In fall 2010, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) stepped up its security efforts in US airports by incorporating random full-body searches as part of its counterterrorism efforts. These full-body searches were a response to the refusal of some people to accept the use of full-body scanners, which were judged by some to be excessively revealing. The chief of the TSA and the secretary of state both stated that, while they acknowledge every citizen’s desire for privacy, this desire must be considered in balance with safety measures. However, whatever safety full-body searches provide is not a reasonable tradeoff for the invasion of privacy that citizens must now suffer, so the TSA must abandon such measures.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.
The argument reaches the conclusion that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) must abandon their measures of full-body searches, on the premise that this poses an invasion of privacy for air travellers that is not a reasonable trade-off for the safety that is claimed to be provided. In formulating this argument, its author fails to answer three important questions, the answers to which could make or break the argument's reasoning.
First, is a full-body scanning less invasive than a full-body search? It may be the case that a full-body scan sees through one’s clothes, and that these scans are checked by an official for potential weapons or arms. Meanwhile, the invasiveness of full-body searches depends on the degree to which it is done. In this case, a full-body search would, on average, be less invasive for air travellers, considering it is randomly done, as opposed to scans that everyone has to take part in. Thus, if the answer to this question is 'no', then the author's argument that the TSA should revert to its old measures would prove unwarranted.
Second, did the people who refuse to scan do so with the justification that it was an invasion of their privacy? Perhaps, these people did so for nefarious purposes or for fear of their accessories potentially being detected as weapons by the scan. If evidence arises in support of this, then the evidence provided by the author would not substantiate their claims, and the argument would significantly be weakened. Such a situation may possibly be better addressed by searches as opposed to scans, since the authority in-charge may even roughly judge a traveller's body language during a search to consider whether they are hiding a banned object.
Third, were full-body scans effective in the past? Also, consider a related question: is it possible that scans are, in general, more effective than searches? If the answer to these questions is 'no,' then it is possible that TSA considered this as one of their reasons to switch to searches. It may be possible that people could obscure weapons during scans, and that this would not occur in a search. It may also be the case that the rate of accuracy is lower for scans, due to possible issues with imaging or associated technology flaws.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its inability to answer the aforementioned questions. The author should consult, perhaps, a comprehensive study by the TSA that checks the efficacy of the old and new security efforts. This may help the author in deducing if their assumptions were true or false, and if their stance is valid.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-09 | Technoblade | 73 | view |
| 2020-05-08 | elisabetta_fedele | 60 | view |
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of marketing at DuraSocks Inc A recent study of Dura Socks customers suggests that our company is wasting the money it spends on its patented Endure manufacturing process which ensures that our sock 78
- The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve This sanctuary is essent 66
- Claim The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint Reason Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea Write a respo 66
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your positi 70
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 78
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 442 350
No. of Characters: 2141 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.585 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.844 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.756 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 156 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.263 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.447 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.55 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 448, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'scan'.
Suggestion: scan
...ring it is randomly done, as opposed to scans that everyone has to take part in. Thus...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 542, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...answer to this question is no, then the authors argument that the TSA should revert to ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 434, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'may', 'possibly'.
Suggestion: may; possibly
...ificantly be weakened. Such a situation may possibly be better addressed by searches as oppo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 434, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'may'.
Suggestion: may
...ificantly be weakened. Such a situation may possibly be better addressed by searches as oppo...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, may, second, so, then, third, thus, while, as to, in conclusion, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2209.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 442.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99773755656 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58517132086 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8172799283 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484162895928 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 676.8 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0127251749 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.263157895 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2631578947 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.84210526316 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216204095459 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0800753121791 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716933753716 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126014700064 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0691771862156 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.