THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

CIVIL LIBERTIES For some, security worth the cost By Sarah Schweitzer, Globe Staff, 9/13/2001 Sitting outside on his lunch break yesterday, Al Sapochetti had a few pointed suggestions for the FAA and the Massachusetts Port Authority, the operator of Logan Airport. ''There should definitely be security guards on planes,'' Sapochetti said. ''Two of them.'' His fellow construction workers nodded solemnly. ''And there should be security cameras at the airport gates,'' said Sapochetti, a Somerville native, sitting in the shadow of the Boston Safe Deposit and Trust Co. building, a 41-story granite-and-steel behemoth that suddenly seemed less impenetrable the day after hijacked airplanes toppled New York's World Trade Center towers. Sapochetti joined a chorus of calls yesterday for heightened security measures - ideas that ranged across the technology spectrum, including the creation of a national identification card, the introduction of scannable passports, and the use of face-recognition scanning software, which allows video cameras to track individuals in large crowds. The ideas are practical - if visceral - reactions, driven by a hope of recapturing some sense of security, a semblance of control. Yet, according to others, they are dangerous schemes that could eat away freedom and civil liberties. ''Everybody in the country wants to avoid giving into terrorism, and everyone wants to stand up to terrorism,'' said Michael Avery, a constitutional law professor at Suffolk University Law School. ''But the way to do that is to maintain a free society.'' Avery said that as demands for greater clampdowns on travel and other freedoms gain momentum, they should be considered through a long-term lens. Erode those freedoms now, he said, and there is no turning back. Aim Tantikul, 28, an interior designer who lives in Boston, said she does not ''mind the strict security measures in public facilities. It's expected.'' She said she is willing to sacrifice an extra hour at the airport to minimize her risk, she said. ''We need to be willing to spend more time and be more concerned, even if it is inconvenient,'' she said as she lunched with a friend outside Center Plaza near Beacon Hill. Joe Lafo, an architect who lives in Bedford, said the precautions at airports and federal buildings are reactionary, but rooted in a reality - one that will only darken now. ''Do we have to be more stringent? I think so,'' he said, contending that European countries have lived with greater security measures for years. ''This has absolutely changed our ways of thinking about travel.'' Indeed, some security measures being bandied about, like the national passport, have been tried with some success in Europe. But the United States has legal traditions, such as the Fourth Amendment, which bars ''unreasonable'' searches by authorities. And in the United States, some of the measures already have proved controversial. When facial-recognition software was quietly used by Tampa police at the Super Bowl in January, it was nationally condemned as an invasion of privacy. Some people said yesterday that they put little stock in technical gizmos, contending that while they might soothe worried minds, they would have little real effect in cases like Tuesday's hijackings, in which the perpetrators reportedly used razors and other seemingly innocuous items to wage their war. ''They had knives. They didn't have guns,'' said Jude Preval, an office worker at the law firm of Palmer & Dodge. ''It was going to happen no matter what.'' Preval, a Haitian native who lives in Mattapan, said increased security also poses a concern about selective checks based on race and ethnicity. ''Searches are fine,'' he said, ''but I'm not going to like it if I'm being searched and others are passed by.'' Charles Ogletree, a professor of criminal justice at Harvard Law School, said he, too, was concered about discriminatory enforcement of new security measures, citing the treatment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. ''We can't respond inappropriately. We have to have a measured response to threats that are real,'' he said. Arab-Americans are now particularly vulnerable to unwarranted scrutiny, he said. Pat Blakely, the office manager for the state Division of Capital Asset Management, said she cannot conceive of such dangers for herself. ''I don't think we will be targetted,'' said Blakely, who is black. ''This is America.'' Globe Staff writer Ross Kerber contributed to this report. This story ran on page A10 of the Boston Globe on 9/13/2001. © Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.