Sunday, November 2, 2008

Real vs. Perceived Security

There were many interesting points raised during our session last Friday, but what was most interesting to me was our examination of airport security and the broader ramifications of such a mentality.

 

Does it matter more how effective airport security is, or is our concern more with feeling secure than actually being secure? I personally believe that the current airport security process is an effective means of ensuring the safety of all passengers; however, part of that feeling is due to air marshals aboard all flights. If it were not for the screening process, I would likely feel less safe, but I doubt that the lack of this process would prevent me from traveling. If anything, it would make things much easier by reducing the anxiety of missing a flight or having to repack items from a carry on to a checked suitcase.

 

It seems that perceived security matters more than actually security. The axiom: “Ignorance is bliss” is very appropriate, as many Americans would be distressed if they knew how ineffective our security is. The U.S./Canada border, our shipping ports, and potentially dangerous information posted on the internet are all valid security threats that cannot be effectively managed. Fortunately for many US citizens, this fact is not often brought up, and anxiety over terrorist attacks has conveniently been channeled into the War in Iraq.

 

My personal belief agrees with Mueller’s article. The reality of a terrorist attack is grossly exaggerated. The reality is that a terrorist attack on the US would be easier than the unsuspecting American would naturally assume, and, additionally, that terrorists are less likely to attack the US than is generally thought. This may not be reassuring, but the tendency of the American media to exaggerate a threat is less due to its seriousness and more due to the media’s need to generate interest and profit.

 

 

 

No comments: