DLax85

An interesting point....discuss.

Why Is It Permissible to Profile Packages But Not Passengers? | Psychology Today

The Scientific Fundamentalist
A Look at the Hard Truths About Human Nature
by Satoshi Kanazawa

Why Is It Permissible to Profile Packages But Not Passengers?


When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight (unless it’s Yemeni)

Published on November 14, 2010



After three bombs were discovered in October among packages sent from Yemen to Chicago, FedEx, UPS, the US Postal Service, and the Royal Mail have all suspended service from Yemen.

Why isn’t anybody upset about this?

Most packages from Yemen to the United States are innocent.

They contain business documents, product samples, and gifts from friends and relatives.

But a very, very few Yemeni packages contain bombs, designed to blow up either midair in a cargo or passenger plane, or in a synagogue in Chicago, killing dozens and hundreds of people.

And the probability that any given package from Yemen turns out to be a bomb, while very, very low, is much, much higher than the probability that any given package from any other nation turns out to be a bomb.

That is precisely why FedEx, UPS, the USPS, and the Royal Mail all made the sensible decision to suspend air cargo service from Yemen.

Similarly, most passengers from Yemen or Pakistan are innocent.

They are businessmen, families on vacation, and students studying at universities in the United States.

They have no intention of carrying a bomb into the airplane or blowing it up midair.

But a very few Yemeni or Pakistani passengers are terrorists, who intend to do just that and kill hundreds of people.

And the probability that any given passenger from Yemen or Pakistan turns out to be a terrorist, while very, very low, is much, much higher than the probability that a passenger from any other nation turns out to be a terrorist.

But we cannot ban all air passengers from Yemen or Pakistan, because then liberals would cry profiling.

I’m willing to bet that the probability that a given passenger from Yemen or Pakistan turns out to be a terrorist carrying a bomb is at least comparable, if not higher, than the probability that a given package from Yemen turns out to contain a bomb.

True, packages are not people, while passengers are. But packages just don’t mail themselves.

There are people – mostly innocent people – behind every package sent from Yemen. FedEx, UPS, the USPS, and the Royal Mail are telling all Yemeni residents that they may not send any package to the United States or the United Kingdom.

They are profiling all packages on the basis of their national origin because three out of hundreds of thousands of packages from Yemen turned out to be bombs.

Yet Delta Airlines or British Airways cannot tell all Yemeni citizens that they may not fly to the United States or the United Kingdom.

They are forbidden by law to profile all passengers on the basis of their national origin because a few out of hundreds of thousands of passengers from Yemen or Pakistan or Egypt or Saudi Arabia turned out to be terrorists in the past.

True, sending packages to the United States is not an inalienable human right of any citizen, but neither is flying to the United States.

Why is it permissible to profile packages (and the people who send them) on the basis of their national origin, but not air passengers?

Huck

Because passengers have constitutional rights, even foreign nationals.

Send all complaints to the founding fathers.

SteamJet

What U.S. constitutional rights do foreign nationals have and under what circumstances?

Huck

Just about all of them, as soon as they set foot on U.S. soil.

Exceptions would be voting rights, the right to run for office, the right to work in certain positions like teaching and police, and a few others.

In this circumstance, the applicable constitutional area is equal protection. And as groups formed by common national origins are a protected class, any discrimination against them would have to meet the "strict scrutiny" of the highest level of judicial review. So proponents of racial profiling would have to prove (1) a compelling government interest; and (2) that the profiling is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Twin Wasp

Pretty much all of them. See the 1886 Supreme Court decision Yick Wo v. Hopkins 188 US 356.


"The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says:
"Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
These provisions are universal in their application to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality, and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws. It is accordingly enacted by § 1977 of the Revised Statutes, that
"all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.""

Fresh Hot Pizza

-You know, when I go through airport security, I don't complain, no matter what they do. Why? Because I'm proud of my citizenship and I'm proud of my country and I don't mind it if my country asks something of me in the form of airport security.

Rant aside, let me tell you my thoughts. On September 11, we were attacked. Right after September 11, a doctor, a US citizen with a US passport was detained in the San Antonio airport. They took him into a room and interrogated him for 2 hours; he missed his flight. In the end he caught another flight. It turns out that this man, who was originally from Saudi Arabia, had the same name as noted terrorist. His story made it to the local newspaper, and when asked if he wanted an apology, his answer was "No, I'm an American now. My country called upon me then, and I don't think I need an apology for that simple service".

That's how I feel about the TSA and bag searches and pat-downs. When I get searched, or get the "SSSS" on my one-way ticket, and they pull me aside and go through my bag and backpack, make me take my shoes off, et cetera. I'm being called upon by my country; I'm happy to show my patriotism by being cooperative.

The back-scatter array? That I have a problem with. While it is only 1/2000th the radiation of a chest X-ray, it still adds up. I've got a great big hog, so I'm not likely to generate any laughs in the back room, not that I care.

-That whole issue is silly! I bet the same people who complain that the screeners can see your penis or your breasts/vagina are the same people who have no qualms going to the gym and taking showers completely naked in front of strangers.

And as to the pat down? I've been patted down before, and yes, they've gently patted my genitals. Now if the guy grabs them, and then grabs them again, smiling at me...

[of course, it depends upon what he looks like....]

(That was a joke; settle down!)

-I think that pilots in uniform with a valid airline ID and an FAA issued pilot certificate should have the ability to basically walk through security with little more than the traditional metal detector. Why is is so damn hard for airports to build crew entrances? EVERY airport with part 121 airline service should have this feature.

iarapilot

Because packages have no "feelings"! Unless the ACLU and the other alphabet organizations get involved. Gotta be PC, ya know!

Gunter

Easy. He meant Civil rights.

Maybe you can stand up the first organization dedicated to protecting the rights of packages. Call it the APLU (American Package Liberties Union). I'm sure Jesse Jackson would love to extort money from FedEX and UPS for this obviously egregious profiling.