TSA: Overly Reliant on Technology?

Anyone who has watched the news during the past few days has heard extensive commentary about how a terrorist managed to board a plane with explosives on Christmas Day. Some blame inefficient management of the watch lists, others blame lax security procedures. But one commentator who spoke during a local NBC affiliate broadcast gave the most backwards rationale of all: over reliance on technology.

According to this individual, airport security agents rely too heavily on metal detectors and not enough on thorough questioning about a traveler's background, reasons for flying, and so forth. This criticism runs counter to others, who argue that full-body scans -- which is pretty scarce in airports due to its high price tag and privacy concerns -- would be able to detect explosives.

Of course, security agents should do their due diligence to identify any red flags during check-in procedures; that's part of the job description already. But to expect them -- or even permit them, for that matter-- to make a judgment call about an individual's right to board an airplane would inevitably cause a spike in lawsuits filed by people who felt they were unfairly treated or inappropriately profiled based upon their race or birthplace. There would also be huge discrepancies in who is stopped and who is not, particularly when one considers that some security agents are TSA employees, while others are outside contractors.

The fact remains that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was able to cross the airport security checkpoint and board a plane with explosives hidden in his underwear, despite being on a terrorist watch list and driving his own father to report concerns about his mental state to authorities; this did not happen because a particular security agent failed to ask Abdulmutallab about his time in Yemen or his study of radical Islam in London.

Do security procedures need to improve? Absolutely. But technology should be the enabler.