September 11, 2001 is a day that no American will ever forget. On that day, Islamic terrorist group, al-Qaeda, carried out the largest terrorist attack in United States history. As many may know, the attack consisted of four plane hijackings, with two of them being flown into the World Trade Center, one hitting the Pentagon and another crashing in Pennsylvania (“Should Full-Body Scanners Be Used in U.S. Airports?”, 2010, p. 3). As a result, a total of 3,000 civilians were killed, including over 400 law enforcement personnel. This tragic event has encouraged the United States government to enforce stricter airport security in order to prevent future terrorist attacks. In order to ensure passenger safety, the U.S. government has decided to use
…show more content…
According to Mark Fischetti, an editor at Scientific American, “The security equipment in place at the nation’s airports was mandated in the 1970’s, when the chief concern was hijackings, not terrorist bombings. So while the metal detectors we all step through can uncover guns, knives, and other metal weapons, they can’t find hidden explosives” (“Should Full-Body Scanners Be Used In U.S. Airports?”, 2010, p. 4). Mark Fischetti is explaining that the prior forms of security used by the Transportation Security Administration can detect metal objects but can’t find any explosives. With the use of full-body scanners; however, they can detect any explosives in the form of powders, liquids or other bomb residue. They can do this because the full-body scanners are able to get a three-dimensional view of a passenger's body and see through their clothing to identify any metallic or nonmetallic materials (Leslie & Schneider, 2010, p. 1). An example of where these full-body scanners could have been effective is with the Christmas Day bombing incident. On December 25, 2009, a terrorist by the name of Abdulmutallab hid PETN powder in his underwear and was failed to be detected by security; however, the bomb was never detonated. With the use of full-body scanners, the terrorist would have never made it past security with the explosive in his underwear, which shows that these scanners can help save many innocent civilians
According to Mark Fischetti, an editor at Scientific American, “The security equipment in place at the nation’s airports was mandated in the 1970’s, when the chief concern was hijackings, not terrorist bombings. So while the metal detectors we all step through can uncover guns, knives, and other metal weapons, they can’t find hidden explosives” (“Should Full-Body Scanners Be Used In U.S. Airports?”, 2010, p. 4). Mark Fischetti is explaining that the prior forms of security used by the Transportation Security Administration can detect metal objects but can’t find any explosives. With the use of full-body scanners; however, they can detect any explosives in the form of powders, liquids or other bomb residue. They can do this because the full-body scanners are able to get a three-dimensional view of a passenger's body and see through their clothing to identify any metallic or nonmetallic materials (Leslie & Schneider, 2010, p. 1). An example of where these full-body scanners could have been effective is with the Christmas Day bombing incident. On December 25, 2009, a terrorist by the name of Abdulmutallab hid PETN powder in his underwear and was failed to be detected by security; however, the bomb was never detonated. With the use of full-body scanners, the terrorist would have never made it past security with the explosive in his underwear, which shows that these scanners can help save many innocent civilians