Risk based security
We recently read the report which stated “that we are not in the business of eliminating all risk associated with traveling from point A to point B. Risk is inherent in virtually everything we do. Our objective is to mitigate risk and to reduce, as much as possible, the potential for anyone to commit a deliberate attack against our transportation systems”
Obviously, the government has to provide some Risk Based Solutions (RBS) to its policies. Otherwise screening would take so long no one would want to fly. That’s would be bad for the economy. But should they be trying to eliminate all risk? When it comes to risk where is the cutoff, when is the risk too high to ignore? Most people feel the risk is acceptable until something happens. That’s when they start screaming that something should have been done. Where do you draw the line in regards to where RBS for airport screening is vs where it should be? Support you answer.
Please research the question and provide your thoughts by responding to this discussion post. Your response should be between 250-750 words and needs to include at least two citations at the end of the post. Think of your posting in terms of a contribution to a dialogue, not a writing exercise. This is particularly important since we don’t meet in person. Therefore, this is one of the few ways we can generate a dialog. Make your posts clear and pertinent. Offer clarifying examples for complex and abstract ideas. Don’t be afraid to include open-ended questions that invite dialogue in your response. Read the other response posts to help get an idea on what you want to say on the subject. Feel free to offer evidence supporting the earlier post or your contrasting point of view and ask challenging, open-ended questions.
*Refer to the Discussion Rubric for this course for further detail regarding post and response expectations.
