[ad_1]
The SPOT program observes travelers for signs of stress to prevent terrorism, but has been used for regular criminal activity. It uses behavior detection officers trained to look for psychological signs of stress, which can be indicators of fear. Some argue that it violates citizens’ rights and the Constitution. While helpful, programs like SPOT need scrutiny to ensure they are used for their intended purpose.
Government agencies often use acronyms to name various programs. SPOT is the acronym of Screening Passengers Observation Technique, a program used in airports to observe travelers looking for signs of stress. There are a number of signs that are believed to indicate that a person could be dangerous or cause trouble.
The SPOT program was ostensibly created to help prevent terrorism, but has been used against citizens for regular criminal activity, including non-payment of child support. Some feel that the SPOT program is a good and necessary tool. Some even offer the argument that no one should mind being watched if they have nothing to hide. Others find such an argument repugnant in a country built on personal freedom and the restriction of governmental power. There are many arguments both for and against the SPOT program.
The SPOT program uses “behavior detection officers” trained to look for psychological signs of stress. Profuse sweating, restlessness, twitching of facial features, and other signs can be indicators that a person is experiencing stress or fear. It’s not hard to imagine people appearing fearful – due to a fear of flying – or appearing stressed as they rush to catch their flight, as some have argued. On the other hand, while psychology is not a difficult science, it can sometimes be useful for predicting and perhaps even preventing violent behavior.
Some believe that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) should be looking for potential terrorists rather than people who are behind on child support payments or looking for other common criminals. An extensive criminal justice system already exists for regular criminal activity and offers constitutional protections. Unfortunately, when used as a normal law enforcement tool, SPOT can circumvent these protections.
The Constitution, especially the Fourth Amendment, clearly outlines in which cases a person or their property may be searched or seized. SPOT’s opponents point out that nowhere in that amendment is there a justification for detaining a person, searching him or his belongings because his facial features indicate stress, which is what SPOT does. They say it reeks of “facecrime” as described by George Orwell in his famous book 1984. It also leads to questions about the constitutionality of the SPOT program when used on American citizens. The courts will likely be called upon to address this issue.
There is often a fine line between security and freedom. Programs like SPOT can be helpful to some extent, but many feel they also need to be scrutinized to ensure citizens’ rights are not violated in the name of security. It was pointed out that if the program is meant to fight terrorism, then that’s how it should be used. It would be a tragedy if a terrorist managed to get on a plane while behavior tracking officers were busy tracking down a nervous pickpocket.
[ad_2]