Theory Posting

Before the terrorist attacks of 9-11, the thought of improving airport security seemed irrelavent, because the idea of a terrorist attack occuring throught the use of our airlines was unheard of. It is no secret that the catastrophic event that occurred in New York City on September 11, 2001 is the most devastating event that has taken place within our country's walls since the attacks on Pearl Harbor. In order to prevent such an event from ever happening again, the US Transportation Security Administration have employed groundbreaking technological advancements and plan for many more to come into use within the next few years. One of these new machines called SPO technology has the ability to has the ability to scan moving people, including those who are not in the security line, within one second before or after they enter a transit area. They also have the ability to single out people as a possible threat (Skycontrol). However, like any new advancement, there are people who support the new technology, as well as those who oppose its bringing into use.

It is obvious that the use of new airport security would be supported by many people because it make the potential flyer feel safer. I know one of the first feelings a flyer has when he or she steps on to the aircraft is, "Am I going to have a safe and successful flight?," or something of that nature. The improvement of airport security not only provides travelers with a sense of safety, but more importantly, with technological advancements, the chances of another 9-11 occurring are slim to none. It is for the safety of our country as a whole. (evolution of security)

So if this new technology is going to make our country many times safer, then why would anyone be opposed? The answer is money and jobs. The funding provided by the government to technologically advance our airport security is billions of billions of dollars. With our economy on the downfall, it is easy to argue that money should be invested into improving our banking system to create a better money flow. The second reason people are opposed is due to the number of jobs that would be taken from people due to new technology. The Charlotte Douglas Airport employees about a thousand jobs just at the security check points (note this is the approximation spread across three shifts)(airport jobs). New technological advancement will drastically decrease the number of security jobs. These new machines only require at most three people to opperate. So if five machines are in on security area. The number of employees will decrease from about thirty during a work shift to around fifteen. Thus, adding to the overall economic downfall.

Since there are two polar opposite sides, how can our government find a happy medium, or will they have to choose one or the other. In my opinion, keeping our county is safe and improving our economy are the two most important government based issues in our country today. In order to provide a happy medium between both those who oppose the technological advancements, such as the SPO technology, and those who support its use, the government is going to have to continue to make technological advancement while creating new airport jobs. The government should not allow number of airport security jobs should not take a drastic fall. After all, machines can and will make mistakes.