Varsity-Packet-Final

Cost and technology have never been the primary

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: an attempted physical attack, it is necessary for the port to maintain the perception that it has adequate security measures. In order to accomplish this task, the sub-objective of preventing physical attack attempts is adequate sensors in place: adequate visible physical barriers, visible security checkpoints, and physical patrols. The sub objectives of preventing attempted importation of WMD or terror cells are similar to those of prevent physical attack attempts. They include: random inspections, intelligence -based inspections, sensors (both the right type of sensors and an appropriate number), and an effective manifest screening process. 23 | P a g e Port Security Affirmative BDL Answers to: Plan Leads to Shipping Delays [___] [___] New advances in screening technology means no delays Jerrold L. Nadler, Edward J. Markey and Bennie G. Thompson, Democratic representatives from New York, Massachusetts and Mississippi, 2012 (Cargo, the Terrorists’ Trojan Horse; June 26, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/opinion/thedangerous-delay-on-port-security.html) Homeland Security says it uses a “layered, risk-based approach” to cargo scanning, which, instead of comprehensive scanning, targets specific cargo thought to be high-risk. But this approach is inadequate. Recent advances in screening technologies have undermined Homeland Security’s contention that the technology is not available to scan all cargo containers without disrupting commerce. An effective high-volume container screening system was installed in the Port of Hong Kong in 2005. Trials of new, American-made technology have demonstrated that scanning all containers would be feasible at many ports. The world’s largest marine terminal operators have offered to work with the department to put the law into effect. Cost and technology have never been the primary obstacles to meeting this mandate. What is missing is a sense of urgency and determination. We recognized that the scanning of 100 percent of all cargo containers in five years could be a challenging deadline to meet. That is why we included the authority to extend the deadline in cases in which Homeland Security certified that there are at least two major obstacles relating to the availability and accuracy of the technology, the logistics of its deployment and use, or impacts to trade. Now Homeland Security is using this authority to simply exempt itself from any meaningful compliance with the law we wrote to close a dangerous loophole in United States security. We have urged the department over the last five years to make the law a reality, to no avail. Our nation can no longer risk such delays. 24 | P a g e Port Security Affirmative BDL States Counterplan Answers [____] [____] Permutation – do the plan where the federal government has jurisdiction Jon D. Haveman and Howard J. Shatz, Public Policy Institute of California, 2006 (Protecting the Nation’s Seaports: Balancing Security and Costs, www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/r_606jhr.pdf) Jurisdictional conflicts. Fed...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 02/06/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online