The opinion blurb from Tuesday, “CNN claims backlash to airport body scans,” could only have been written to incite fury. To summarize that piece with a quote from it: “Flying is not a right guaranteed in the Constitution.” If you don’t like it, don’t fly!
This interpretation of the role of the Constitution in our society claims that the only rights we should expect are the ones specifically granted in it? Or something? This is a very dangerous argument. It implies that since flying is not a right, there is no line that cannot be crossed if we say the words “national security.” But there is a line of course, and once we admit that some line exists, it becomes a question of defining it for ourselves. The so-called Shoe Bomber appeared, so our shoes must be X-rayed. Okay. The Underwear Bomber came next, so now the TSA wants to check my underwear. That’s my line, but maybe yours is past that.
Perhaps after the arrest of the Colon Bomber, as you prepare for your mandated pre-boarding prostate exam, you will object. Or, perhaps not.
The argument against the full body scans and the new, “enhanced” pat-down is about saying, “This is my line.” No, I refuse to be strip-searched without cause, even if a machine is doing the stripping. (See: Fourth Amendment. What up, Constitution?) No, I refuse to let you grope my man-parts, even if you are looking for a bomb in my underpants. Take a picture, it would last longer. No, like I said, I refuse to let you take a picture.
There is more at stake than flying. As our friend the opinion writer from Tuesday suggests, we should note that the Constitution also provides no guarantee of rights to take trains, drive or walk so maybe we should have government agents fondling us when we try to do those things as well.
For those who would say that this sounds paranoid (like me: I would say that.), you might consider that a warrant is no longer required to listen in on your phone calls — “national security” — so you are not entitled to privacy on the phone; nor is a warrant required for the FBI to place tracking devices on your car — “national security” — so you are not entitled to privacy in your driveway. (Search the recent case of American student Yasir Afifi in Santa Clara, Calif.)
Therefore I submit that before you decide that the new security procedures are “at most a minimal inconvenience,” you should take a moment to ask: Where is my line, and what will I do once my line is crossed? However one feels about the quick-trigger striking of French workers, one must acknowledge that they know that they have power over their government, and they know how to exercise it. Better to overuse that power from time to time than risk the impotence implicit in the statement, “Flying is not a right guaranteed in the Constitution.”
[email protected]