Much (appropriate) blogosphere and news brouhaha (e.g., here, here) over a woman who was forced to remove her nipple piercings (which required pliers to do so) before she was allowed past an airport TSA checkpoint. Regardless of how you feel (or cringe) at the concept of nipple rings, the idea that they are somehow taboo on an airplane (even given the extremity of the woman involved offering to show them to a female TSA agent to prove they weren't a threat, rather than having to remove them) seems extreme.

Hamlin said she was trying to board a flight from Lubbock to Dallas on Feb. 24 when she was scanned by a Transportation Security Administration agent after passing through a larger metal detector without problems. The female TSA agent used a handheld detector that beeped when it passed in front of Hamlin's chest, the Dallas-area resident said.

Hamlin said she told the woman that she was wearing nipple piercings. The female agent then called over her male colleagues, one of whom said she would have to remove the body piercings, Hamlin claimed.

Hamlin said she could not remove them and asked if she could instead display her pierced breasts in private to the female agent. But several other male officers told her she could not board her flight until the jewelry was removed, she said.

She was taken behind a curtain and managed to remove one bar-shaped nipple piercing but had trouble with the second, a ring. "Still crying, she informed the TSA officer that she could not remove it without the help of pliers, and the officer gave a pair to her," said Hamlin's attorney, Gloria Allred, reading from a letter she sent Thursday to the director of the TSA's Office of Civil Rights and Liberties. Allred is a well-known Los Angeles lawyer who often represents high-profile claims.

She said she heard male TSA agents snickering as she took out the ring. She was scanned again and was allowed to board even though she still was wearing a belly button ring.

 

Initially, the TSA took the standard line that Anything That Alarms the Security Folks is Per Se Dangerous and Must Be Resolved.

If an alarm does sound, "until that is resolved, we're not going to let them go through the checkpoint, no matter what they're wearing or where they're wearing it," said TSA spokesman Dwayne Baird in Salt Lake City.

People routinely pass through security wearing wedding rings without problems and it might take a larger bit of metal to trigger an alarm, Baird said. "I'd be really curious to know what this woman had in her nipples," he said. "Sometimes they have a chain between their nipples, or a chain between their nipples and their belly button. It would have to be made of heavy metal to be detected."

Transportation Security employees are required to check anything that raises concerns at checkpoints, Baird said. "No matter what it is, if it's something that unduly alarms people or sets off the sensors they must check it," Baird said. "But I've never heard of any of our people having anyone remove something that sounds as small as a nipple ring."

Allred said celebrity Nicole Richie had her breasts inspected by security at an airport because of her nipple rings several years ago. Baird said he was not aware of the Richie incident either.

 

The TSA, though, has gotten a bit more publicity-savvy these days, running, for example, their own blog. At which site, the incident has been addressed (or at least acknowledged), leading to the following official statement -- which is about as "y'know, we really goofed up on this and we're sorry" an admission as one could ever hope for from the TSA, or any government agency:

TSA has reviewed the circumstances related to the screening of a passenger with body piercings that occurred recently in Lubbock, Texas. It appears that the Transportation Security Officers involved properly followed procedures in that incident. They rightly insisted that the alarm that was raised be resolved. TSA supports the thoroughness of the Officers involved as they were acting to protect the passengers and crews of the flights departing Lubbock that day.

TSA has reviewed the procedures themselves and agrees that they need to be changed. In the future TSA will inform passengers that they have the option to resolve the alarm through a visual inspection of the article in lieu of removing the item in question. TSA acknowledges that our procedures caused difficulty for the passenger involved and regrets the situation in which she found herself. We appreciate her raising awareness on this issue and we are changing the procedures to ensure that this does not happen again.

 

Which actually says, "The folks involve did as they were instructed to do, but maybe the instructions weren't the right ones, so we're going to change them." Which isn't terribly satisfying, and is still more than a bit goofy (follow the comments in the blog entry for reasons why) -- but is, at least, a somewhat positive sign.

Though how sad is it that such a lukewarm acknowledgment of screwing up is to be considered something all that positive?

Filed under :: Homeland Security