'Evaluation of Airport Security Measures Essay\r'

' rejoinder and especi eachy quick response to stresses may results to major(ip) loopholes and possible risky omissions. Mainly, this occurs due to overlook of seemly time to holistically evaluate the immediate issue at hand and possible local and international pressures. Since phratry 2001, US transportation systems security on terrorist attacks false vast urgency that saw major changes in the sector’s appendages. The Congress passed the aerodrome protection federal officialisation Act of 2001 as the main computer programme for restoring the overall sanctity and integrity of the airports to secure the fast-flying dwindling consumers confidence both locally and internationally.\r\n1. break implementation issues of the airport security measures which were approved by Congress shortly after the incident on family line 11 (i. e. Airport Security Federalization Act of 2001). To begin with, the serve required that all the airport security viewing personnel be federal employees and an estimated 20, 0000 new federal workers had to be hired. littler airports were required to employ local law enforcement agencies to supply security. However, ensuring that the transport funding needs are in effect identified and comprehensively prioritized is still a major dispute.\r\nPutting the security measures under the federal considerations in all the airports rose with a great perk up it off the funds required by the new incision of homeland security. Arguably, the Act did not immediately ramp up the direct input of the airports where the new security teams were deployed. With the period economic downturn, the segment of homeland Security has convey one of its operations setbacks as lack of becoming funds to sustain these operations (Alexander & Seth, 2004).\r\nTo increase to that, good harmony and coordination in the Department of native land Security and Department of Transport has proved to be a hard nut to crack altogether. As indicated earlier, bulk of the employees in airport systems were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security which has created an extended system of response to the major problems by the expanded panel (Marcus, 2004). Notably, scholars ware indicated that September 11 Terrorist attack resulted from long time know vulnerabilities that indicated failure to pro-actively address them.\r\nThough an immediate operation system was established for running the airports, there was lack of clear long term focus on the management of the airports under the combined system. Ensuring the overall competence of the staff via high quality and staffing competence strain for the expanded workforce has been a major challenge since the passing of the Act (Robert et al, 2008). Arguably, the Department of Transport acknowledge of possible future stresses from the large demand for bringing up and capacity building for the employees.\r\nThis formed an extension of the prior challenges on funding and coord ination between the hidden sector, the Department of Transport and the Department of Homeland security. Monitoring and care of this massive and highly integrative workforce widens the rift further due to the variance in burn down (Robert et al, 2008). Whereas the private entities are direct after effective implementation of the law under al conditions, the private parties are after maximal profits which could agree the whole agenda due to considerations of risk taking in a capitalistic setting.\r\n2. Describe gaps in airport security, which were not addressed by these measures Arguably, the Airport Security Federalization Act of 2001 had major gaps that have seen slow implementation of its demands and reduced capacity to light upon the overall objectives. The main aim of the laws is to enhance emend operations and maximum returns to the public and the government. However, the massive screening measures established never appreciated the difficulties that people go through to be cleared for flights.\r\nThis has raised concerns locally and globally. To add to that, the law requires that only Americans can aid in the airport screening personnel (Subcommittee on Homeland Security, 2008). This was a major gap in promoting non professionalism and closing out innovations from the global outsourcing arena. Notably, laws preventing entry into the Cockpit have existed with little success in US and opposite countries. However, the Act emphasizes on the rule as a major preventive measure.\r\nThis indicates possible disaster in waiting as it is entirely dependent on consciousness of the crew on board. To add to that, the act requires that the cockpit be equipped with stun guns for emergency purposes (Robert et al, 2008). However, this is another(prenominal) major loophole with analysts urgently calling for its reconsideration. Presence of ammunitions should be under a highly trained federal air marshal. Arguably, arms in the cockpit act as a possible supply to the terrorists after abstracted possible ways to get theirs on board.\r\n'