the data and it has to be questioned who is the owner and why this person is the owner. Besides, people often refuse it to relinquish all their private information. A further weak point of the profiling system is who decides which passenger is trustworthy as there is a wide range of possible criteria.
Since profiling systems interfere in passengers' privacy new procedures have been implemented in order to avoid that. The trusted traveller program was introduced in 2001 and works on a voluntary basis. Passengers can decide on their own if and which information they want to relinquish to the government. The background is again that airports are able to focus more on people who are not registered. For participation passengers have to pay an annual fee of $ 28.
Previously shown profiling systems imply both positive and negative aspects. But we have to decide if we want a safer airport check or if we insist on our privacy regardless our security. This means we should also care about the liberty of others to be safe instead of just insist on our own right.
Ravich, T, M (2007): Is Airline Passenger Screening Necessary?, University of Miami Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 5, p. 1-59
Martonosi, S, E, Barnett, A (2006): How Effective Is Security Screening of Airline Passengers?, Interfaces, Vol. 36, No. 6, November-December 2006, pp. 545-552
Stone, C, A, Zissu, A (2007): Registered Traveler Program: The Financial Value of Registering the Good Guys, Review of Policy Research, Vol. 24, No. 5
In contrast to racial profiling, positive profiling means that people will not be selected by ethnical or religious reasons but by certain behavioural patterns. But it is just one part of an entire security procedure and technically high developed systems are required. The idea was not a new one as in the 1960´s the Federal Aviation Administration already wanted to implement such a procedure but it was abandoned. Due to a tragic accident the passenger profiling was taken up again and the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System, in short CAPPS, was born. CAPPS, which was introduced in 1997, is a management tool for airports that selects passengers and labels them as risky or non-risky passengers while they are checking in, using 39 different kinds of information.
A passenger who is assumed to be a low-risk traveller only needs to pass the metal detector and has to accept that his luggage will be controlled with the help of an x-ray machine, the so-called primary screening. Once a passenger is labelled as a potential threat and, therefore, as a selectee has to pass a second screening. This includes an entire check of his clothes, baggage through explosive detection systems as well as a questioning about why, where and with whom he is traveling. After 2001 it was decided to enhance the systems abilities and CAPPS II was launched. But soon it was replaced by the new system Secure Flight. But the only difference is that not the airlines are in charge for collecting and maintaining the data but the Transportation Security Administration. A passenger's name gets filtered through different data bases in order to find out if he is maybe connected with terrorists.
Also these systems are very helpful and may prevent future attacks, opinions about that topic are very controversial. There are supporters of this idea who say it is a very essential part of airport security because it raises the probability to concentrate on finding terrorists. Furthermore, it would decrease the inconveniences of other passengers raised by long and irritating waiting periods because they are able to pass without additional checks. Furthermore, passenger profiling is a potential way of reducing security costs as long lasting security checks will become unnecessary. In more detail, passenger profiling would shorten the baggage screening process as just selected passengers would have to pass it. Airports, consequently, would be able to use this money for maintaining their security standards and procedures. As these arguments reveal travellers which are assumed as being trustworthy are not limited in their travel behaviour.
But there are some negative aspects which have to be considered as well. All named systems do not assure if they are working properly and if the right person was selected or not. There is no certainty that selectees are real terrorists or if they maybe just fall into certain patterns which seem to be suspicious. Systems can be manipulated as well as innocent passengers who may be forced to become a part of the attack. Another weak point is that someone has to be in charge of collecting the data and it has to be questioned who is the owner and why this person is the owner. Besides, people often refuse it to relinquish all their private information. A further weak point of the profiling system is who decides which passenger is trustworthy as there is a wide range of possible criteria.
Since profiling systems interfere in passengers' privacy new procedures have been implemented in order to avoid that. The trusted traveller program was introduced in 2001 and works on a voluntary basis. Passengers can decide on their own if and which information they want to relinquish to the government. The background is again that airports are able to focus more on people who are not registered. For participation passengers have to pay an annual fee of $ 28.
Previously shown profiling systems imply both positive and negative aspects. But we have to decide if we want a safer airport check or if we insist on our privacy regardless our security. This means we should also care about the liberty of others to be safe instead of just insist on our own right.
Ravich, T, M (2007): Is Airline Passenger Screening Necessary?, University of Miami Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 5, p. 1-59
Martonosi, S, E, Barnett, A (2006): How Effective Is Security Screening of Airline Passengers?, Interfaces, Vol. 36, No. 6, November-December 2006, pp. 545-552
Stone, C, A, Zissu, A (2007): Registered Traveler Program: The Financial Value of Registering the Good Guys, Review of Policy Research, Vol. 24, No. 5