Seven Years After 9-11/ Are Our Airports Any Safer? A comparison of airport security before and after 9-11

This years presidential election is a huge toss up (2008 Election). Who has the better tax plan? Who has the more efficient health care plan? Which candidate has the more productive plan for reducing gas prices? All of these are concerns voters are going to have. With the economy grasping all the voter's attention (Economic downfall), the issue of homeland security has seemed to get lost in the mix. If this was a repeat of the 2004 election, homeland security would be the number one issue on the importance scale (2004 election). Don't get me wrong, it is viewed as a very important issue in this election, but I think it is an issue that should receive more attention than it is receiving right now. After all, many would argue that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 have had the most crucial effect on our country since the new millennium (9-11). The Department of Homeland Security was formed in response of the 9-11 attacks, which of course occurred during the presidential term of President George W. Bush. Many critiques would argue that President Bush is the worst ranked president in U.S. history (Worst Job Ever), and since the Department of Homeland Security was formed during Bush's administration, many people argue homeland security has not been as affective as it could be under the administration of a different president (Department of Homeland Security). I even heard a guy say one time that he thought Dennis Rodman (Dennis Rodman) would have made a better president. There was a rumor once that Rodman was considering running for the position. Enough chatting though. The terrorist attacks of 9-11 left our country petrified of airline use and in need of a government response.

With the airport security as tight and technologically advanced as it is in today's airports (Security Advancements), it seems like the pre 9-11 airport security regulations are long forgotten. However, these slack regulations should never be forgotten, as our country may have never suffered from the affects of a terrorist attack, had these new advanced regulations been put into affect in the first place.
Its easy to say that now, but lets take a look at just how easy it was for the terrorist attacks to take place (Target for Terrorists). First and foremost, the airport security before 9-11 was a joke (warning). My father used to put his pocket knife in his carry on bag and it would pass right through the security check point. However, my father's pocket knife is minor compared to the weapons people have passed throught security. Many times teams were able to breach security about 90% of the time, sneaking bombs and submachine guns past airport screeners, exploiting expensive new bomb detection machines which consistently failed. According to one team leader, "The team repeatedly warned the FAA of the potential for security breaches and hijackings but was told to cover up its findings." (FAA) So if we knew our security system was weak, then why didn't our federal government fix the problem and strengthen airport scurity.

The changes put in place following the September 11th catastrophe have been drastic and rapidly put into effect. The changes to airport security can be placed into two catagories: those practical and effective, and those irrational, wasteful, and pointless. This summer, I flew to Mexico. Everytime I have flown post 9-11, the Department of Homeland Security has introduced a new technologically advanced security checkpoint, so I was very eagar to see what new security advancements were being used. I recall one new advancement being a machine that as someone passes through, the machine blows air onto the person from every angle possible. These new devices are the most accurate metal detectors on the market and will detect the smallest metal masses (Smith's Detection). On top of this new detector there are many smaller security advacements that have been put into effect: liquid limits, bullet proof cock pits, more intense passenger screening, more body searches and more random bag searches (T-ray). There are many new secruity advancement that are still being processed. These include machines that are heat sensitive, as well as those that will be capable of detecting whether someone is a possible threat based on that person's emotions prior to flying(Malintent). Although most of the changes in airport security have been successful there are those that have not been as successful (ineffective). As mentioned before, in the years before 9-11 if a security detector was not effective the federal government was not stepping in and discarding the use of that machine. Now a days, however, the government is accepting nothing but nearly 100% detection of anything that may be a possible threat to the flight. Despite this there are still many improvements that need to be made. It has been hinted that our country's airports should model some of its security strategies after Isreal's airport security system (Israeli Security System). A fellow classmate of mine constructed a blog in which he compared Isreal's airport security to that of the U.S. (Classmate)

The upcoming election will feature the second elected president of the homeland security era. Many people question how the new administrations are going to approach the subject seeing as it is a very broad issue. Some may also be questioning if McCain is the winner, whether or not he will approach homeland security in the same manner as the Bush Administration (John McCain). Each candidate has his own specific view on how homeland security will be managed during their administration. Both candidates are in extreme favor of increasing airport security. However, Obama's stance on this issue is the one I am in support of. Obama wants to give money toward the advancement of not only our airport security but also toward protecting our nuclear power plants and cyber hackers (Barack Obama). McCain, on the other hand, wants to continue to build the army and national fire power while attempting to create a possitive image toward the war in Iraq (war in Iraq).